Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2011 Aug 27;366(1576):2426-37.
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2011.0065.

Old and new challenges in using species diversity for assessing biodiversity

Affiliations
Review

Old and new challenges in using species diversity for assessing biodiversity

Alessandro Chiarucci et al. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. .

Abstract

Although the maintenance of diversity of living systems is critical for ecosystem functioning, the accelerating pace of global change is threatening its preservation. Standardized methods for biodiversity assessment and monitoring are needed. Species diversity is one of the most widely adopted metrics for assessing patterns and processes of biodiversity, at both ecological and biogeographic scales. However, those perspectives differ because of the types of data that can be feasibly collected, resulting in differences in the questions that can be addressed. Despite a theoretical consensus on diversity metrics, standardized methods for its measurement are lacking, especially at the scales needed to monitor biodiversity for conservation and management purposes. We review the conceptual framework for species diversity, examine common metrics, and explore their use for biodiversity conservation and management. Key differences in diversity measures at ecological and biogeographic scales are the completeness of species lists and the ability to include information on species abundances. We analyse the major pitfalls and problems with quantitative measurement of species diversity, look at the use of weighting measures by phylogenetic distance, discuss potential solutions and propose a research agenda to solve the major existing problems.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Wilson E. O., Peter F. M. 1981. Biodiversity. Washington, DC: National Academy Press
    1. Scheiner S. M., Willig M. R. 2011. The theory of ecology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press
    1. Butchart S. H. M., et al. 2010. Global biodiversity: indicators of recent declines. Science 328, 1164–116810.1126/science.1187512 (doi:10.1126/science.1187512) - DOI - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hector A., Bagchi R. 2007. Biodiversity and ecosystem multifunctionality. Nature 448, 188–19010.1038/nature05947 (doi:10.1038/nature05947) - DOI - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hector A. 1998. The effect of diversity on productivity: detecting the role of complementarity. Oikos 82, 597–59910.2307/3546380 (doi:10.2307/3546380) - DOI - DOI

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources