# Diversity Accumulation

#### Gilles Colling

#### 2026-06-14

## Introduction

A species accumulation curve answers one question: how does the count of species grow as more of a region is surveyed. Raw richness, the number of species present, is the simplest answer, and it is the one the base `spacc()` function returns. Richness treats a species seen once and a species seen ten thousand times as equal contributions, so two regions with identical species lists score the same even when one is dominated by a single hyperabundant species and the other shares individuals evenly. That difference matters for conservation triage, for detecting disturbance, and for comparing surveys of unequal effort, and it is invisible to richness alone.

This vignette covers the diversity-accumulation family in spacc: the functions that track an abundance-aware diversity measure as sites are added in spatial order, rather than a raw species count. The family is built on Hill numbers, which place richness, Shannon diversity, and Simpson diversity on one axis indexed by a single parameter \(q\). The same accumulation machinery extends to beta diversity (how composition turns over across space), to phylogenetic and functional diversity (where species carry evolutionary or trait distances), and to coverage-standardised diversity (where curves are read against sampling completeness rather than site count). Each variant returns a typed S3 object with `print()`, `summary()`, `plot()`, and `as.data.frame()` methods, so the analysis idiom is the same regardless of which diversity measure is tracked.

Uncertainty in spacc comes from one source. Every curve is computed from many random starting sites; the nearest-neighbour walk that orders the remaining sites depends on where it begins, so each starting seed produces a different curve. The package reports the across-seed mean and the 2.5% and 97.5% quantiles of those seed curves as a ribbon. There are no priors and no parametric error model. A wide ribbon means the curve is sensitive to where sampling starts, which is itself ecological information about spatial structure. The worked examples below all use a small number of seeds to keep the vignette fast; real analyses should use more, and the practical guidance section gives concrete numbers.

## The diversity framework

Hill numbers (Hill 1973, Jost 2007, Chao et al. 2014) measure diversity as an effective number of species: the number of equally-abundant species that would yield the observed value of a diversity index. For a community with relative abundances \(p_i\) for species \(i = 1, \dots, S\), where \(p_i = n_i / N\), \(n_i\) is the count of species \(i\), \(N = \sum_i n_i\) is the total count, and \(S\) is the number of species present, the Hill number of order \(q\) is

\[ {}^{q}D = \left( \sum_{i=1}^{S} p_i^{q} \right)^{1/(1-q)}. \]

The order \(q\) controls how much weight rare species receive. At \(q = 0\) the term \(p_i^0 = 1\) for every present species, so \({}^{0}D = S\), plain richness, which ignores abundance entirely. The formula is undefined at \(q = 1\) because the exponent \(1/(1-q)\) diverges, but the limit exists and equals the exponential of Shannon entropy,

\[ {}^{1}D = \exp\!\left( -\sum_{i=1}^{S} p_i \log p_i \right), \]

which weights each species in proportion to its abundance and is read as the effective number of common species. At \(q = 2\) the value is the inverse Simpson concentration, \({}^{2}D = 1 / \sum_i p_i^2\), the effective number of dominant species. Hill numbers are non-increasing in \(q\): \({}^{q}D \ge {}^{q'}D\) whenever \(q \le q'\), because raising \(q\) shifts weight toward the most abundant species and away from the long tail of rare ones. The gap between \({}^{0}D\) and \({}^{2}D\) is therefore a direct read on dominance: a wide gap means a few species hold most of the individuals.

The same numbers decompose across space. Following Jost (2007), regional (gamma) diversity is the multiplicative product of mean local (alpha) diversity and turnover (beta):

\[ {}^{q}D_{\gamma} = {}^{q}D_{\alpha} \times {}^{q}D_{\beta}. \]

Here \({}^{q}D_{\gamma}\) is the Hill number of the pooled community across all sites, \({}^{q}D_{\alpha}\) is the effective number of species in an average site, and \({}^{q}D_{\beta} = {}^{q}D_{\gamma} / {}^{q}D_{\alpha}\) is the effective number of completely distinct communities. Beta ranges from 1, when every site has identical composition, up to the number of sites, when no two sites share a species. Because alpha is a generalised (power) mean of per-site values, the decomposition is exact at every \(q\), and beta is independent of alpha in the sense Jost defines, so a region can have high local diversity with low turnover or the reverse.

## Simulating data

The examples use a single simulated dataset with known structure, so the curves can be read against ground truth. Each species is placed at a random centre in a 100-by-100 plane, and its expected abundance at a site falls off as a Gaussian kernel of the squared distance from that centre. A site near a species’ centre has high expected abundance for that species; a site far away has almost none. Counts are then drawn from a Poisson distribution with that expected value. This is a thinned Poisson point process viewed at the site level, and it is the standard way to generate spatially aggregated community data: species are common where conditions suit them and rare elsewhere, which is what creates spatial turnover.

    library(spacc)

    set.seed(123)
    n_sites <- 60
    n_species <- 30

    coords <- data.frame(
      x = runif(n_sites, 0, 100),
      y = runif(n_sites, 0, 100)
    )

    # Abundance matrix with spatial clustering
    species <- matrix(0L, n_sites, n_species)
    for (sp in seq_len(n_species)) {
      cx <- runif(1, 10, 90)
      cy <- runif(1, 10, 90)
      lambda <- 5 * exp(-0.001 * ((coords$x - cx)^2 + (coords$y - cy)^2))
      species[, sp] <- rpois(n_sites, lambda)
    }
    colnames(species) <- paste0("sp", seq_len(n_species))

Three parameters set the ecology of the simulation. The peak intensity 5 is the expected count of a species at its own centre, so each species tops out at a handful of individuals per site. The decay rate 0.001 in the exponent sets the range over which a species stays common: at a squared distance of 1000 units, roughly 32 units away, expected abundance has dropped to \(5 e^{-1} \approx 1.8\), and by 60 units it is near zero. Smaller decay rates spread species more widely and flatten turnover; larger rates concentrate them and sharpen it. The 60 sites in a 100-by-100 plane give a mean nearest-neighbour spacing of roughly 6 units, well inside each species’ range, so neighbouring sites share many species and the nearest-neighbour accumulation walk picks up turnover gradually.

The resulting matrix is sites-by-species with integer counts. Most spacc functions accept either this abundance form or a presence/absence version obtained by thresholding at zero. The first few entries show the spatial structure directly: a given site holds large counts for the few species centred nearby and zeros for the rest.

    dim(species)
    #> [1] 60 30
    species[1:4, 1:8]
    #>      sp1 sp2 sp3 sp4 sp5 sp6 sp7 sp8
    #> [1,]   0   0   4   0   3   0   1   3
    #> [2,]   1   2   0   0   0   3   1   0
    #> [3,]   2   1   5   1   7   0   1   3
    #> [4,]   6   3   0   0   0   3   0   0
    sum(species > 0) / length(species)   # fraction of nonzero cells
    #> [1] 0.5022222

## Hill number accumulation

`spaccHill()` tracks Hill numbers along the spatial accumulation curve. It orders sites by nearest-neighbour distance from a random seed, pools their abundances cumulatively, and computes \({}^{q}D\) of the pooled community at each step, for every requested order \(q\). The result is one curve per \(q\), each averaged over `n_seeds` random starts.

    hill <- spaccHill(species, coords, q = c(0, 1, 2), n_seeds = 20, progress = FALSE)
    hill
    #> spacc Hill numbers: 60 sites, 30 species, 20 seeds
    #> Orders (q): 0, 1, 2
    #> Method: knn

    library(ggplot2)
    plot(hill) +
      theme(panel.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"),
            plot.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"))

Hill number accumulation for q = 0, 1, 2.

The three curves separate cleanly. The \(q = 0\) curve is ordinary richness and climbs toward the regional pool of 30 species. The \(q = 1\) and \(q = 2\) curves sit below it and rise more slowly, because they count effective common and dominant species rather than all present species. The reason higher \(q\) accumulates more slowly is structural: a new site adds a rare species to the \(q = 0\) count immediately, but that species barely moves \({}^{1}D\) or \({}^{2}D\) until it accumulates enough individuals to shift the relative-abundance vector. The gap between the curves at any site count is the dominance signature at that spatial scale.

The numeric curve is available through `as.data.frame()`, which returns the across-seed mean and the 2.5%/97.5% quantile band per site, stacked by \(q\).

    hill_df <- as.data.frame(hill)
    head(hill_df, 3)
    #>   sites q  mean lower upper       sd
    #> 1     1 0 14.75     7    24 6.290134
    #> 2     2 0 18.00    11    28 6.087087
    #> 3     3 0 20.35    11    29 5.333854
    # Final-site values per q
    hill_df[hill_df$sites == max(hill_df$sites), c("q", "mean", "lower", "upper")]
    #>     q     mean    lower    upper
    #> 60  0 30.00000 30.00000 30.00000
    #> 120 1 29.23513 29.23513 29.23513
    #> 180 2 28.56626 28.56626 28.56626

The final-site row gives the regional effective diversity at each order. Here \({}^{0}D\) recovers all 30 species, while \({}^{1}D\) and \({}^{2}D\) are lower, quantifying how uneven the pooled community is. The `summary()` method returns the same quantities in long form with an adjustable `ci_level`, which is useful for plotting custom intervals.

    hs <- summary(hill, ci_level = 0.90)
    tail(hs, 3)
    #>     q sites     mean    lower    upper
    #> 178 2    58 28.45312 28.36059 28.56035
    #> 179 2    59 28.51834 28.47592 28.57000
    #> 180 2    60 28.56626 28.56626 28.56626

Reading the three orders together is more informative than any one of them. If the \(q = 0\) curve keeps rising while \(q = 2\) has flattened, the region is still gaining rare species but its dominant structure is already captured; further sampling adds to the species list without changing what the community is mostly made of.

## Alpha, beta, and gamma diversity

The accumulation curve describes the pooled community as it grows. The multiplicative partition describes the fixed set of all sites and splits its diversity into a local and a turnover part. `alphaDiversity()` returns per-site Hill numbers, `gammaDiversity()` returns the pooled regional values, and `diversityPartition()` combines them into the full alpha-beta-gamma decomposition.

    # Alpha diversity: per-site Hill numbers
    alpha <- alphaDiversity(species, q = c(0, 1, 2))
    colMeans(alpha)
    #>       q0       q1       q2
    #> 15.06667 12.39927 10.61170

    # Gamma diversity: pooled regional diversity
    gamma <- gammaDiversity(species, q = c(0, 1, 2))
    gamma
    #>       q0       q1       q2
    #> 30.00000 29.23513 28.56626

    # Full partition: gamma = alpha * beta
    partition <- diversityPartition(species, q = c(0, 1, 2))
    partition
    #> Alpha-Beta-Gamma Diversity Partitioning
    #> 60 sites, 30 species
    #>
    #>  q alpha beta gamma
    #>  0 15.07 1.99 30.00
    #>  1 11.42 2.56 29.24
    #>  2  8.81 3.24 28.57
    #>
    #> Interpretation:
    #>   Alpha = mean effective species per site
    #>   Beta  = effective number of communities (1 to n_sites)
    #>   Gamma = regional effective species (gamma = alpha x beta)

The partition object prints alpha, beta, and gamma side by side for each order. Mean alpha is much smaller than gamma here because each site holds only the few species whose centres are nearby, while the region pools all of them. Beta, their ratio, measures how many effectively distinct communities the region contains. The `summary()` method adds a normalised beta on a 0-to-1 scale, \(({}^{q}D_{\beta} - 1)/(n - 1)\), which rescales turnover so that 0 is a single homogeneous community and 1 is complete distinctness across the \(n\) sites.

    summary(partition)
    #>    q     alpha     beta    gamma n_sites beta_normalized
    #> q0 0 15.066667 1.991150 30.00000      60      0.01679916
    #> q1 1 11.422875 2.559350 29.23513      60      0.02642966
    #> q2 2  8.813323 3.241258 28.56626      60      0.03798743

Beta falls as \(q\) rises. At \(q = 0\) turnover is driven by the long tail of rare, locally restricted species, which inflates the effective number of communities. At \(q = 2\) only the dominant species count, and dominants tend to be the widespread species shared across sites, so the region looks more homogeneous. This ordering, \(\beta_0 \ge \beta_1 \ge \beta_2\), is the typical pattern for aggregated data and is worth checking: a reversal usually signals that rare species are widespread while common ones are patchy, which is unusual and worth investigating.

## Checking and interpreting with uncertainty

Every accumulation curve in spacc carries a confidence band built from the spread across seed starts. The columns to read are `mean`, `lower`, and `upper` from `as.data.frame()` or `summary()`. The band is widest early in the curve, where the identity of the seed site dominates, and narrows as accumulation covers most of the region and the curves converge on the same pooled community.

    ci <- as.data.frame(hill)
    ci0 <- ci[ci$q == 0, ]
    # Width of the 95% band at a few site counts
    data.frame(sites = c(5, 20, 40, 60),
               width = ci0$upper[c(5, 20, 40, 60)] - ci0$lower[c(5, 20, 40, 60)])
    #>   sites width
    #> 1     5    14
    #> 2    20     2
    #> 3    40     0
    #> 4    60     0

The band width shrinks toward the right because all seed walks eventually pool the same sites. A band that stays wide at high site counts would indicate that the order of accumulation still matters near saturation, which happens when the region has strong large-scale structure that some seeds traverse and others do not.

Beyond the curve, two diagnostics summarise the dominance structure of the communities directly. `evenness()` divides the Hill number at each order by richness, giving \(E_q = {}^{q}D / {}^{0}D\), a value in \([0, 1]\) where 1 is a perfectly even community and small values mean a few species dominate.

    ev <- evenness(species, q = seq(0.1, 3, by = 0.1))
    ev
    #> Evenness (hill): 60 sites, 30 species
    #> q range: [0.1, 3.0]
    #> Mean evenness: E_1 = 0.823, E_2 = 0.704
    #> Regional evenness: E_1 = 0.975, E_2 = 0.952

    plot(ev) +
      theme(panel.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"),
            plot.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"))

Hill evenness profile across orders.

The evenness profile falls with \(q\) because higher orders divide a dominance-weighted diversity by full richness. A profile that drops steeply indicates strong dominance; one that stays near 1 indicates a community where individuals are spread evenly across species. Pielou’s \(J\) and Simpson evenness are available through `type = "pielou"` and `type = "simpson"` for single-number summaries at \(q = 1\) and \(q = 2\).

    evenness(species, type = "pielou")
    #> Evenness (pielou): 60 sites, 30 species
    #> Mean Pielou's J: 0.923
    #> Regional J: 0.992

The continuous diversity profile, \({}^{q}D\) as a function of \(q\), is the most complete dominance diagnostic because it shows the whole decline from richness to inverse Simpson rather than three points. `diversityProfile()` evaluates Hill numbers over a grid of \(q\) for each site and for the pooled region.

    prof <- diversityProfile(species, q = seq(0, 3, by = 0.2))
    prof
    #> Diversity profile: 60 sites, 30 species
    #> q range: [0.0, 3.0] (16 values)
    #> Per-site: mean D_0 = 15.1, mean D_1 = 12.4, mean D_2 = 10.6
    #> Regional: D_0 = 30.0, D_1 = 29.2, D_2 = 28.6

    plot(prof) +
      theme(panel.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"),
            plot.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"))

Diversity profile: per-site mean (solid) and regional gamma (dashed).

The solid line is the mean per-site profile and the dashed line is the regional profile. The vertical gap between them at any \(q\) is beta diversity at that order, read off the same plot. Two regions can have identical richness, the \({}^{0}D\) intercept, yet very different profiles: the one whose profile drops faster is more dominated. Comparing profiles is more honest than comparing single indices because it does not commit to one value of \(q\) before looking at the data.

## Beta, functional, and phylogenetic beta diversity

Taxonomic beta diversity asks how the species list turns over across space. `spaccBeta()` partitions it into two pieces along the accumulation curve, following Baselga (2010): turnover, where new sites bring different species in exchange for old ones, and nestedness, where new sites are species-poor subsets of what is already accumulated. The two sum to total beta.

    pa <- (species > 0) * 1L
    beta <- spaccBeta(pa, coords, n_seeds = 20, progress = FALSE)
    beta
    #> spacc beta diversity: 60 sites, 20 seeds
    #> Index: sorensen, Method: knn
    #> Mean final beta: 0.474 (turnover: 0.000, nestedness: 0.474)

    plot(beta) +
      theme(panel.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"),
            plot.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"))

Spatial beta diversity accumulation with turnover/nestedness.

For this aggregated simulation turnover dominates: neighbouring sites hold different species because each species is confined near its own centre, so expanding spatially mostly replaces species rather than nesting them. The numeric partition is in `as.data.frame()`, which gives the across-step means and their standard deviations.

    tail(as.data.frame(beta), 3)
    #>    sites beta_total beta_turnover beta_nestedness beta_total_sd
    #> 57    57  0.5012692             0       0.5012692     0.1806722
    #> 58    58  0.4736317             0       0.4736317     0.1308800
    #> 59    59  0.4737261             0       0.4737261     0.1467560
    #>    beta_turnover_sd beta_nestedness_sd
    #> 57                0          0.1806722
    #> 58                0          0.1308800
    #> 59                0          0.1467560

The Hill-number framework offers a complementary beta. `spaccHillBeta()` computes gamma, alpha, and their ratio beta at each accumulation step, for each \(q\), so beta is itself an effective number of communities rather than a dissimilarity in \([0,1]\). This is the Jost (2007) decomposition tracked along the curve.

    hb <- spaccHillBeta(species, coords, q = c(0, 1, 2), n_seeds = 15, progress = FALSE)
    hb
    #> spacc Hill beta diversity: 60 sites, 30 species, 15 seeds
    #> Orders (q): 0, 1, 2
    #>   q = 0: mean final beta = 1.99
    #>   q = 1: mean final beta = 2.56
    #>   q = 2: mean final beta = 3.24

    plot(hb, component = "beta") +
      theme(panel.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"),
            plot.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"))

Hill beta (effective number of communities) along accumulation.

Beta rises as sites accumulate because each new site can only add distinctness, and it rises fastest at \(q = 0\) where rare restricted species count most. The Baselga partition and the Hill partition answer different questions: Baselga asks whether dissimilarity is replacement or loss, while Hill beta asks how many distinct communities the accumulated set is worth. Reporting both is reasonable when the distinction matters.

When species carry traits, functional beta weights turnover by how different the incoming and outgoing species are in trait space. `spaccBetaFunc()` scales the Baselga components by the mean pairwise trait distance of the species that differ, so replacing a species with a near-identical one registers little beta even though the species list changed.

    # Simulate two continuous traits
    traits <- data.frame(
      body_size = rnorm(n_species),
      wing_length = rnorm(n_species)
    )
    rownames(traits) <- colnames(species)

    beta_func <- spaccBetaFunc(pa, coords, traits, n_seeds = 20, progress = FALSE)

    plot(beta_func) +
      theme(panel.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"),
            plot.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"))

Functional beta diversity accumulation.

Functional beta is lower than taxonomic beta whenever the species that turn over are functionally similar, which is the common case in trait-redundant assemblages. The phylogenetic analogue, `spaccBetaPhylo()`, does the same with a phylogenetic distance matrix from a tree, weighting turnover by evolutionary divergence so that swapping close relatives counts for less than swapping distant lineages.

    library(ape)
    #>
    #> Attaching package: 'ape'
    #> The following object is masked from 'package:spacc':
    #>
    #>     ace
    tree <- rcoal(n_species, tip.label = colnames(species))

    beta_phylo <- spaccBetaPhylo(pa, coords, tree, n_seeds = 20, progress = FALSE)

    plot(beta_phylo) +
      theme(panel.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"),
            plot.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"))

Phylogenetic beta diversity accumulation.

Comparing taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic beta on the same data separates three kinds of turnover. High taxonomic but low functional and phylogenetic beta means the region swaps species that are ecologically and evolutionarily interchangeable. High beta on all three means the region replaces distinct lineages with distinct ecological roles, which is the pattern that flags genuine biogeographic boundaries.

## Phylogenetic and functional accumulation

Beyond beta, the diversity of the accumulated community itself can be measured on a tree or in trait space. `spaccPhylo()` tracks phylogenetic diversity along the curve. Mean pairwise distance (MPD) is the average phylogenetic distance between all species present, sensitive to deep tree structure; mean nearest taxon distance (MNTD) is the average distance to each species’ closest relative, sensitive to terminal clustering; and Faith’s PD is the total branch length spanned by the accumulated species.

    phylo_acc <- spaccPhylo(pa, coords, tree,
                            metric = c("mpd", "mntd", "pd"),
                            n_seeds = 20, progress = FALSE)

    plot(phylo_acc) +
      theme(panel.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"),
            plot.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"))

Phylogenetic diversity accumulation.

PD rises steadily as more lineages are added, much like richness, because each new species contributes branch length. MPD and MNTD behave differently: they can plateau early or even decline if the species added late are close relatives of ones already present, since they measure average distances rather than totals. A flat MPD with a rising PD says the region keeps adding species but not new deep branches.

Functional accumulation works the same way in trait space. `spaccFunc()` tracks functional dispersion (FDis), the abundance-weighted mean distance of species to the community centroid, and functional richness (FRic), the volume of trait space occupied. FRic needs more species than traits to define a hull, so with a two-trait dataset it stabilises once enough species accumulate.

    func_acc <- spaccFunc(species, coords, traits,
                          metric = c("fdis"),
                          n_seeds = 20, progress = FALSE)

    plot(func_acc) +
      theme(panel.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"),
            plot.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"))

Functional diversity accumulation.

FDis tends to saturate quickly because once the community spans the main axes of trait variation, adding species near the centroid does not move the mean distance much. A FDis curve that keeps climbing indicates the region is still gaining functionally extreme species at large spatial scales.

The continuous-\(q\) profile extends to both paradigms. `diversityProfilePhylo()` gives phylogenetic Hill numbers across \(q\), and `diversityProfileFunc()` gives trait-similarity Hill numbers, each reading as an effective number of lineages or functional units that declines with \(q\) exactly as the taxonomic profile does.

    fp <- diversityProfileFunc(species, traits, q = seq(0, 3, by = 0.5))
    fp
    #> Functional diversity profile: 60 sites, 30 species
    #> q range: [0.0, 3.0] (7 values)
    #> Per-site: mean D_0 = 1.5, mean D_1 = 1.5, mean D_2 = 1.5
    #> Regional: D_0 = 1.6, D_1 = 1.6, D_2 = 1.6

## Rao’s quadratic entropy

Rao’s quadratic entropy combines relative abundance with pairwise distance between species, giving an abundance-weighted measure of phylogenetic or functional dispersion (Rao 1982). It is defined as \(Q = \sum_{i} \sum_{j} p_i p_j d_{ij}\), where \(p_i\) is the relative abundance of species \(i\) and \(d_{ij}\) is the distance between species \(i\) and \(j\) on the tree or in trait space. Both `spaccPhylo()` and `spaccFunc()` expose it through `metric = "rao"`.

    phylo_rao <- spaccPhylo(species, coords, tree,
                            metric = "rao",
                            n_seeds = 20, progress = FALSE)

    plot(phylo_rao) +
      theme(panel.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"),
            plot.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"))

Phylogenetic Rao’s Q accumulation.

For functional Rao the species distance is the Euclidean distance in trait space:

    func_rao <- spaccFunc(species, coords, traits,
                          metric = "rao",
                          n_seeds = 20, progress = FALSE)
    tail(as.data.frame(func_rao), 3)
    #>    sites metric     mean    lower    upper          sd
    #> 58    58    rao 1.880594 1.879207 1.884775 0.001788390
    #> 59    59    rao 1.881485 1.880221 1.883420 0.001009007
    #> 60    60    rao 1.882974 1.882974 1.882974 0.000000000

With presence/absence data Rao’s Q reduces to an equal-weight form; with abundances it weights each species pair by the product of relative abundances. The phylogenetic and functional backends carry abundances in double precision, so continuous values such as percent cover or biomass are used directly:

    cover <- species / max(species)   # fractional values in [0, 1]
    func_rao_cover <- spaccFunc(cover, coords, traits,
                                metric = "rao", n_seeds = 10, progress = FALSE)
    tail(as.data.frame(func_rao_cover), 3)
    #>    sites metric     mean    lower    upper           sd
    #> 58    58    rao 1.880327 1.879207 1.881671 1.021466e-03
    #> 59    59    rao 1.880863 1.880221 1.882188 7.575978e-04
    #> 60    60    rao 1.882974 1.882974 1.882974 2.769383e-16

Rao’s Q saturates faster than richness because once the community spans the main distance structure, adding more species near existing ones barely changes the abundance-weighted mean distance. It is the natural single-number summary when both abundance and pairwise distance matter, and it connects to Hill numbers: the effective number form of Rao is a functional or phylogenetic Hill number at \(q = 2\).

## Coverage-based diversity

Comparing curves at equal site count is not always fair, because a fixed number of sites can represent very different fractions of the underlying community depending on how abundant the organisms are. Sample coverage is the estimated proportion of total community abundance belonging to the species already seen, and standardising by coverage rather than site count puts surveys of unequal effort on the same footing (Chao & Jost 2012). `spaccCoverage()` tracks coverage alongside richness as sites accumulate.

    cov <- spaccCoverage(species, coords, n_seeds = 20, progress = FALSE)
    cov
    #> spacc coverage (Chao-Jost 2012): 60 sites, 30 species, 20 seeds
    #> Mean final coverage: 100.0%
    #> Mean final richness: 30.0 species

    plot(cov) +
      theme(panel.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"),
            plot.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"))

Coverage-based spatial rarefaction.

The default Chao-Jost estimator uses singleton and doubleton counts and assumes individuals are sampled independently. For plot-based data where sites are the sampling units, the Chiu (2023) sample-based estimator is more appropriate because it uses incidence frequencies across sites instead.

    cov_chiu <- spaccCoverage(species, coords, coverage = "chiu",
                              n_seeds = 20, progress = FALSE)
    tail(as.data.frame(cov_chiu), 3)
    #>    sites richness individuals coverage richness_sd coverage_sd
    #> 58    58       30      2263.8        1           0           0
    #> 59    59       30      2286.8        1           0           0
    #> 60    60       30      2308.0        1           0           0

Once coverage is tracked, richness can be read at fixed completeness levels. `interpolateCoverage()` returns the richness each seed curve reached at the requested coverage targets, interpolating within the observed range.

    interp <- interpolateCoverage(cov, target = c(0.90, 0.95))
    summary(interp)
    #>       C90             C95
    #>  Min.   :10.63   Min.   :12.66
    #>  1st Qu.:15.80   1st Qu.:18.21
    #>  Median :16.00   Median :19.82
    #>  Mean   :17.87   Mean   :20.43
    #>  3rd Qu.:21.84   3rd Qu.:24.03
    #>  Max.   :24.53   Max.   :26.93

The same idea applied to Hill numbers gives coverage-standardised diversity at every order. `spaccHillCoverage()` computes Hill numbers and coverage together, and plotting against coverage rather than site count shows diversity at matched completeness.

    hc <- spaccHillCoverage(species, coords, q = c(0, 1, 2),
                            n_seeds = 15, progress = FALSE)

    plot(hc, xaxis = "coverage") +
      theme(panel.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"),
            plot.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"))

Hill numbers plotted against sample coverage.

Reading diversity against coverage is the recommended way to compare two regions of unequal sampling effort: pick a coverage level both reach, such as 95%, and compare the diversity there. Comparing at equal site count instead would penalise the region whose organisms are rarer, because the same site count buys it less coverage.

## Custom diversity metrics

`spaccDiversity()` accumulates any user-supplied index along a spatial ordering. At each step the cumulative community is passed to a function that returns a single number, so indices spacc does not implement directly can still be tracked along the accumulation curve.

    # Shannon entropy of the cumulative community
    shannon <- function(comm) {
      p <- comm[comm > 0] / sum(comm)
      -sum(p * log(p))
    }

    div <- spaccDiversity(species, coords, shannon,
                          method = "knn", n_seeds = 20, progress = FALSE)

    plot(div, ylab = "Cumulative Shannon entropy") +
      theme(panel.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"),
            plot.background = element_rect(fill = "transparent"))

Custom (Shannon entropy) accumulation curve.

The function receives a named vector of cumulative abundances (or 0/1 incidences when `incidence = TRUE`), plus any extra arguments passed through `...`. The result inherits the `spacc` class, so `summary()`, `as.data.frame()`, and `predict()` apply. The `plot()` method uses a metric-neutral axis label by default; set `ylab` to name the index. Available orderings are `"knn"`, `"kncn"`, `"random"`, `"radius"`, and `"collector"`. Because the index is an arbitrary R function it runs slower than the compiled metrics while accepting any definition, so it is best kept for indices that are not already built in.

## Practical guidance

Diversity accumulation offers more knobs than plain richness, and a few conventions keep results comparable and defensible.

Which \(q\) to report. Report all three of \(q = 0\), \(q = 1\), and \(q = 2\) together rather than choosing one. The triple \({}^{0}D, {}^{1}D, {}^{2}D\) shows richness, common-species diversity, and dominant-species diversity in one row, and the gap between them is the dominance signal. If a single number is forced, \(q = 1\) is the least arbitrary because it weights species exactly by abundance and is the only order where the diversity decomposition is fully symmetric. Use \(q = 0\) when rare species are the conservation target and \(q = 2\) when dominance or invasion is the question.

Abundance versus incidence. Use abundance data whenever counts are available, because every order above \(q = 0\) needs them; presence/absence collapses all orders to richness and discards the dominance information the Hill framework exists to capture. Beta partitioning with `spaccBeta()` runs on presence/absence by design, but Hill, functional, and phylogenetic diversity should be fed counts, cover, or biomass. The functional and phylogenetic backends accept non-integer abundances, so percent cover in \([0,1]\) works directly.

Trait and tree minimums. Functional richness (FRic) needs at least one more species than traits to define a convex hull, so with 4 traits keep at least 5 species per accumulation step and prefer 10 or more for a stable hull. Rao’s Q and FDis work with fewer but become noisy below about 5 species. For trait distances use at least 2 traits; a single trait reduces functional diversity to a one-dimensional range and the convex hull degenerates. Phylogenetic metrics need a tree covering every species in the matrix, and MPD and MNTD stabilise with roughly 15 or more species; below 10 they swing widely from one or two pairs.

Number of seeds. The ribbon width is set by the spread across seeds, so more seeds give a smoother, narrower band. Use at least 50 seeds for reporting and 100 or more when the confidence band itself is the result. The examples here use 10 to 20 to keep the build fast, which is too few for publication. Set `seed =` for reproducibility, since the seed sites are drawn at random.

Minimum sample size. Coverage-based comparison needs each region to reach the common coverage target; below about 20 sites with aggregated data, coverage often does not climb past 90%, and interpolation to a higher target returns `NA`. For the multiplicative partition, beta is unstable with fewer than about 5 sites because alpha is a mean over very few values. Aim for at least 20 sites for any diversity-accumulation analysis and 30 or more before reading turnover.

When not to use these. Do not compute Rao’s Q or any abundance-weighted metric with very few species, roughly under 5, because the abundance-weighted mean distance is then driven by one or two pairs and the curve is meaningless. Do not use functional metrics with a single trait, where the hull collapses and FRic is undefined. Do not standardise by coverage when one region cannot reach the target coverage at all; compare at the highest coverage both attain, or fall back to site-based curves and say so. Finally, treat a wide confidence ribbon as a possible artefact of too few seeds before reading it as biological signal.

The table below summarises which function fits which question.

Question | Function | Input | Key metric
--- | --- | --- | ---
How does effective diversity grow with area | `spaccHill()` | abundance | \({}^{q}D\) per order
How is regional diversity split locally vs across sites | `diversityPartition()` | abundance | alpha, beta, gamma
Is turnover replacement or species loss | `spaccBeta()` | presence/absence | turnover, nestedness
How many distinct communities (Hill beta) | `spaccHillBeta()` | abundance | beta per order
Does turnover involve distinct traits or lineages | `spaccBetaFunc()`, `spaccBetaPhylo()` | P/A + traits/tree | weighted beta
How does evolutionary or trait diversity accumulate | `spaccPhylo()`, `spaccFunc()` | abundance + tree/traits | MPD, MNTD, PD, FDis, FRic
Abundance-weighted trait/lineage dispersion | `spaccPhylo(metric="rao")`, `spaccFunc(metric="rao")` | abundance + tree/traits | Rao’s Q
Fair comparison under unequal effort | `spaccCoverage()`, `spaccHillCoverage()` | abundance | coverage-standardised
An index spacc does not implement | `spaccDiversity()` | any | user function

The whole family shares one analysis idiom. Simulate or load a sites-by-species matrix, call the function with coordinates, read the curve with `as.data.frame()` or `summary()`, and plot it with the across-seed ribbon. The choice of measure, taxonomic, functional, phylogenetic, or coverage-standardised, changes what the y-axis means, not how the result is obtained.

## References

- Baselga, A. (2010). Partitioning the turnover and nestedness components of beta diversity. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 19, 134-143.
- Baselga, A. (2012). The relationship between species replacement, dissimilarity derived from nestedness, and nestedness. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 21, 1223-1232.
- Chao, A. & Jost, L. (2012). Coverage-based rarefaction and extrapolation. Ecology, 93, 2533-2547.
- Chao, A., Gotelli, N.J., Hsieh, T.C., et al. (2014). Rarefaction and extrapolation with Hill numbers. Ecological Monographs, 84, 45-67.
- Chiu, C.-H. (2023). A sample-based estimator for sample coverage. Ecology, 104, e4099.
- Faith, D.P. (1992). Conservation evaluation and phylogenetic diversity. Biological Conservation, 61, 1-10.
- Hill, M.O. (1973). Diversity and evenness: a unifying notation and its consequences. Ecology, 54, 427-432.
- Jost, L. (2007). Partitioning diversity into independent alpha and beta components. Ecology, 88, 2427-2439.
- Leinster, T. & Cobbold, C.A. (2012). Measuring diversity: the importance of species similarity. Ecology, 93, 477-489.
- Rao, C.R. (1982). Diversity and dissimilarity coefficients: a unified approach. Theoretical Population Biology, 21, 24-43.