Table 2.

Number of significant anovas for each monitoring scheme over 100 replicates, for each indicator (columns), for exponential (top section) and instant decline (bottom section). Moderate (97.5%) decline is shown as representative, full results in Data S1.

Sampling scheme	Ho	He	K	Kr	GW	Fis
Exponential
1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11	3	27	79	57	21	9
1-3-5-7-9-11	4	20	81	57	23	6
3-4-6-8-9-11	5	19	80	52	23	9
1-2-3-9-10-11	3	24	79	59	24	6
3-4-5-9-10-11	6	24	78	59	26	7
6-7-8-9-10-11	2	18	73	51	20	8
1-5-8-11	3	25	81	54	23	9
3-5-8-11	7	20	79	54	23	6
1-2-10-11	1	26	80	57	23	10
3-4-10-11	6	22	79	60	22	9
8-9-10-11	3	16	68	43	19	7
1-2-8-9	1	14	27	25	3	8
3-4-8-9	3	7	14	15	4	8
1-11	2	16	79	50	22	13
3-11	8	15	77	51	16	10
6-11	7	17	67	47	17	11
8-11	6	13	59	40	17	10
1-6	4	6	8	7	2	6
1-8	5	6	18	12	2	4
1-10	5	13	51	33	14	4
Instant
1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11	57	93	100	100	72	12
1-3-5-7-9-11	50	88	100	100	70	9
3-4-6-8-9-11	43	75	100	94	63	8
1-2-3-9-10-11	64	93	100	100	72	14
3-4-5-9-10-11	47	83	100	97	62	13
6-7-8-9-10-11	24	64	90	77	37	9
1-5-8-11	44	86	100	100	66	12
3-5-8-11	40	73	100	94	55	10
1-2-10-11	65	91	100	100	71	9
3-4-10-11	49	79	100	95	65	12
8-9-10-11	14	38	76	49	19	8
1-11	45	84	100	99	60	10
1-2-8-9	39	76	100	99	65	5
3-4-8-9	30	59	99	89	56	6
3-11	40	73	100	89	51	8
6-11	26	58	90	67	29	15
8-11	15	37	66	43	9	7
1-6	18	47	100	88	43	8
1-8	28	66	100	92	50	10
1-10	35	80	100	98	57	11

H_o, Observed heterozygosity; H_e, expected heterozygosity; K, number alleles; K_r, allelic range; GW, Garza-Williamson M-ratio statistic; F_is, inbreeding coefficient.