Table 2.
Species richness and diversity were estimated with the use of four indices, two in each case. The high values of the Good’s coverage index show good representation of the existing diversity in each sample. For each index, the value of the standard error is also shown
| Species richness indices | Species diversity indices | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. | ID | Good’s coverage | Chao1 | Ace | Shannon | Simpson reciprocal |
| 1 | F_IR_BR | 0.98 | 406.27 ± 9.74a | 453.35 ± 7.74a | 2.95 ± 0.00a | 3.60 ± 0.01a |
| 2 | M_IR_BR | 0.98 | 333.04 ± 4.63b | 366.96 ± 5.54b | 3.31 ± 0.01b | 5.71 ± 0.02b |
| 3 | F_NIR_BR | 0.97 | 583.58 ± 12.45c | 594.74 ± 8.81c | 4.55 ± 0.00c | 12.38 ± 0.02c |
| 4 | M_NIR_BR | 0.98 | 471.42 ± 7.25d | 488.04 ± 6.94a | 4.41 ± 0.00d | 11.07 ± 0.02d |
| 5 | F_IR_SG | 0.97 | 622.23 ± 13.95c | 747.99 ± 13.92d | 4.55 ± 0.01c | 10.62 ± 0.02e |
| 6 | M_IR_SG | 0.97 | 522.74 ± 8.63e | 555.49 ± 5.04e | 4.90 ± 0.00e | 11.57 ± 0.04f |
| 7 | F_NIR_SG | 0.98 | 448.09 ± 13.97d | 483.93 ± 11.6a | 4.00 ± 0.00f | 6.91 ± 0.02g |
| 8 | M_NIR_SG | 0.97 | 611.78 ± 9.95c | 666.66 ± 11.69f | 4.90 ± 0.00e | 12.01 ± 0.04h |
For each diversity index, ANOVAs followed by the Tukey HSD test, (P value < 0.05 ). Significant differences are indicated by different letters