Please,
In the ecological literature, i found: Shannon index, Shannon-Weaver index and Shannon-Wiener index? Which should I use?
Thanks.
Bonjour,
Les 3 Indices écologiques sont les mêmes, juste que leur appellation est différente. Mtn on parle de l'indice de Shannon tout court !!!
Thank you Mr. Biche and Dr Feest.
I found this paper. Interesting to read.
The 3 Ecological Indices are the same, just that their name is different. Now we are talking about the Shannon index just short !!!
Ce qui est clair et net est que la fonction H' revient à Claude Shannon (1948) et la confusion avec Shannon -Weaver ou Wiener est associée à la coproduction Shannon-Weaver (1949). Le plus correct est Shannon (1948). Le droit revient à Shannon, juste Shannon.
Bonjour Souad
Certains utilisent Shannon-Weaver et d'autres Shannon tout court. C'est pareil. Bonne continuation
Bonjour Samia,
J'ai mis à la disposition des chercheurs cet article que j'ai téléchargé répondant à ma question et à tous ceux qui se la posent. La correcte appellation est Shannon (1948) parce qu'il a été à l'origine de sa fonction H'. La confusion a pris naissance dans la littérature après la publication de sa coproduction en 1949 avec Weaver(Wiener). A mon avis, le mieux est d'utiliser tout bonnement Shannon (1948). Vous pouvez lire l'article en question traitant exclusivement cette question. Bonne réception.
Dear Souad, please check the paper with title: "A tribute to Claude Shannon (1916–2001) and a plea for more rigorous use of species richness, species diversity and the ‘Shannon–Wiener’ Index".
In fact, the Spellerberg and Fedor (2003) paper concludes as:
" We suggest that the ‘mislabelling’ of the Shannon Index ‘H’ (as referred to by Krebs, 1999) has come about partly because of the joint authorship of Shannon & Weaver’s book, which has led to a belief that these two authors can be attributed to the Index. That is, the Shannon index is sometimes called the Shannon & Weaver Index. In fact, in the late 1940s Shannon had built on the work of Wiener. That being the case, it seems preferable to refer to ‘H’ (the species diversity index) as the ‘Shannon Index’ or the ‘Shannon & Wiener Index’ ".
None of them as Simpson's is better being more independent of species ricness (see Magurran 2004).
Dr Feest,
Last time, you recommended me Berger Parkerindex.
Simpson does not consider rare species which are also important.
Souad
In my experience calculating all three indices Berger-Parker comes out generally the same as the other two (in a relative sense). It is also easy to calculate. For utility the 0-1.0 range of B-P and the 0-3.5+ range of S-W are much smaller than Simpsons and thus have a lower discriminatory power.
As ever Magurran is the bible.
Hope this helps
Alan
This is based on information theory and the concept that the diversity or information in a sample or community can be measured in a similar way to the information contained within a message or code.
The index (H) is sometimes correctly called the Shannon-Wiener index but elsewhere is referred to wrongly as the Shannon-Weaver index (Spellerberg and Fedor, 2003).
The index makes the assumption that individuals are randomly sampled from an ‘infinitely large’ population and also assumes that all the species from a community are included in the sample.
This last assumption is not always easy to meet and presupposes that the ecologist knows exactly what is the species composition of the community – a very difficult question for most plant ecologists! Herewith. you may find a standard reference for this issue.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Indexes