On the Efficiency of Some Alpha Diversity Indices: A Simulation Study Using Bootstrap Resampling
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22120/jwb.2020.127654.1142Keywords:
Alpha indices, biodiversity, biodiversity indices, efficiency, bootstrap resamplingAbstract
It is essential to measure biodiversity to determine the stability of a community of species. A good measure gives precise, reliable, and efficient information about the community structure. This study was conducted to evaluate the statistical properties and test some alpha diversity indices' efficiency through a bootstrap resampling. The available birds' data were being applied in some alpha diversity indices. Moreover, the Shapiro-Wilk test is being used to test the normality of the index. All indices analyzed have p-values higher than the alpha level of significance (α=0.05), indicating that the index's bootstrap sampling distribution is normally distributed. Mostly, all indices are consistently efficient at large sample sizes. The Menhinick richness index is more efficient in measuring birds' species richness since it has the smallest means squared error (MSE) values. Among the diversity indices studied in this paper, Simpson's diversity index generated smaller mean squared error (MSE) values; thus, it is a more efficient diversity index in measuring birds' diversity. The Shannon evenness index is more efficient among the five evenness indices in measuring species evenness of birds because it provides the smaller MSE values.
References
Antoney, P.U. (1970). Bird communities in the forest habitats of Wayanad, South India. Shodhganga@INFLIBNET: Bird communities in the forest habitats of Wayanad, South India. https://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/handle/10603/33672.
Brown, R., Jacobs, L.A., & Peet, R.K. (2007). Species Richness: Small Scale. Encyclopedia of Life Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470015902.a0020488
Chivian, E., & Bernstein, A. (2010). How Our Health Depends on Biodiversity. Center for Health and the Global Environment.
Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R.J. (1993). An Introduction to the Bootstrap. Chapman & Hall.
Fisher, R. (1921). On the Mathematical Foundations of Theoretical Statistics. Royal Society.
Fontana, S., Sattler, T., Bontadina, F., & Moretti, M. (2011). How to Manage the Urban Green to Improve Birds Diversity and Community Structure. Lands and Urban Planning.
Gross, L., Beals, M., & Harrell, S. (2019). Diversity Indices: Shannon's H and E. Quantitative Biology at Community Colleges, QUBES Educational Resources. https://doi.org/10.25334/Q4844Q
Krebs C. (1999). Ecological Methodology. Benjamin Cummings, San Francisco, CA.
Launchbaugh, K. (2009). Principle of Vegetation Measurement, Assessment, Ecological Monitoring, and Analysis. Vegetation Measurement & Assessment. https://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/veg_measure/.
Nikulin, M. (1994). Efficiency of a Statistical Procedure. Encyclopedia of Mathematics, Springer.
Odum, P. (2000). Fundamentals of Ecology. Quezon City, Philippines: JMC Press, Inc.
Rao, C. (1962). Efficient Estimates and Optimum Inference Procedures in Large Samples. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 24(1), 46-72. Retrieved February 12, 2020, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2983745
Redowan, M. (2015). Spatial pattern of tree diversity and evenness across forest types in Majella National Park, Italy. Forest Ecosystems, 2(24). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40663-015-0048-1
Trapani, L., & Horváth, L. (2016). Statistical inference in a random coefficient panel model. Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, 193(1), 54–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2016.01.006
Williams, V. L., Witkowski, E. T. F., & Balkwill, K. (2005). Application of diversity indices to appraise plant availability in the traditional medicinal markets of Johannesburg, South Africa. Biodiversity and Conservation, 14, 2971–3001. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-004-0256-4
Woldemariam, W. M., Gutema, T.M., Morrison, K., & Aticho, A. (2018). Assessment of wetland flora and avifauna species diversity in Kafa Zone, Southern Ethiopia. Journal of Asia-Pacific Biodiversity, 11(4): 494-502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japb.2018.08.003
JWB applies the 