Geostatistical approaches and optimal additional sampling schemes for spatial patterns and future sampling of bird diversity

Abstract

Aim To evaluate geostatistical approaches, namely kriging, co-kriging and geostatistical simulation, and to develop an optimal sampling design for mapping the spatial patterns of bird diversity, estimating their spatial autocorrelations and selecting additional samples of bird diversity in a 2450 km 2 basin. Location Taiwan.Methods Kriging, co-kriging and simulated annealing are applied to estimate and simulate the spatial patterns of bird diversity. In addition, kriging and co-kriging with a genetic algorithm are used to optimally select further samples to improve the kriging and co-kriging estimations. The association between bird diversity and elevation, and bird diversity and land cover, is analysed with estimated and simulated maps. ResultsThe Simpson index correlates spatially with the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) within the micro-scale and the macro-scale in the study basin, but the Shannon diversity index only correlates spatially with NDVI within the micro-scale. Co-kriging and simulated annealing simulation accurately simulate the statistical and spatial patterns of bird diversity. The mean estimated diversity and the simulated diversity increase with elevation and decrease with increasing urbanization. The proposed optimal sampling approach selects 43 additional sampling sites with a high spatial estimation variance in bird diversity.Main conclusions Small-scale variations dominate the total spatial variation of the observed diversity due to a lack of spatial information and insufficient sampling. However, simulations of bird diversity consistently capture the sampling statistics and spatial patterns of the observed bird diversity. The data thus accumulated can be used to understand the spatial patterns of bird diversity associated with different types of land cover and elevation, and to optimize sample selection. Co-kriging combined with a genetic algorithm yields additional optimal sampling sites, which can be used to augment existing sampling points in future studies of bird diversity.

Simulating Spatial Distributions, Variability and Uncertainty of Soil Arsenic by Geostatistical Simulations in Geographic Information Systems

“…The annealing algorithm perturbs the image by simulating thermal perturbation [1,25,26]. In SAS, swapping the values in pairs of grid nodes that do not contain a conditioning datum, modifies the initial field, reproducing a histogram [1,11].…”

The need for an integrated biodiversity policy support process – Building the European contribution to a global Biodiversity Observation Network (EU BON)

“…Despite considerable advances in the theory and practice of optimal spatial sampling (e.g. Braunisch and Suchant 2010, Lin et al 2008), trade-offs between optimal spatial and optimal temporal sampling are not yet completely resolved. The advances for habitat monitoring achieved by the EBONE project (Brus et al 2011, Metzger et al 2013) will be taken up and EU BON will tackle these challenges with new statistical and virtual ecological approaches (Railsback and Grimm 2012).…”

Uncertainty and the design of in-situ biodiversity-monitoring programs

“…Evaluations of the effects of scale of sampling are generally difficult with idiosyncratic sampling, but can be achieved with a few sites with standardized infrastructure. Where coverage is inadequate, geostatistical techniques may help to define priorities for locations of new sampling sites (Lin et al 2008). Modular designs allow flexibility in answering local questions, while permitting different stakeholders to adjust the system to their questions .…”

“…Reyers et al 2002, Ilg et al 2012) and selection of sites for additional sampling when initial sampling is inadequate (e.g. Lin et al 2008). However, spatially standardized sampling is generally the easiest option to evaluate the assumptions of analyses, and standardized sampling has allowed evaluation of the effects of scale and position of sampling units in RAPELD plots ) and elsewhere (Chisholm et al 2013).…”