bioRxivEcology
Stocktaking the environmental coverage of a continental ecosystem observation network
Abstract
Field-based sampling of terrestrial habitats at continental scales is required to build ecosystem observation networks. However, a key challenge for detecting change in ecosystem composition, structure and function is to obtain a representative sample of habitats. Representative sampling contributes to ecological validity when analysing large spatial surveys, but field resources are limited and representativeness may differ markedly from purely practical sampling strategies to statistically rigorous ones. Here, we report a post hoc assessment of the coverage of environmental gradients as a surrogate for ecological coverage by a continental-scale survey of the Australian Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Network (TERN). TERNs surveillance program maintains a network of ecosystem observation plots that were init ially established in the rangelands through a stratification method (clustering of bioregions by environment) and Ausplots methodology. Subsequent site selection comprised gap filling combined with opportunistic sampling. Firstly, we confirmed that environmental coverage has been a good surrogate for ecological coverage. The cumulative sampling of environments and plant species composition over time were strongly correlated (based on mean multivariate dispersion; r = 0.93). We then compared the environmental sampling of Ausplots to 100,000 background points and a set of retrospective (virtual) sampling schemes: systematic grid, simple random, stratified random, and generalised random-tessellation stratified (GRTS). Differences were assessed according to sampling densities along environmental gradients, and multivariate dispersion (environmental space represented via multi-dimensional scaling). Ausplots outperformed systematic grid, simple random and GRTS in coverage of environmental space (Tukey HSD of mean dispersion, p < .001). GRTS site selection obtained similar coverage to Ausplots when employing the same bioregional stratification. Stratification by climatic zones generated the highest environmental coverage (p < .001), but the resulting sampling densities over-represented mesic coastal habitats. The Ausplots stratification by bioregions implemented under practical constraints represented complex environments well compared to statistically oriented or spatially even samples. However, potential statistical inference and power also depend on spatial and temporal replication, unbiased site selection, and accurate field measurements relative to the magnitude of change. A key conclusion is that environmental, rather than spatial, stratification is required to maximise ecological coverage across continental ecosystem observation networks.
- assay: field survey / ecological data
- research focus: ecology & biodiversity
- approach: statistical model
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Using generalised dissimilarity modelling and targeted field surveys to gap-fill an ecosystem surveillance network
G. R. Guerin, K. J. Williams, … B. Sparrow·bioRxiv·Jun 1, 2020
- Environmental biases in the study of ecological networks at the planetary scale
T. Poisot, G. Bergeron, … S. Vissault·bioRxiv·Jan 27, 2020
- The most abundant plant species of Eastern Australia and our knowledge of their traits
David Coleman, Mark Westoby, … Julian Schrader·bioRxiv·Dec 17, 2025
- Detecting ecosystem trends in response to climate and disturbance across continental plot networks: a power analysis
Greg R. Guerin, Irene Martín‐Forés, … Ben D. Sparrow·bioRxiv·Oct 14, 2024
- A systematic survey of regional multitaxon biodiversity: evaluating strategies and coverage
A. K. Brunbjerg, H. H. Bruun, … R. Ejrnaes·BMC EcologyPeer-reviewed·Oct 15, 2019
- Revealing biases in the sampling of ecological interaction networks
M. de Aguiar, E. A. Newman, … Ecological Network Dynamics Working Group at the National Institute for Mathematical and Biological·bioRxiv·May 22, 2018