A checklist for using Beals’ index with incomplete floristic monitoring data : reply to Christensen et al. (2021): Problems in using Beals’ index to detect species trends in incomplete floristic monitoring data

Bruelheide, Helge; Jansen, Florian; Jandt, Ute; Bernhardt‐Römermann, Markus; Bonn, Aletta; Bowler, Diana; Dengler, Jürgen; Eichenberg, David; Grescho, Volker; Kellner, Simon; Klenke, Reinhard A.; Lütt, Silke; Lüttgert, Lina; Sabatini, Francesco Maria; Wesche, Karsten

doi:10.1111/ddi.13277

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.21256/zhaw-22832

Publication type:	Article in scientific journal
Type of review:	Peer review (publication)
Title:	A checklist for using Beals’ index with incomplete floristic monitoring data : reply to Christensen et al. (2021): Problems in using Beals’ index to detect species trends in incomplete floristic monitoring data
Authors:	Bruelheide, Helge Jansen, Florian Jandt, Ute Bernhardt‐Römermann, Markus Bonn, Aletta Bowler, Diana Dengler, Jürgen Eichenberg, David Grescho, Volker Kellner, Simon Klenke, Reinhard A. Lütt, Silke Lüttgert, Lina Sabatini, Francesco Maria Wesche, Karsten
et. al:	No
DOI:	10.1111/ddi.13277 10.21256/zhaw-22832
Published in:	Diversity and Distributions
Volume(Issue):	27
Issue:	7
Page(s):	1328
Pages to:	1333
Issue Date:	Jul-2021
Publisher / Ed. Institution:	Wiley
ISSN:	1366-9516 1472-4642
Language:	English
Subject (DDC):	580: Plants (Botany)
Abstract:	Christensen et al. criticized the application of Beals’ index of sociological favourability to adjust for incomplete species lists when comparing repeated surveys. Their main argument was that using Beals’ conditional occurrence probabilities would systematically underestimate biodiversity change compared to using observed frequencies. Although this might be the case for rare species, as we explicitly stated in our original publication, we here use a worked-out example to show that this criticism is unjustified for species that are sufficiently represented in the reference data set. In our opinion, the misconception derives from ignoring one of the key requirements for applying Beal's index, which is the use of a sufficiently large reference data set to derive a reliable co occurrence matrix. We here show how the predicted probability for the occurrence of a species depends on the size of the reference data set and give recommendations on the premises for applying Beals’ approach for monitoring purposes.
URI:	https://digitalcollection.zhaw.ch/handle/11475/22832
Fulltext version:	Published version
License (according to publishing contract):	CC BY 4.0: Attribution 4.0 International
Departement:	Life Sciences and Facility Management
Organisational Unit:	Institute of Natural Resource Sciences (IUNR)
Appears in collections:	Publikationen Life Sciences und Facility Management

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
2021_Bruelheide-etal_Checklist-Beals-index_ddi.pdf		532.65 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Show full item record

Bruelheide, H., Jansen, F., Jandt, U., Bernhardt‐Römermann, M., Bonn, A., Bowler, D., Dengler, J., Eichenberg, D., Grescho, V., Kellner, S., Klenke, R. A., Lütt, S., Lüttgert, L., Sabatini, F. M., & Wesche, K. (2021). A checklist for using Beals’ index with incomplete floristic monitoring data : reply to Christensen et al. (2021): Problems in using Beals’ index to detect species trends in incomplete floristic monitoring data. Diversity and Distributions, 27(7), 1328–1333. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.13277

Bruelheide, H. et al. (2021) ‘A checklist for using Beals’ index with incomplete floristic monitoring data : reply to Christensen et al. (2021): Problems in using Beals’ index to detect species trends in incomplete floristic monitoring data’, Diversity and Distributions, 27(7), pp. 1328–1333. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.13277.

H. Bruelheide et al., “A checklist for using Beals’ index with incomplete floristic monitoring data : reply to Christensen et al. (2021): Problems in using Beals’ index to detect species trends in incomplete floristic monitoring data,” Diversity and Distributions, vol. 27, no. 7, pp. 1328–1333, Jul. 2021, doi: 10.1111/ddi.13277.

BRUELHEIDE, Helge, Florian JANSEN, Ute JANDT, Markus BERNHARDT‐RÖMERMANN, Aletta BONN, Diana BOWLER, Jürgen DENGLER, David EICHENBERG, Volker GRESCHO, Simon KELLNER, Reinhard A. KLENKE, Silke LÜTT, Lina LÜTTGERT, Francesco Maria SABATINI und Karsten WESCHE, 2021. A checklist for using Beals’ index with incomplete floristic monitoring data : reply to Christensen et al. (2021): Problems in using Beals’ index to detect species trends in incomplete floristic monitoring data. Diversity and Distributions. Juli 2021. Bd. 27, Nr. 7, S. 1328–1333. DOI 10.1111/ddi.13277

Bruelheide, Helge, Florian Jansen, Ute Jandt, Markus Bernhardt‐Römermann, Aletta Bonn, Diana Bowler, Jürgen Dengler, et al. 2021. “A Checklist for Using Beals’ Index with Incomplete Floristic Monitoring Data : Reply to Christensen et Al. (2021): Problems in Using Beals’ Index to Detect Species Trends in Incomplete Floristic Monitoring Data.” Diversity and Distributions 27 (7): 1328–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.13277.

Bruelheide, Helge, et al. “A Checklist for Using Beals’ Index with Incomplete Floristic Monitoring Data : Reply to Christensen et Al. (2021): Problems in Using Beals’ Index to Detect Species Trends in Incomplete Floristic Monitoring Data.” Diversity and Distributions, vol. 27, no. 7, July 2021, pp. 1328–33, https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.13277.