与参照社区的距离指数(DRCI):评估社区恢复成功与否的新工具

IF 2.8 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY
Fontès Hugo, Marquis Christian, Torre Franck, Patrick Grillas, Thierry Dutoit, François Mesléard
{"title":"与参照社区的距离指数(DRCI):评估社区恢复成功与否的新工具","authors":"Fontès Hugo, Marquis Christian, Torre Franck, Patrick Grillas, Thierry Dutoit, François Mesléard","doi":"10.1111/rec.14194","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The concept of a reference ecosystem is fundamental in restoration ecology, especially in assessing the success of ecological restoration projects. In response to criticism, it has undergone conceptual evolutions in its definition and use in the last decades. Even though there is still a need to develop statistical methods and analyses to account for reference variability. Here, we focus on two original and one literature‐based calculation methods for designed indexes, which all aim to compare a community to be assessed (undergoing restoration) with a variable set of reference communities. These methods either use the average reference situation (species composition and abundance) as the restoration target or on the contrary, allow any reference site to be considered a relevant target. We compare the results of these methods by analyzing a simulated dataset. We then illustrate the application of the most relevant index by a real case study that compared a created Mediterranean temporary pond to a panel of 27 reference ponds located in the south of France. The results show that the Distance to Reference Communities Index (DRCI) correctly measures differences in species composition and abundance between an assessed and a reference panel of communities. It takes into account the variability of the reference communities, while the use of other indexes focuses on unrealistic average and fixed reference values. DRCI is complementary to a detailed ecological interpretation and to the use of other commonly used indexes, by giving a synthetic metric.","PeriodicalId":54487,"journal":{"name":"Restoration Ecology","volume":"59 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Distance to Reference Communities Index (DRCI): a new tool to assess communities' restoration success\",\"authors\":\"Fontès Hugo, Marquis Christian, Torre Franck, Patrick Grillas, Thierry Dutoit, François Mesléard\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/rec.14194\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The concept of a reference ecosystem is fundamental in restoration ecology, especially in assessing the success of ecological restoration projects. In response to criticism, it has undergone conceptual evolutions in its definition and use in the last decades. Even though there is still a need to develop statistical methods and analyses to account for reference variability. Here, we focus on two original and one literature‐based calculation methods for designed indexes, which all aim to compare a community to be assessed (undergoing restoration) with a variable set of reference communities. These methods either use the average reference situation (species composition and abundance) as the restoration target or on the contrary, allow any reference site to be considered a relevant target. We compare the results of these methods by analyzing a simulated dataset. We then illustrate the application of the most relevant index by a real case study that compared a created Mediterranean temporary pond to a panel of 27 reference ponds located in the south of France. The results show that the Distance to Reference Communities Index (DRCI) correctly measures differences in species composition and abundance between an assessed and a reference panel of communities. It takes into account the variability of the reference communities, while the use of other indexes focuses on unrealistic average and fixed reference values. DRCI is complementary to a detailed ecological interpretation and to the use of other commonly used indexes, by giving a synthetic metric.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54487,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Restoration Ecology\",\"volume\":\"59 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Restoration Ecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.14194\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Restoration Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.14194","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

参考生态系统的概念是恢复生态学的基础,尤其是在评估生态恢复项目的成功方面。为了回应批评,过去几十年来,它的定义和使用经历了概念上的演变。尽管仍然需要开发统计方法和分析方法来解释参考变异性。在此,我们重点介绍两种原创的设计指数计算方法和一种基于文献的计算方法,其目的都是将待评估(正在恢复中)的群落与一组可变的参照群落进行比较。这些方法要么将平均参照情况(物种组成和丰度)作为恢复目标,要么允许将任何参照地点视为相关目标。我们通过分析模拟数据集来比较这些方法的结果。然后,我们通过一个实际案例研究来说明最相关指数的应用,该案例研究将一个已创建的地中海临时池塘与位于法国南部的 27 个参考池塘进行了比较。结果表明,参考群落距离指数(DRCI)能正确测量被评估群落与参考群落之间物种组成和丰度的差异。该指数考虑到了参考群落的变异性,而使用其他指数则侧重于不切实际的平均值和固定参考值。DRCI 提供了一个合成指标,是对详细生态解释和使用其他常用指标的补充。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Distance to Reference Communities Index (DRCI): a new tool to assess communities' restoration success
The concept of a reference ecosystem is fundamental in restoration ecology, especially in assessing the success of ecological restoration projects. In response to criticism, it has undergone conceptual evolutions in its definition and use in the last decades. Even though there is still a need to develop statistical methods and analyses to account for reference variability. Here, we focus on two original and one literature‐based calculation methods for designed indexes, which all aim to compare a community to be assessed (undergoing restoration) with a variable set of reference communities. These methods either use the average reference situation (species composition and abundance) as the restoration target or on the contrary, allow any reference site to be considered a relevant target. We compare the results of these methods by analyzing a simulated dataset. We then illustrate the application of the most relevant index by a real case study that compared a created Mediterranean temporary pond to a panel of 27 reference ponds located in the south of France. The results show that the Distance to Reference Communities Index (DRCI) correctly measures differences in species composition and abundance between an assessed and a reference panel of communities. It takes into account the variability of the reference communities, while the use of other indexes focuses on unrealistic average and fixed reference values. DRCI is complementary to a detailed ecological interpretation and to the use of other commonly used indexes, by giving a synthetic metric.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Restoration Ecology
Restoration Ecology 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
15.60%
发文量
226
审稿时长
12-24 weeks
期刊介绍: Restoration Ecology fosters the exchange of ideas among the many disciplines involved with ecological restoration. Addressing global concerns and communicating them to the international research community and restoration practitioners, the journal is at the forefront of a vital new direction in science, ecology, and policy. Original papers describe experimental, observational, and theoretical studies on terrestrial, marine, and freshwater systems, and are considered without taxonomic bias. Contributions span the natural sciences, including ecological and biological aspects, as well as the restoration of soil, air and water when set in an ecological context; and the social sciences, including cultural, philosophical, political, educational, economic and historical aspects. Edited by a distinguished panel, the journal continues to be a major conduit for researchers to publish their findings in the fight to not only halt ecological damage, but also to ultimately reverse it.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信