The Effect of Sampling Effort on the Mean of Range Size - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
the effect of sampling effort on the mean of range size
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

The Effect of Sampling Effort on the Mean of Range Size - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Feb 04, 2023 314 likes •782 views

The Effect of Sampling Effort on the Mean of Range Size Distributions Megan Ruffley Ivn Jimnez Talk Outline Introduction Working Hypothesis Methods Study System Quantification of Sampling Effort Computer Simulation

slide-1
SLIDE 1

The Effect of Sampling Effort on the Mean of Range Size Distributions

Megan Ruffley Iván Jiménez

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Talk Outline

  • Introduction
  • Working Hypothesis
  • Methods

– Study System – Quantification of Sampling Effort – Computer Simulation Experiment

  • Results
  • Conclusions & Implications
slide-3
SLIDE 3

Species’ Range Size Distributions Range Size # of Species

Gaston, 2003

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Species’ Range Size Distributions Range Size # of Species

Mean of Range Size Distribution

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Species’ Range Size Distributions Range Size # of Species

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Species’ Range Size Distributions Range Size # of Species

Mean of Range Size Distribution1 Mean of Range Size Distribution 2

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Region Mean Range Size Conservation Priority

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Means of Range Size Distributions for Vascular Plants

Morueta-Holme, et al. 2013

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Talk Outline

  • Introduction
  • Working Hypothesis
  • Methods

– Study System – Quantification of Collection Effort – Computer Simulation Experiment

  • Results
  • Conclusions & Implications
slide-10
SLIDE 10

A quantitative model that relates the effects of sampling effort to bias in estimates of the mean

  • f range size distributions.

Working Hypothesis

Where P.m is the probability of not discovering a species, d is detectability, Ci is sampling effort, AOO is geographic range size measured as area of

  • ccupancy
slide-11
SLIDE 11

Working Hypothesis

X X X X X

longitude latitude

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Working Hypothesis Sampling Effort

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Bias in Estimates of the Mean of Range Size Distributions is defined as:

(Mean Range Size of discovered species – Mean Range Size of all species)

Working Hypothesis

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Working Hypothesis Sampling Effort

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Working Hypothesis

  • Prediction 1: As mean sampling effort increases, the bias

in the estimate of the mean of range size distributions will decrease.

Mean Sampling Effort

Bias in Estimate of the Mean of RSD

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Sampling Effort

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

Aggregation in Sampling Effort

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Working Hypothesis

  • Prediction 2: As spatial aggregation in sampling effort

increases, the bias in the estimate of the mean of range size distributions will increase.

Bias in Estimate of the Mean of RSD Spatial Aggregation in Sampling Effort

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Talk Outline

  • Introduction
  • Working Hypothesis
  • Methods

– Study System – Quantification of Collection Effort – Computer Simulation Experiment

  • Results
  • Conclusions & Implications
slide-19
SLIDE 19

Study System

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Talk Outline

  • Introduction
  • Working Hypothesis
  • Methods

– Study System – Quantification of Sampling Effort – Computer Simulation Experiment

  • Results
  • Conclusions & Implications
slide-21
SLIDE 21

Quantification of Sampling effort

  • 986,107 herbarium specimen

records used

  • Collector Days = unique

combinations of collector name and collection date (Sheth, et

  • al. 2012)
slide-22
SLIDE 22

X X X X X X X X X

X X X

X X X X X X X X X

longitude latitude

10 km 10 km

Quantification of Sampling effort

slide-23
SLIDE 23

10 x 10km cells

Quantification of Sampling effort

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Quantification of Sampling effort

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Quantification of Sampling effort

Relative Frequency of 100 x 100km cells Mean Sampling Effort

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Quantification of Sampling effort

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Talk Outline

  • Introduction
  • Working Hypothesis
  • Methods

– Study System – Quantification of Sampling Effort – Computer Simulation Experiment

  • Results
  • Conclusions & Implications
slide-28
SLIDE 28

Computer Simulation Experiment

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Computer Simulation Experiment

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Computer Simulation Experiment

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Computer Simulation Experiment

slide-32
SLIDE 32

100,000 Species

Computer Simulation Experiment

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Computer Simulation Experiment

100 x 100km

slide-34
SLIDE 34

Computer Simulation Experiment

Bias in Estimates of Mean Range Size is defined as:

(Mean Range Size of discovered species – Mean Range Size of all species)

slide-35
SLIDE 35

Talk Outline

  • Introduction
  • Working Hypothesis
  • Methods

– Study System – Quantification of Sampling Effort – Computer Simulation Experiment

  • Results
  • Conclusions & Implications
slide-36
SLIDE 36

Prediction 1: As mean sampling effort increases, the bias in the estimate of the mean of range size distributions will decrease.

slide-37
SLIDE 37

Prediction 1: As mean sampling effort increases, the bias in the estimate of the mean of range size distributions will decrease.

Mean Sampling Effort Bias in the Estimate of Mean of RSD

slide-38
SLIDE 38

Prediction 2: As spatial aggregation in sampling effort increases, the bias in the estimate of the mean of range size distributions will increase.

slide-39
SLIDE 39

Bias in Mean RSD (partial residuals)

Prediction 2: As spatial aggregation in sampling effort increases, the bias in the estimate of the mean of range size distributions will increase. Spatial Aggregation in Sampling Effort

Bias in the Estimate of Mean of RSD

slide-40
SLIDE 40

Talk Outline

  • Introduction
  • Working Hypothesis
  • Methods

– Study System – Quantification of sampling effort – Computer Simulation Experiment

  • Results
  • Conclusions & Implications
slide-41
SLIDE 41

Conclusions

  • Mean sampling effort is higher in the Andes

than Amazonia.

  • Spatial aggregation of sampling effort is lower

in the Andes than Amazonia.

slide-42
SLIDE 42

Conclusions

  • Mean sampling effort has a negative

relationship with bias in estimates of the mean of range size distributions.

  • Spatial aggregation in sampling effort has a

positive relationship with bias in estimates of the mean of range size distributions.

slide-43
SLIDE 43

Implications

  • Current descriptions of geographic variation in

RSD (Morueta-Holme, et al. 2013) and the density of narrowly distributed plant species across the Neotropics (Myers, et al. 2000; Pimm, et al. 2014) may be more fiction than substance, and should be regarded as highly tentative at best.

slide-44
SLIDE 44

Acknolwedgments

  • David Bogler
  • Burgund Bassuner
  • The Center for Conservation and

Sustainable Development

  • 2014 REU interns at the Missouri Botanical

Garden.

  • National Science Foundation.
slide-45
SLIDE 45

Questions?