Climate Change Data Portal
DOI | 10.1111/jvs.12763 |
Assessing sampling coverage of species distribution in biodiversity databases | |
Sporbert, Maria1,2; Bruelheide, Helge1,2; Seidler, Gunnar1; Keil, Petr1,3; Jandt, Ute1,2; Austrheim, Gunnar4; Biurrun, Idoia5; Antonio Campos, Juan5; Carni, Andraz6,7; Chytry, Milan8; Csiky, Janos9; De Bie, Els10; Dengler, Juergen11,12; Golub, Valentin13; Grytnes, John-Arvid14; Indreica, Adrian15; Jansen, Florian16; Jirousek, Martin8,17; Lenoir, Jonathan18; Luoto, Miska19; Marceno, Corrado5; Moeslund, Jesper Erenskjold20; Perez-Haase, Aaron21; Rusina, Solvita22; Vandvik, Vigdis14,23; Vassilev, Kiril24; Welk, Erik1,2 | |
发表日期 | 2019 |
ISSN | 1100-9233 |
EISSN | 1654-1103 |
卷号 | 30期号:4页码:620-632 |
英文摘要 | Aim Biodiversity databases are valuable resources for understanding plant species distributions and dynamics, but they may insufficiently represent the actual geographic distribution and climatic niches of species. Here we propose and test a method to assess sampling coverage of species distribution in biodiversity databases in geographic and climatic space. Location Europe. Methods Using a test selection of 808,794 vegetation plots from the European Vegetation Archive (EVA), we assessed the sampling coverage of 564 European vascular plant species across both their geographic ranges and realized climatic niches. Range maps from the Chorological Database Halle (CDH) were used as background reference data to capture species geographic ranges and to derive species climatic niches. To quantify sampling coverage, we developed a box-counting method, the Dynamic Match Coefficient (DMC), which quantifies how much a set of occurrences of a given species matches with its geographic range or climatic niche. DMC is the area under the curve measuring the match between occurrence data and background reference (geographic range or climatic niche) across grids with variable resolution. High DMC values indicate good sampling coverage. We applied null models to compare observed DMC values with expectations from random distributions across species ranges and niches. Results Comparisons with null models showed that, for most species, actual distributions within EVA are deviating from null model expectations and are more clumped than expected in both geographic and climatic space. Despite high interspecific variation, we found a positive relationship in DMC values between geographic and climatic space, but sampling coverage was in general more random across geographic space. Conclusion Because DMC values are species-specific and most biodiversity databases are clearly biased in terms of sampling coverage of species occurrences, we recommend using DMC values as covariates in macro-ecological models that use species as the observation unit. |
WOS研究方向 | Plant Sciences ; Environmental Sciences & Ecology ; Forestry |
来源期刊 | JOURNAL OF VEGETATION SCIENCE |
文献类型 | 期刊论文 |
条目标识符 | http://gcip.llas.ac.cn/handle/2XKMVOVA/99894 |
作者单位 | 1.Martin Luther Univ Halle Wittenberg, Geobot & Bot Garden, Inst Biol, Halle, Germany; 2.German Ctr Integrat Biodivers Res iDiv, Leipzig, Germany; 3.Martin Luther Univ Halle Wittenberg, Inst Comp Sci Biodivers Synth, Halle, Germany; 4.Norwegian Univ Sci & Technol, Univ Museum, Dept Nat Hist, Trondheim, Norway; 5.Univ Basque Country, UPV EHU, Dept Plant Biol & Ecol, Bilbao, Spain; 6.Slovenian Acad Sci & Arts, Jovan Hadzi Inst Biol, Sci Res Ctr, Ljubljana, Slovenia; 7.Univ Nova Gorica, Sch Viticulture & Enol, Nova Gorica, Slovenia; 8.Masaryk Univ, Fac Sci, Dept Bot & Zool, Brno, Czech Republic; 9.Univ Pecs, Inst Biol Ecol, Pecs, Hungary; 10.Biotope Divers, Res Inst Nat & Forest, Brussels, Belgium; 11.Zurich Univ Appl Sci ZHAW, Inst Nat Resource Management IUNR, Vegetat Ecol Grp, Wadenswil, Switzerland; 12.Univ Bayreuth, Bayreuth Ctr Ecol & Environm Res BayCEER, Plant Ecol, Bayreuth, Germany; 13.Russian Acad Sci, Inst Ecol Volga River Basin, Tolyatti, Russia; 14.Univ Bergen, Dept Biol Sci, Bergen, Norway; 15.Transilvania Univ Brasov, Dept Silviculture, Brasov, Romania; 16.Univ Rostock, Fac Agr & Environm Sci, Rostock, Germany; 17.Mendel Univ Brno, Fac AgriSci, Dept Plant Biol, Brno, Czech Republic; 18.UPJV, CNRS, UMR 7058, UR Ecol & Dynam Syst Anthropises EDYSAN, Amiens, France; 19.Univ Helsinki, Dept Geosci & Geog, Helsinki, Finland; 20.Aarhus Univ, Dept Biosci Biodivers & Conservat, Ronde, Denmark; 21.Univ Barcelona, Dept Evolutionary Biol Ecol & Environm Sci, Barcelona, Spain; 22.Univ Latvia, Fac Geog & Earth Sci, Riga, Latvia; 23.Univ Bergen, Bjerknes Ctr Climate Res, Bergen, Norway; 24.Bulgarian Acad Sci, Inst Biodivers & Ecosyst Res Plant & Fungal Diver, Sofia, Bulgaria |
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 | Sporbert, Maria,Bruelheide, Helge,Seidler, Gunnar,et al. Assessing sampling coverage of species distribution in biodiversity databases[J],2019,30(4):620-632. |
APA | Sporbert, Maria.,Bruelheide, Helge.,Seidler, Gunnar.,Keil, Petr.,Jandt, Ute.,...&Welk, Erik.(2019).Assessing sampling coverage of species distribution in biodiversity databases.JOURNAL OF VEGETATION SCIENCE,30(4),620-632. |
MLA | Sporbert, Maria,et al."Assessing sampling coverage of species distribution in biodiversity databases".JOURNAL OF VEGETATION SCIENCE 30.4(2019):620-632. |
条目包含的文件 | 条目无相关文件。 |
除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。