New records and detailed distribution and abundance of selected arthropod species collected between 1999 and 2011 in Azorean native forests.

BACKGROUND: In this contribution we present detailed distribution and abundance data for arthropod species identified during the BALA - Biodiversity of Arthropods from the Laurisilva of the Azores (1999-2004) and BALA2 projects (2010-2011) from 18 native forest fragments in seven of the nine Azorean islands (all excluding Graciosa and Corvo islands, which have no native forest left). NEW INFORMATION: Of the total 286 species identified, 81% were captured between 1999 and 2000, a period during which only 39% of all the samples were collected. On average, arthropod richness for each island increased by 10% during the time frame of these projects. The classes Arachnida, Chilopoda and Diplopoda represent the most remarkable cases of new island records, with more than 30% of the records being novelties. This study stresses the need to expand the approaches applied in these projects to other habitats in the Azores, and more importantly to other less surveyed taxonomic groups (e.g. Diptera and Hymenoptera). These steps are fundamental for getting a more accurate assessment of biodiversity in the archipelago.

Evaluating the performance of species richness estimators: sensitivity to sample grain size.

1. Fifteen species richness estimators (three asymptotic based on species accumulation curves, 11 nonparametric, and one based in the species-area relationship) were compared by examining their performance in estimating the total species richness of epigean arthropods in the Azorean Laurisilva forests. Data obtained with standardized sampling of 78 transects in natural forest remnants of five islands were aggregated in seven different grains (i.e. ways of defining a single sample): islands, natural areas, transects, pairs of traps, traps, database records and individuals to assess the effect of using different sampling units on species richness estimations. 2. Estimated species richness scores depended both on the estimator considered and on the grain size used to aggregate data. However, several estimators (ACE, Chao 1, Jackknifel and 2 and Bootstrap) were precise in spite of grain variations. Weibull and several recent estimators [proposed by Rosenzweig et al. (Conservation Biology, 2003, 17, 864-874), and Ugland et al. (Journal of Animal Ecology, 2003, 72, 888-897)] performed poorly. 3. Estimations developed using the smaller grain sizes (pair of traps, traps, records and individuals) presented similar scores in a number of estimators (the above-mentioned plus ICE, Chao2, Michaelis-Menten, Negative Exponential and Clench). The estimations from those four sample sizes were also highly correlated. 4. Contrary to other studies, we conclude that most species richness estimators may be useful in biodiversity studies. Owing to their inherent formulas, several nonparametric and asymptotic estimators present insensitivity to differences in the way the samples are aggregated. Thus, they could be used to compare species richness scores obtained from different sampling strategies. Our results also point out that species richness estimations coming from small grain sizes can be directly compared and other estimators could give more precise results in those cases. We propose a decision framework based on our results and on the literature to assess which estimator should be used to compare species richness scores of different sites, depending on the grain size of the original data, and of the kind of data available (species occurrence or abundance data).

Abundance, spatial variance and occupancy: arthropod species distribution in the Azores.

1. The positive abundance-occupancy and abundance-variance relationships are two of the most widely documented patterns in population and community ecology. 2. Recently, a general model has been proposed linking the mean abundance, the spatial variance in abundance, and the occupancy of species. A striking feature of this model is that it consists explicitly of the three variables abundance, variance and occupancy, and no extra parameters are involved. However, little is known about how well the model performs. 3. Here, we show that the abundance-variance-occupancy model fits extremely well to data on the abundance, variance and occupancy of a large number of arthropod species in natural forest patches in the Azores, at three spatial extents, and distinguishing between species of different colonization status. Indeed, virtually all variation about the bivariate abundance-occupancy and abundance-variance relationships is effectively explained by the third missing variable (variance in abundance in the case of the abundance-occupancy relationship, and occupancy in the case of the abundance-variance relationship). 4. Introduced species tend to exhibit lower densities, less spatial variance in these densities, and occupy fewer sites than native and endemic species. None the less, they all lie on the same bivariate abundance-occupancy and abundance-variance, and trivariate abundance-variance-occupancy, relationships. 5. Density, spatial variance in density, and occupancy appear to be all the things one needs to know to describe much of the spatial distribution of species.