Abstract
Functional diversity indices typically focus on a small number of recognised important traits. The phylogenetic diversity measure (PD) has provided one way to make inferences about a broader array of traits. However, PD’s assumption that shared ancestry explains shared features cannot account for all shared traits. An alternative functional diversity index, EDf, shifts the focus from shared ancestry to shared habitat as the explanation of shared traits among species. EDf calculations use a functional trait space with dimensions reflecting environmental or habitat gradients, contrasting with conventional traits spaces in which dimensions are defined by nominated traits. The EDf method assumes a unimodal relationship between traits and habitat gradients, reflecting its assumption that shared habitat explains shared traits among species. This model allows inference of the relative trait diversity of different subsets of species. EDf adapts the environmental diversity (ED) method, which was designed to evaluate the diversity of subsets of sites under a model of unimodal response of species to gradients. The re-casting of the model as unimodal response of traits to gradients means that EDf makes inferences about the relative number of traits represented by different subsets of species. This “counting-up” of traits means that EDf not only can evaluate the functional trait diversity of subsets of species but also provide other calculations supporting biodiversity conservation planning. For priority setting among species, weighted EDf distinctiveness indicates the extent to which a species has traits shared by few others. Probabilistic EDf integrates estimated species’ extinction probabilities. EDf can support conservation planning for functional diversity that effectively balances conservation of traits of known importance with conservation of more general functional trait diversity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Austin MP (1976) Performance of four ordination techniques assuming three different non-linear species response models. Vegetatio 33:43–49
Austin MP (2013) Inconsistencies between theory and methodology: a recurrent problem in ordination studies. J Veg Sci 24:251–268
Australian Museum (2012) DIVERSITY software manual and example runs. Available at: http://australianmuseum.net.au/document/DIVERSITY-software-manual-and-example-runs
Cadotte MW, Cavender-Bares J, Tilman D, Oakley TH (2009) Using phylogenetic, functional and trait diversity to understand patterns of plant community productivity. PLoS One 4(5):e5695. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005695
Cadotte MW, Davies TJ, Regetz J, Kembel SW, Cleland E, Oakley TH (2010) Phylogenetic diversity metrics for ecological communities: integrating species richness, abundance and evolutionary history. Ecol Lett 13:96–105
Cianciaruso MV, Batalha MA, Petchey OL (2013) High loss of plant phylogenetic and functional diversity due to simulated extinctions of pollinators and seed dispersers in a tropical savanna. Nat Conserv 11:36–42
Davies TJ, Buckley LB (2011) Phylogenetic diversity as a window into the evolutionary and biogeographic histories of present-day richness gradients for mammals. Phil Trans R Soc B 366:2414–2425
Devictor V, Mouillot D, Meynard C, Jiguet F, Thuiller W, Mouquet N (2010) Spatial mismatch and congruence between taxonomic, phylogenetic and functional diversity: the need for integrative conservation strategies in a changing world. Ecol Lett 13:1030–1040
Díaz S, Cabido M (2001) Vive la difference: plant functional diversity matters to ecosystem processes. Trends Ecol Evol 16:646–655
Díaz S, Quétiera F, Cáceres DM, Trainor SF et al (2011) Linking functional diversity and social actor strategies in a framework for interdisciplinary analysis of nature’s benefits to society. Proc Natl Acad Sci 108:895–902
Faith DP (1989) Homoplasy as pattern: multivariate analysis of morphological convergence in Anseriformes. Cladistics 5:235–258
Faith DP (1992) Conservation evaluation and phylogenetic diversity. Biol Conserv 61:1–10
Faith DP (1994) Phylogenetic pattern and the quantification of organismal biodiversity. Philos Trans R Soc B 345:45–58
Faith DP (1996) Conservation priorities and phylogenetic pattern. Conserv Biol 10:1286–1289
Faith DP (1997) Can ordination tell us something about cladistic data that cladistics don’t tell us? A response to parnell and waldren. Taxon 46:529–534
Faith DP (2008) Threatened species and the potential loss of phylogenetic diversity: conservation scenarios based on estimated extinction probabilities and phylogenetic risk analysis. Conserv Biol 22:1461–1470
Faith DP (2013a) Biodiversity and evolutionary history: useful extensions of the PD phylogenetic diversity assessment framework. Ann NY Acad Sci 1289:69–89
Faith DP (2013b) “Using databases of observed traits to infer more general trait patterns and produce useful indices based on functional trait diversity” Abstract. The 11th INTECOL Congress. Ecology: Into the next 100 years. London, 18–23 August 2013
Faith DP (2015) Phylogenetic diversity, functional trait diversity, and extinction: avoiding tipping points and worst-case losses. Phil Trans Royal Soc B 370:20140011. doi:10.1098/rstb.2014.0011
Faith DP, Pollock LJ (2014) Phylogenetic diversity and the sustainable use of biodiversity. In: Verdade LM et al (eds) Applied ecology and human dimensions in biological conservation. Springer, Berlin, pp 35–52
Faith DP, Walker PA (1993) DIVERSITY: a software package for sampling phylogenetic and environmental diversity. Reference and user’s guide CSIRO, Canberra
Faith DP, Walker PA (1996) Environmental diversity: on the best-possible use of surrogate data for assessing the relative biodiversity of sets of areas. Biodivers Conserv 5:399–415
Faith DP, Minchin PR, Belbin L (1987) Compositional dissimilarity as a robust measure of ecological distance. Vegetatio 69:57–68
Faith DP, Ferrier S, Walker PA (2004a) The ED strategy: how species-level surrogates indicate general biodiversity patterns through an ‘environmental diversity’ perspective. J Biogeogr 31:1207–1217
Faith DP, Reid CAM, Hunter J (2004b) Integrating phylogenetic diversity, complementarity, and endemism. Conserv Biol 18:255–261
Faith DP, Magallon S, Hendry AP et al (2010) Evosystem services: an evolutionary perspective on the links between biodiversity and human well-being. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2:66–74
Flynn DFB, Mirotchnick N, Jain M et al (2011) Functional and phylogenetic diversity as predictors of biodiversity-ecosystem-function relationships. Ecology 92:1573–1581
Goodall DW (1963) The continuum and the individualistic association. Vegetatio 11:297–316
Hooper DU, Vitousek PM (1997) The effects of plant composition and diversity on ecosystem processes. Science 277:1302–1305
Johnson RW, Goodall DW (1980) A maximum likelihood approach to non-linear ordination. Vegetatio 41:133–142
King I (2009) The need for the incorporation of phylogeny in the measurement of biological diversity, with special reference to ecosystem functioning research. BioEssays 31:107–116
Laliberte E, Legendre P (2010) A distance-based framework for measuring functional diversity from multiple traits. Ecology 91:299–305
Leps J, de Bello F, Lavorel S (2006) Quantifying and interpreting functional diversity of natural communities: practical considerations matter. Preslia 78:481–501
Mace GM, Reyers B, Alkemade R et al (2014) Approaches to defining a planetary boundary for biodiversity. Glob Environ Change 28:289–297
Mason NWH, de Bello F (2013) Functional diversity: a tool for answering challenging ecological questions. J Veg Sci 24:777–780
Mason NWH, Pavoine S (2013) Does trait conservatism guarantee that indicators of phylogenetic community structure will reveal niche-based assembly processes along stress gradients? J Veg Sci 24:820–833
Meynard CN, Devictor V, Mouillot D et al (2011) Beyond taxonomic diversity patterns: how do alpha, beta and gamma components of bird functional and phylogenetic diversity respond to environmental gradients across France? Glob Ecol Biogeogr 20:893–903
Milcu A (2013) Functionally and phylogenetically diverse plant communities key to soil biota. Ecology 94:1878–1885
Minchin PR (1987) An evaluation of the relative robustness of techniques for ecological Ordination. Vegetatio 69:89–107
Mooers AØ, Faith DP, Maddison WP (2008) Converting endangered species categories to probabilities of extinction for phylogenetic conservation prioritization. PLoS One 3(11):e3700. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0003700
Paganelli D, Marchini A, Occhipinti-Ambrogi A (2011) Functional structure of marine benthic assemblages using biological traits analysis (BTA): a study along the Emilia-Romagna coastline (Italy, North-West Adriatic Sea). Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 96:245–256
Pavoine S, Bonsall MB (2011) Measuring biodiversity to explain community assembly: a unified approach. Biol Rev 86:792–812
Petchey OL, Gaston KJ (2002) Functional diversity (FD), species richness and community composition. Ecol Lett 5:402–411
Petchey OL, Gaston KJ (2006) Functional diversity: back to basics and looking forward. Ecol Lett 9:741–758
Pla L, Casanoves F, Di Rienzo J (2012) Quantifying functional biodiversity. SpringerBriefs Environ Sci 38:2191–5547
Poos MS, Walker SC, Jackson DA (2009) Functional-diversity indices can be driven by methodological choices and species richness. Ecology 90:341–347
Prinzing AR, Reiffers WG, Braakhekke SM et al (2008) Less lineages–more trait variation: phylogenetically clustered plant communities are functionally more diverse. Ecol Lett 11:809–819
Rao CR (1982) Diversity and dissimilarity coefficients—a unified approach. Theor Popul Biol 21:24–43
Rosenfeld JS (2002) Logical fallacies in the assessment of functional redundancy. Conserv Biol 16:837–839
Safi K, Cianciaruso MV, Loyola RD et al (2011) Understanding global patterns of mammalian functional and phylogenetic diversity. Phil Trans R Soc B 366:2536–2544
Schleuter D, Daufresne M, Massol F, Argillier C (2010) A user’s guide to functional diversity indices. Ecol Monogr 80:469–484
Stuart-Smith RD et al (2013) Integrating abundance and functional traits reveals new global hotspots of fish diversity. Nature 501(7468):539–542
Villeger S, Mason NWH, Mouillot D (2008) New multidimensional functional diversity indices for a multifaceted framework in functional ecology. Ecology 89:2290–2301
Villeger S, Novack-Gottshall PM, Mouillot D (2011) The multidimensionality of the niche reveals functional diversity changes in benthic marine biotas across geological time. Ecol Lett 14:561–568
Violle C, Jiang L (2009) Towards a trait-based quantification of species niche. J Plant Ecol 2:87–93
Weiher E, Freund D, Bunton T et al (2011) Advances, challenges and a developing synthesis of ecological community assembly theory. Philos Trans R Soc B 366:2403–2413
Weitzman ML (1992) On diversity. Q J Econ 107:363–405
Acknowledgments
I thank A. Saul for discussions, and I thank bioGENESIS (DIVERSITAS) for support and discussion. I thank the organisers of the INTECOL symposium on functional trait diversity for the opportunity to present this work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by Dr. Peter R. Minchin and Dr. Jari Oksanen.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Faith, D.P. The unimodal relationship between species’ functional traits and habitat gradients provides a family of indices supporting the conservation of functional trait diversity. Plant Ecol 216, 725–740 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11258-015-0454-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11258-015-0454-z