A mathematical investigation of Rao diversity coefficients among the communities according to species morphometry and species taxonomy (Q2204617)
From MaRDI portal
| This is the item page for this Wikibase entity, intended for internal use and editing purposes. Please use this page instead for the normal view: A mathematical investigation of Rao diversity coefficients among the communities according to species morphometry and species taxonomy |
scientific article
| Language | Label | Description | Also known as |
|---|---|---|---|
| English | A mathematical investigation of Rao diversity coefficients among the communities according to species morphometry and species taxonomy |
scientific article |
Statements
A mathematical investigation of Rao diversity coefficients among the communities according to species morphometry and species taxonomy (English)
0 references
15 October 2020
0 references
Summary: Although Rao diversity coefficient (Rao DIVC) is sensitive to the differences among species, a gap still remains in investigating how the communities are affected when the dissimilarity among the species are in terms of its morphometry and taxonomy. I studied the effect of using species taxonomic classification and species morphometrical traits in the computation of Rao DIVC in assessing diversity of ecological communities. I utlised the Mahalanobis distance for measuring the variation of species morphometry. As for species taxonomy, I employed the method by \textit{R. M. Warwick} and \textit{K. R. Clarke} [``New `biodiversity' measures reveal a decrease in taxonomic distinctness with increasing stress'', Marine Ecol. Prog. Ser. 129, 301--305 (1995; \url{doi:10.3354/meps129301})]. When the calculated Rao DIVCs, double principal coordinate analysis and co-inertia analysis outputs were compared, I discovered that Rao DIVCs accounting species morphometry (\(R_{sm}\)) and species taxonomy (\(R_{st}\)) yielded different results and interpretation. \(R_{sm}\) clearly showed more the variation among communities but contributed less in the analysis, whereas \(R_{st}\) showed more clearly the clusters between the communities which make the interpretation easier.
0 references
double principal coordinate analysis
0 references
DPCoA
0 references
Mahalanobis distance
0 references
Rao diversity coefficient
0 references
Rao DIVC
0 references
co-inertia analysis
0 references
COIA
0 references
0.84035003
0 references
0.8200225
0 references
0.8196294
0 references
0.8185785
0 references
0.81588596
0 references
0.81332666
0 references