Environmental monitoring through functional biodiversity tools
Introduction
The issue of preserving biodiversity is a central aim of current environmental policy (Paoletti, 1999, McCann, 2002, Vackar et al., 2012). In an ecological framework, diversity relies on the variety of living organisms in a delineated study area (Pielou, 1975). Due to increasing human impact and the mismanagement of the environment, the term biodiversity is now inextricably linked to preserving essential ecosystem functions. Generally, a high level of biodiversity is associated with natural conditions in an ecosystem, and vice versa. For this reason, biodiversity plays a fundamental role in determining environmental health (Burger et al., 2013). In this context, biomonitoring represents a useful tool for assessing the effects of human-related stressors on exposed populations (Nash, 1996). This technique is based either on the tendency of some organism to accumulate pollutants in its tissues (bioaccumulation) or on the changes that occur in the composition of animal and plant communities after exposure to pollutants (bioindication). This paper focuses on the latter; thus, biodiversity assessment of some specific organisms becomes useful for quantifying environmental damage. For example, epiphytic lichens are one of the best-suited organisms for evaluating the effects of atmospheric pollutants (Nimis et al., 1989, Cislaghi and Nimis, 1997). Due to their morphological and physiological characteristics, lichens respond rapidly to atmospheric changes, in particular changes caused by anthropogenic factors.
Thus, the resulting imperative is to provide a suitable measure for biodiversity. Despite the enormous number of indices that have been developed to assess the biological health of a community (Gove et al., 1994), a universally accepted measure has not been established (Ricotta, 2005). A diversity index is, in general terms, a mathematical expression that combines species richness and species evenness (Pielou, 1977). However, these two components are confounded when a single index is considered. The problem is that a community with few species and high evenness could have the same diversity measure as another community with many species and low evenness (Pielou, 1977). Therefore different indices could lead to different community ranking (Patil and Taillie, 1982). The choice of an index must be considered with care. In the literature the most frequently used diversity indices are the species richness, Shannon (Shannon, 1948) and Simpson (Simpson, 1949) indices. Species richness is the simplest index, but it does not take into account evenness. The Simpson diversity index is a good measure of dominance, but not a good predictor of species richness, whereas the Shannon index is affected by both the number of species and their evenness (Evangelista et al., 2012). However, the Shannon index is particularly sensitive to the presence of rare species in a community, while the Simpson index is particularly sensitive to changes in the relative abundances of the most dominant species. This highlights how the use of a single indicator greatly reduces the complexity of the ecological systems and hides the multidimensional aspect of biodiversity (Gattone and Di Battista, 2009, Gove et al., 1994, Patil and Taillie, 1979, Di Battista and Gattone, 2003, Fattorini and Marcheselli, 1999).
In the literature, diversity profiles are presented as a possible solution for this limitation (Hill, 1973, Patil and Taillie, 1982, Tòthmérész, 1995, Carranza et al., 2007). A diversity profile is a curve depicting several values of diversity indices simultaneously, including Shannon, Simpson and species richness. Therefore, the diversity profile is a family of measures, that is a family of diversity indices dependent upon a single continuous parameter that is sensitive to both rare and common species. The plot of diversity profiles plays a fundamental role in comparing different communities. Indeed, if the diversity profiles do not intersect, the higher curve corresponds to the community with greater diversity.
The primary limitation of this approach lies in the difficulty of comparing communities with intersecting profiles. To solve this problem, we suggest additional tools to improve the analysis of biodiversity profiles. Because these profiles are presented as curves, the functional data analysis (FDA) approach can be considered (Gattone and Di Battista, 2009, Di Battista and Fortuna, 2013). FDA is a useful tool for a deeper analysis of phenomena varying in a fixed domain (Ramsay and Silverman, 2005, Ferraty and Vieu, 2006). This approach allows for the evaluation of the behaviour of a diversity profile throughout the reference domain. In particular, we propose three functional measures to inspect diversity profile characteristics: the derivatives, the radius of curvature and the length of the diversity profile. The combined use of these indicators allows the analyst to consider the multidimensional aspects of diversity and resolves some limitations of classical methods. The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 introduces the theories and presents a comparison between the previous conventional measures of biodiversity and the new proposed method. Section 3 deals with an application of these theories to a real-world data set. Finally, Section 4 concludes the paper.
Section snippets
Functional biodiversity measures
Let us suppose that an ecological population is composed of N units and is partitioned into s species (i = 1, 2, …, s). Let N = (N1, …, Ns)′ be the species abundance vector whose generic element Ni represents the number of individuals belonging to the ith species, and let p = (p1, …, ps)′ be the relative abundance vector with , such that 0 ≤ pi ≤ 1 and (Gattone and Di Battista, 2004).
To evaluate the community biodiversity, we consider the β diversity profile proposed by Patil and
Case study
The framework described above has been applied to evaluate the diversity of epiphytic lichens, that is, lichens that live on the bark of trees. Lichens are composite organisms consisting of a fungus (the mycobiont) and a photosynthetic partner (the photobiont) that grow together in a symbiotic relationship. They are particularly sensitive to environmental stresses, especially with regard to pollution, eutrophication and climate change (ANPA, 2001), because their metabolic processes depend on
Conclusions
Biodiversity assessment is a key component of environmental sustainability. The most frequently used methods for this evaluation are diversity indices and diversity profiles. However, neither approach is exhaustive because they often lead to vague results for the ranking of communities. The aim of this paper was to resolve this issue by analysing the β profile in a functional framework. Ecologists generally assess environmental systems by evaluating the diversity profile only from a graphical
References (36)
- et al.
Analyzing landscape diversity in time: the use of rènyi's generalized entropy function
Ecol. Indic.
(2007) - et al.
The response of epiphytic lichens to air pollution and subsets of ecological predictors: a case study from the italian prealps
Environ. Pollut.
(2008) Is the diversity of epiphytic lichens a reliable indicator of air pollution? A case study from italy
Environ. Pollut.
(2007)- et al.
Functional traits of epiphytic lichens as potential indicators of environmental conditions in forest ecosystems
Ecol. Indic.
(2012) - et al.
Ecological diversity and forest management
Using bioindicators based on biodiversity to assess landscape sustainability
Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.
(1999)- et al.
Review of multispecies indices for monitoring human impacts on biodiversity
Ecol. Indic.
(2012) - et al.
Relationship between epiphytic lichens, trace elements and gaseous atmospheric pollutants
Environ. Pollut.
(2001) - ANPA, 2001. I.B.L. Indice di Biodiversità Lichenica. Manuali e Linee Guida. no....
- et al.
Mapping lichen diversity as an indicator of environmental quality
Determining environmental impacts for sensitive species: using iconic species as bioindicators for management and policy
J. Environ. Protect.
Lichens, air pollution and lung cancer
Nature
Assessing biodiversity profile through FDA
Statistica
Non parametric tests and confidence regions for intrinsic diversity profiles of biological populations
Environmetrics
Comparison of diversity indices applied to macrophyte incidence-based data
Brazil. Arch. Biol. Technol.
Inference on intrinsic diversity profiles of biological populations
Environmetrics
Nonparametric functional data analysis
Multivariate bootstrap confidence regions for abundance vector using data depth
Environ. Ecol. Stat.
Cited by (39)
Benthic macrofauna as an indicator of Ecological Integrity at an ocean beach with touristic purpose; Playa El Rivero, Punta Del Diablo, Rocha, Uruguay
2020, Regional Studies in Marine ScienceFunctional unsupervised classification of spatial biodiversity
2020, Ecological IndicatorsCitation Excerpt :In the specific case of diversity profiles, several works have showed that the development of a FDA approach provides a reliable theoretical framework to investigate biodiversity (Battista et al., 2017). Indeed, it makes possible to analyze the shape of the profile by using functional tools, to evaluate the behaviour of the profile throughout the reference domain and to introduce new analytical tools for assessing diversity, such as the derivatives, the arc length (Di Battista et al., 2016), the curvature (Battista et al., 2017), and the integral function (Maturo and Di Battista, 2018). However, the literature on diversity profiles in a FDA context, mainly focused on independent curves, which is not a reasonable assumption in the environmental fields, where samples of functions are observed in different sites and where it is natural to expect spatial aggregation in natural communities.
Eco-efficiency measurement of industrial sectors in China: A hybrid super-efficiency DEA analysis
2019, Journal of Cleaner ProductionSpatiotemporal variations in finfish assemblage and diversity indices in relation to ecological indicators of the Atrai River, Dinajpur, Bangladesh
2019, Egyptian Journal of Aquatic Research