5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Publish your biodiversity research with us!

      Submit your article here.

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Paving the Way for Standardized and Comparable Subterranean Biodiversity Studies

      , , ,
      Subterranean Biology
      Pensoft Publishers

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          A series of potential pitfalls (fallacies) in estimating subterranean biodiversity are outlined: (1) provincialism—treating different regions differently, especially with respect to new discoveries and undescribed species; (2) equality of described and undescribed species—ignoring the possibility that undescribed species are not really new species; (3) isotropy—assuming all cave regions of similar size have equally rich faunas; (4) scale invariance—ignoring the affect of area on species richness; and (5) misuse of expert opinion—the over-reliance on experts estimates often without comparable estimates for all areas. Some standard procedures are suggested for subterranean biodiversity studies, and the value of such studies is emphasized.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          Subterranean Biology
          SB
          Pensoft Publishers
          1314-2615
          1768-1448
          February 11 2013
          February 11 2013
          : 10
          : 43-50
          Article
          10.3897/subtbiol.10.4759
          6037ec03-5d42-40ac-bdc6-5e38d4a108f7
          © 2013

          http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

          History

          Comments

          Comment on this article