Literature DB >> 22986892

The equivalence of two phylogenetic biodiversity measures: the Shapley value and Fair Proportion index.

Klaas Hartmann1.   

Abstract

Most biodiversity conservation programs are forced to prioritise species in order to allocate their funding. This paper contains a mathematical proof that provides biological support for one common approach based on phylogenetic indices. Phylogenetic trees describe the evolutionary relationships between a group of taxa. Two indices for computing the distinctiveness of each taxon in a phylogenetic tree are considered here-the Shapley value and the Fair Proportion index. These indices provide a measure of the importance of each taxon for overall biodiversity and have been used to prioritise taxa for conservation. The Shapley value is the biodiversity contribution a taxon is expected to make if all taxa are equally likely to become extinct. This interpretation makes it appealing to use the Shapley value in biodiversity conservation applications. The Fair Proportion index lacks a convenient interpretation, however it is significantly easier to calculate and understand. It has been empirically observed that there is a high correlation between the two indices. This paper shows the mathematical basis for this correlation and proves that as the number of taxa increases, the indices become equivalent. Consequently in biodiversity prioritisation the simpler Fair Proportion index can be used whilst retaining the appealing interpretation of the Shapley value.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22986892     DOI: 10.1007/s00285-012-0585-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Math Biol        ISSN: 0303-6812            Impact factor:   2.259


  8 in total

1.  Sampling trees from evolutionary models.

Authors:  Klaas Hartmann; Dennis Wong; Tanja Stadler
Journal:  Syst Biol       Date:  2010-05-28       Impact factor: 15.683

2.  Incorporating evolutionary measures into conservation prioritization.

Authors:  David W Redding; Arne Ø Mooers
Journal:  Conserv Biol       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 6.560

3.  Maximizing phylogenetic diversity in biodiversity conservation: Greedy solutions to the Noah's Ark problem.

Authors:  Klaas Hartmann; Mike Steel
Journal:  Syst Biol       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 15.683

4.  Clade age and not diversification rate explains species richness among animal taxa.

Authors:  Mark A McPeek; Jonathan M Brown
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  2007-02-09       Impact factor: 3.926

5.  Evolutionarily distinctive species often capture more phylogenetic diversity than expected.

Authors:  David W Redding; Klaas Hartmann; Aki Mimoto; Drago Bokal; Matt Devos; Arne Ø Mooers
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  2008-03-04       Impact factor: 2.691

6.  The Shapley value of phylogenetic trees.

Authors:  Claus-Jochen Haake; Akemi Kashiwada; Francis Edward Su
Journal:  J Math Biol       Date:  2007-09-06       Impact factor: 2.259

7.  Mammals on the EDGE: conservation priorities based on threat and phylogeny.

Authors:  Nick J B Isaac; Samuel T Turvey; Ben Collen; Carly Waterman; Jonathan E M Baillie
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2007-03-14       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Hedging our bets: the expected contribution of species to future phylogenetic diversity.

Authors:  Mike Steel; Aki Mimoto; Arne Ø Mooers
Journal:  Evol Bioinform Online       Date:  2007-09-25       Impact factor: 1.625

  8 in total
  8 in total

1.  Equality of Shapley value and fair proportion index in phylogenetic trees.

Authors:  Michael Fuchs; Emma Yu Jin
Journal:  J Math Biol       Date:  2014-12-07       Impact factor: 2.259

2.  Correlation between Shapley values of rooted phylogenetic trees under the beta-splitting model.

Authors:  Michael Fuchs; Ariel R Paningbatan
Journal:  J Math Biol       Date:  2019-09-30       Impact factor: 2.259

3.  Biodiversity, Shapley value and phylogenetic trees: some remarks.

Authors:  Hubert Stahn
Journal:  J Math Biol       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 2.259

4.  Mathematical indices for the influence of risk factors on the lethality of a disease.

Authors:  Ricardo Martínez; Joaquín Sánchez-Soriano
Journal:  J Math Biol       Date:  2021-12-08       Impact factor: 2.259

5.  I-HEDGE: determining the optimum complementary sets of taxa for conservation using evolutionary isolation.

Authors:  Evelyn L Jensen; Arne Ø Mooers; Adalgisa Caccone; Michael A Russello
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2016-08-23       Impact factor: 2.984

6.  The United States Swine Pathogen Database: integrating veterinary diagnostic laboratory sequence data to monitor emerging pathogens of swine.

Authors:  Tavis K Anderson; Blake Inderski; Diego G Diel; Benjamin M Hause; Elizabeth G Porter; Travis Clement; Eric A Nelson; Jianfa Bai; Jane Christopher-Hennings; Phillip C Gauger; Jianqiang Zhang; Karen M Harmon; Rodger Main; Kelly M Lager; Kay S Faaberg
Journal:  Database (Oxford)       Date:  2021-12-15       Impact factor: 3.451

7.  Prioritizing populations for conservation using phylogenetic networks.

Authors:  Logan Volkmann; Iain Martyn; Vincent Moulton; Andreas Spillner; Arne O Mooers
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-02-28       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Measuring Evolutionary Isolation for Conservation.

Authors:  David W Redding; Florent Mazel; Arne Ø Mooers
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-12-10       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.