Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.17663/JWR.2022.24.4.312

Comparison of sampling methods in biodiversity analysis of plant communities living in a riparian park area of Nakdong river  

Nam, Ki-jung (Department of Biology Education, Gyeongsang National University, Institute of Agriculture & Life Science, Gyeongsang National University)
Kim, Min-jung (Department of Biology Education, Gyeongsang National University, Institute of Agriculture & Life Science, Gyeongsang National University)
Publication Information
Journal of Wetlands Research / v.24, no.4, 2022 , pp. 312-319 More about this Journal
Abstract
The species diversity of plant communities is quantitatively measured, and can be affected by plant monitoring methods. This study experimentally compared the structure and diversity of plant communities living in five waterfront park areas in Nak-dong River using three plant survey methods (modified Whittaker, modified Daubenmire, and modified point-line intercept method). According to the diversity profile, the modified Whittaker method produced the highest species richness regardless of the location, but which method makes the highest diversity of dominant species varies depending on the location. The Beta diversity of the communites calculated from the modified Whittaker and the modified Daubenmire suggested that structures of plant communities in five locations were similar, while the Point-line interception method suggested that a small number of dominant species were shared between communities.
Keywords
Biodiversity; Plant community; Sampling methods;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 2  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Lee, S, Lee, K and Jeong, J (2014), The vegetation analysis of Northern region at Jungnang riverside, Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment, 23, pp. 315-322. [DOI: 10.14249/eia.2014.23.4.315]   DOI
2 Marion, ZH, Orwin, KH, Wood, JR, Holdaway, RJ and Dickie, IA (2021), Land use, but not distance, drives fungal beta diversity, Ecology, 102, pp. e03487. [DOI: 10.1002/ecy.3487]   DOI
3 Moreno, CE, Calderon-Patron, JM, Martin-Regalado, N, Martinez-Falcon, AP, Ortega-Martinez, IJ, Rios-Diaz, CL and Rosas, F (2018), Measuring species diversity in the tropics: a review of methodological approaches and framework for future studies, Biotropica, 50, pp. 929-941. [DOI: 10.1111/btp.12607]   DOI
4 Korb, JE, Covington, WW and Fule, PZ (2003), Sampling techniques influence understory plant trajectories after restoration: an example from ponderosa pine restoration, Restoration Ecology, 11, pp. 504-515. [DOI: 10.1046/j.1526-100X.2003.rec0170.x]   DOI
5 Iknayan, KJ, Tingley, MW, Furnas, BJ and Beissinger, SR (2014), Detecting diversity: emerging methods to estimate species diversity, Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 29., pp. 97-106.   DOI
6 Chao, A, Nicholas, JG, Hsie, TC, Sander, EL, Corwell, RK and Ellison, AM (2014b), Rarefaction and extrapolation with Hill numbers: a framework for sampling and estimation in species diversity studies, Ecological Monographs, 84(1), pp. 45-67. [DOI: 10.1890/13-0133.1]   DOI
7 Daly, AJ, Baetens, JM and De Baets, B (2018), Ecological Diversity: Measuring the unmeasurable, Mathematics, 6, 119. [DOI: 10.3390/math6070119]   DOI
8 Godinez-Alvarez, H, Herrick, JE, Mattocks, M, Toledo, D and Van Zee, J (2009), Comparison of three vegetation monitoring methods: Their relative utility for ecological assessment and monitoring, Ecological Indicators, 9, pp. 1001-1008. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2008.11.011]   DOI
9 Lee, SY, Jang, RH, Han, YS, Jung, Lee, SI, Lee, EP and You, YH (2018), Health Condition Assessment Using the Riparian Vegetation Index and Vegetation Analysis of Geumgang mainstream and Mihocheon, Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology, 32, pp. 105-117. [DOI: 10.13047/KJEE.2018.32.1.105]   DOI
10 McGill, BJ (2010), Towards a unification of unified theories of biodiversity, Ecology Letters, 13, pp. 627-642. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01449.x]   DOI
11 Pilliod, D and Arkle, RS (2013), Performance of quantitative vegetation sampling methods across gradients of cover in Great Basin plant communities, Rangeland Ecology and Management, 66, pp.634-647. [DOI: 10.2111/REM-D-13-00063.1]   DOI
12 Stohlgren, TJ, Bull, KA and Otsuki, Y (1998), Comparison of rangeland vegetation sampling techniques in the Central Grasslands, Journal of Rangeland Management, 51, pp. 164-172. [DOI: 10.2307/4003202]   DOI
13 De Stenfano, A, Fowers, B and Mealor, BA (2021), Comparison of visual estimation and line-point intercept vegetation survey methods on annual grass-invaded rangelands of Wyoming, Invasive Plant Science and Management, 14, pp. 240-252. [DOI: 10.1017/inp.2021.36]   DOI
14 Pavoine, S (2020), adiv: AN R package to analyse biodiversity in ecology, Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 11, pp. 1106-1112. [DOI: 10.1111/2041-210X.13430]   DOI
15 R Core Team (2022), R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org
16 Roswell, M, Dushoff, J and Winfree, R (2021), A conceptual guide to measuring species diversity, Oikos, 130, pp. 321-338. [DOI: 10.1111/oik.07202]   DOI
17 Stohlgren, TJ, Falkner, MB and Schell, LD, (1995), A modified-Whittaker nested vegetation sampling method, Vegetatio, 117, pp. 113-121. [DOI: 10.1007/BF00045503]   DOI
18 McGlinn, DJ, Xiao, X, May, F, Gotelli, NJ, Engel, T, Blowes, SA, Knight, TM, Purschke, O, Chase, JM and McGill, BJ (2018), Measurement of Biodiversity(MoB): A method to separate the scale-dependent effects of species abundance distribution, density, and aggregation on diversity change, Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 10, pp. 258-269. [DOI: 10.1111/2041-210X.13102]   DOI
19 Chao, A, Chiu, CH and Jost, L (2014a), Unifying species diversity, phylogenetic diversity, functional diversity, and related similarity and differentiation measures through Hill numbers, Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 45, pp. 297-324. [DOI: 10.1146/annurev-ecosys-120213-091540]   DOI
20 Abrahamson, IL, Nelson, CR and Affleck, DLR (2011), Assessing the performance of sampling designs for measuring the abundance of under story plants, Ecological Applications, 21, pp. 452-464. [DOI: 10.1890/09-2296.1]   DOI
21 Chase, JM and Knight, TM (2013), Scale-dependent effect sizes of ecological drivers on biodiversity: Why standardised sampling is not enough, Ecology Letters, 16, pp. 17-26. [DOI: 10.1111/ele.12112].   DOI
22 Cox, KD, Black, MJ, Filip, N, Miller, MR, Mohns, K, Mortimor, J, Freitas, TR, Loerzer, RG, Gerwig, TG, Juanes, F and Dudas, SE (2017), Community assessment techniques and the implications for rarefaction and extrapolation with Hill numbers, Ecology and Evolution, 7, pp.11213-11226.   DOI
23 Fagua, JC, Jantz, P, Burns, P, Massey, R, Butrago, JY, Saatchi, S, Hakkenberg, C and Goetz, SJ (2021), Mapping tree diversity in the tropical region of Choco-Colombia, Environmental Research Letters, 16, 05424. [DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/abf58a]   DOI
24 Halffter, G and Ros, M (2013), A strategy for measuring biodiversity, Acta Zoologica Mexicana (n.s.), 29(2), pp. 400-411. [DOI: 10.21829/AZM.2013.2921117]   DOI
25 Hulvey, KB, Thomas, K and Thacker, E (2018), A comparison of two herbaceous cover sampling methods to assess ecosystem services in High-shrub rangelands: Photography-based grid point intercept versus quadrat sampling, Rangelands, 40, pp. 152-159. [DOI: 10.1016/j.rala.2018.08.004]   DOI