Pülümür ve Munzur Nehirlerindeki Bentik Alglerin Deng Entropi Tabanlı Taksonomik Çeşitlilik Ölçümleri

Abstract

Son yıllarda Deng entropisi büyük ilgi çekmiş ve çeşitli alanlarda uygulama alanı bulmuştur. Deng Entropisi, Dempster-Shafer Kanıt Teorisi çerçevesinde geliştirilen ve temel olasılık atamasına dayanan entropik bir denklemdir. Bu çalışmada, Deng entropisine dayalı yeni bir taksonomik çeşitlilik indeksi kullanılmıştır. Çalışmada Tunceli'deki Munzur ve Pülümür nehirlerinin bentik alg florası, Ekim 2016 ve Eylül 2017 tarihleri arasında toplanan altı örnek alandan elde edilen veriler kullanılarak incelenmiştir. Sonuçlar, önerilen yeni indeksin taksonomik çeşitliliği hesaplamak için uygulanabilir olduğunu göstermektedir. Bununla birlikte, bu yeni indeksin performansını daha iyi anlamak için, geniş bir ekolojik veri yelpazesi kullanarak diğer geleneksel ve taksonomik çeşitlilik indeksleriyle karşılaştıran daha fazla çalışmaya ihtiyaç vardır.

Keywords

• Biyoçeşitlilik
• Entropi
• Deng
• Shannon

Deng Entropy-Based Taxonomic Diversity Measurements of Benthic Algae in the Pülümür and Munzur Rivers

Abstract

In recent years, Deng entropy has attracted considerable interest and found applications in various fields. Deng Entropy is an entropic equation developed within the framework of the Dempster-Shafer Theory of Evidence and is based on basic probability assignment. In this study, a new taxonomic diversity index based on Deng entropy was used. The study investigated the benthic algal flora of Munzur and Pülümür rivers in Tunceli, using data from six sample sites collected between October 2016 and September 2017. The results indicate that the proposed new index is applicable for calculating taxonomic diversity. However, to better understand the performance of this new index, further studies comparing it with other traditional and taxonomic diversity indices using a wide range of ecological data are needed

Keywords

• Biodiversity
• Entropy
• Deng
• Shannon

References

1. Bourelly, P. (1968). Les Algues D’eau Douce, Initation a la Systematique Tome 2.
2. Bourelly, P. (1970). Les Algues D’eau Douce, Initation a la Systematique Tome 3.
3. Cox, E.J. (1996). Identification of Freshwater Diatoms from Live Material. Chapman&Hall. First Edition, 158 pp. Deng, Y. (2016). Deng entropy. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 91: 549-553https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2016.07.014
4. Faith, D.P.(1992). Conservation evaluation and phylogenetic diversity. Biological Conservation, 61(1): 1-10. Husted, F. (1930). Bacillariophyta. Heft 10 Pascher, Die Susswasser Flora Mitteleuropas.Gustav
5. Lange-Bertalot, H. (1978). DiatomeenDifferentialarten anstelle von Leitformen: ein geeigneteres Kriterium der Gewässerbelastung, Archiv für Hydrobiologie Supplement, 51,393-427
6. Özkan, K. (2016). How to Measure Biodiversity Components (α, β and γ)? Süleyman Demirel University, Faculty of Forestry Publication No: 98, ISBN: 976-9944-452-89-2, Isparta
7. Özkan, K. (2018a). A new proposed measure for estimating taxonomic diversity. Turkish Journal of Forestry | Türkiye Ormancılık Dergisi, 19(4), 336–346. [CrossRef]DOI: 10.18182/tjf.441061
8. Özkan, K. (2018b). Comparing Shannon entropy with Deng entropy and improved Deng entropy for measuring biodiversity when a priori data is not clear. Forestist, 68(2), 136–140.DOI: 10.26650/forestist.2018.340634

9. Özkan, K., Mert A., Şenol A., & Özdemir S. (2018). Macrotakdivozkan, http://www.kantitatifekoloji.net/takdivozkan
10. Özkan, K., Küçüksille, E. U., Mert, A., Gülsoy, S., Süel, H., & Başar, M. (2020.). A software for estimating biodiversity components (BİÇEB), Turkish. Journal of Forestry, 21(3), 344–348.
11. Patrick, R., Raimer, C.W. (1975). The Diyatomes of the United States. Volum II. Acad. Sci. Phyladelphia. Prescott, G.W. (1973). Algae of The Western Great Lake Area. Brown comp. Pub. Dubuque lowa.
12. Peet, R.K. (1974). The measurement of species diversity. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 5: 285-307.
13. Pielou, E.C. (1975). Ecological Diversity. Wiley, Newyork
14. Rao, C.R. (1982). Diversity and dissimilarity coefficients: A unified approach. Theoretical Population Biology, 21(1): 24-43.
15. Ricotta, C., & Avena, G.C. (2003). An information-theoretical measure of taxonomic diversity. Acta Biotheoretica, 51(1): 35-41.DOI: 10.1023/a:1023000322071
16. Round F.E., 1984. The Ecology of Algae. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
17. Shannon, C.E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal, 27: 379-423.
18. Simpson E.H. (1949). Measurement of diversity. Nature, 163: 688.
19. Vane-Wright R.I., Humphries C.J., and Williams P.H. (1991). What to protect?—Systematics and the agony of choice. Biological Conservation, 55(3): 235-254.
20. Warwick, R.M., and Clarke K.R. (1995). New “biodiversity” measures reveal a decrease in taxonomic distinctness with increasing stress. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 129: 301-305.