UST College of Science Department of Biological Sciences

1 TITLE

2 Africano, Winnie Andrea D.1, Bernardo Paul Cedric S.D.1, Carreon, Kiana Dominique L.1,

3 Polanes, Stephanie Kyrha R.1,

4
1
5 Department of Biological Sciences, College of Science, University of Santo Tomas, Manila

7 ABSTRACT

9 Keywords:

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
UST College of Science Department of Biological Sciences

26 METHODS

27 The group was assigned to study the biodiversity model simulator entitled, “Estimating

28 Plant Biodiversity” found within the Virtual Biology Lab website (www.virtualbiologylab.org). The

29 sample of the interface is shown below (Figure 1). There are two (2) types of habitats present in

30 the study area: the lush mesic habitat lies in the left, and the arid xeric habitat lies in the right, all

31 separated by a slope. There are a total of 25 wildflower species present, with each having a

32 difference in their habitat, frequency, and distribution.

33 Ten (10) sampling plots are available and can be placed anywhere on the map using the

34 directional buttons. Once all of them are planted, the plants within the sampling radius can now

35 be counted by clicking the “sample” buttons found in the rightmost column next to the sampling

36 area. The simulation is now complete and the data gathered will now be plotted in the table below.

37 Richness (species number) and abundance (individual count) are the calculated values shown in

38 the table, together with the sample area. The left table pertains to the currently clicked sampling

39 plot, while the right table pertains to the cumulative count data of all sampling plots.

40 The only parameter that can be changed is the sampling radius, which intensifies from a

41 value of 0-4. .Four (4) different simulations were run, each having a different sampling range from

42 1-4; the default setting has a sampling radius of two (2). The sample radius of zero (0) was not

43 included because its sample area is small and can only plot one plant. All the plots were used

44 and were equally and randomly distributed per habitat. Cumulative richness and abundance were

45 taken and each simulation was repeated three (3) times by clicking the “replicate” button to create

46 replicates. This button allows resampling the simulation by recreating the population without

47 removing the plots from its position, removing possible biases. The replicate values were

48 averaged and data from each simulation were compared. Microsoft Excel was used for encoding

49 and visual graphing the data sets.

50
UST College of Science Department of Biological Sciences

51

52 Figure 1: The user interface of the biodiversity model simulation.

53

54 RESULTS

55 a.)

56
Richness
57 25
58
59 20 21
60 20
Species count

19
61 15 14
62
63 10
64
65 5
66
67 0
68 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
69 Radius
70
71
72
73
UST College of Science Department of Biological Sciences

74 b.)
75
76 Abundance
77
450
78
79 400
80 350 403
No. of individuals

81 300
82 250
83
200 230
84
150
85
86 100 136
87 50 64
88 0
89 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
90 Radius
91
92 Figure 2: Relationship of sampling radius to a.) species richness; b.) abundance
93
94

95 Figure 2 shows the effects of changing the sample radius in species richness and

96 abundance. Increasing the sample radius denotes a positive effect on estimating the plant

97 biodiversity. As the area of the plots increases, the species richness and abundance increase as

98 well and vice versa.

99

100 DISCUSSION

101 Estimating plant biodiversity can be measured by two factors, the species abundance and

102 species richness (Odeland et al, 2010). The study shows that by using abundance-based

103 measure in correlation with heterogeneity would mean another indirect measure for biodiversity.

104 It influences biodiversity and shapes the community structures in terms of number and rare

105 abundant species. Species richness is also used to measure diversity in a biological community.

106 However, the study shows that estimating species richness is a sampling problem. Thus,

107 enhancing the sampling effort by increasing the sample size or plot size could improve the

108 probability of species detection which could prevent incomplete sample and sample biases
UST College of Science Department of Biological Sciences

109 (Zhang et al, 2014). The probability of species detection has a strong relationship with the sample

110 size.According to the same study, larger sample sizes are needed to get better species richness

111 estimates. The sample sizes can be extremely variable; small samples lose information and

112 accuracy (Morellato et al, 2009).

113 Sohrabi H. (2018) agrees that the sample size is affected by variations of radius size. By

114 fixing the maximum and minimum search radius, there will be a strong influence on the results. In

115 this study, a new sampling method was performed wherein maximum and minimum radius were

116 compared after determining a random point to use as a point center; both had a different result.

117 The study also suggests that heterogeneity of the area can highly affect the results. According to

118 the Naval research review (1997), a larger radius will encompass a larger number of samples.

119 The bigger the number of samples, the more accurate the sample probability estimates will be.

120

121 CONCLUSION

122 Estimating plant biodiversity through biodiversity model simulator provides a good

123 generalization about real ecological set-ups. Changes in the parameter such as the radius size

124 could affect the measurement of plant biodiversity. Biodiversity in a community also depends on

125 the heterogeneity of plants. A larger radius size does not always acquire accurate estimates as

126 distribution and frequency varies in all habitats. Although these factors can be measured to

127 estimate the plant biodiversity, the inconsistency of plant distribution per replicate degrades the

128 reliability of the data therefore, recommendations were being given. First, the study suggests that

129 creating additional game interference that allows the user to manipulate the stimulation game

130 should be done. And lastly, the distribution of the plants should be consistent in place and non-

131 moving each time the replicate resets.

132

133
UST College of Science Department of Biological Sciences

134 REFERENCES

135 Journal Articles

136 Dornelas, M., Moonen, A. C., Magurran, A. E., & Bàrberi, P. (2009). Species abundance
137 distributions reveal environmental heterogeneity in modified landscapes. Journal of Applied
138 Ecology, 46(3), 666–672 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01640.x
139 Morellato, L. P. C., Camargo, M. G. G., D’Eça Neves, F. F., Luize, B. G., Mantovani, A., & Hudson,
140 I. L. (2009). The Influence of Sampling Method, Sample Size, and Frequency of Observations
141 on Plant Phenological Patterns and Interpretation in Tropical Forest Trees. Phenological
142 Research, 99–121. doi:10.1007/978-90-481-3335-2_5
143 Sohrabi H. (2018): Adaptive k-tree sample plot for the estimation of stem density: An empirical
144 approach. J. For. Sci., 64: 17–24 doi: 10.17221/111/2017-JFS
145 Zhang J, Nielsen SE, Grainger TN, Kohler M, Chipchar T, et al. (2014) Sampling Plant Diversity
146 and Rarity at Landscape Scales: Importance of Sampling Time in Species Detectability. PLoS
147 ONE 9(4): e95334. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0095334
148
149 E-Book
150 Naval Research Reviews, Volumes 49-50. (1997). University of Minnesota: The Office, p.14.