TutorChase logo
Login
AP Biology Notes

8.5.2 Measuring diversity using Simpson’s Diversity Index

AP Syllabus focus:

‘Simpson’s Diversity Index quantifies community diversity using the relative abundances of different species.’

Species diversity is more informative than a simple species list because it incorporates how individuals are distributed among species. Simpson’s Diversity Index is a standard quantitative tool for comparing communities using relative abundance data.

What Simpson’s Diversity Index measures

Simpson’s Diversity Index combines two key aspects of diversity:

  • Species richness: how many different species are present

  • Species evenness: how evenly individuals are distributed among those species

Take your grades to the next level!

UPGRADING TO PREMIUM UNLOCKS
AI Tutor
AI-powered study assistant
instant feedback and guidance
Predicted Papers
Examiner-style predicted papers
based on recent exam trends
Practice Questions
All exam practice questions
by topic for each subject
Study Notes
All detailed revision notes
written by expert teachers
Cheat Sheets
Quick revision summaries
perfect for last-minute review
Past Papers
Complete collection
of practice and past exam papers
Email
Password
Confirm Password
Already have an account?

Practice Questions

FAQ

Different conventions report either “dominance” or “diversity”.

  • $\sum (n_i/N)^2$ increases as dominance increases.

  • $1-\sum (n_i/N)^2$ increases as diversity increases.

Both are derived from the same components; always check which direction indicates greater diversity.

It stabilises as sampling effort increases because relative abundances become more reliable.

Small samples can over- or under-represent species, especially rare ones, shifting $\frac{n_i}{N}$ values and therefore $D$. Replicated sampling and consistent effort improve comparability.

Yes, if categories are applied consistently (e.g., morphospecies or genus-level groups).

However, lumping taxa can inflate apparent evenness and reduce apparent richness. Comparisons are most defensible when the same identification resolution is used across all communities.

Direct comparison is risky because sampling method affects detectability and relative abundance estimates.

A cautious approach is to compare only within method-matched datasets, or to standardise effort (same area, time, or number of traps) before computing $D$.

It can be, but interpretation depends on design.

Averaging quadrat-level $D$ describes typical local diversity, whereas pooling counts across quadrats and computing one $D$ describes diversity at the combined scale. Choose based on the ecological question and keep the approach consistent.

Hire a tutor

Please fill out the form and we'll find a tutor for you.

1/2
Your details
Alternatively contact us via
WhatsApp, Phone Call, or Email