bioRxiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/bioRxiv

bioRxiv · 10.1101/046946

Bias in community-weighted mean analysis relating species attributes to sample attributes: justification and remedy

David Zeleny
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

One way to analyze the relationship between species attributes and sample attributes via the matrix of species composition is to calculate the community-weighted mean of species attributes (CWM) and relate it to sample attributes by correlation, regression or ANOVA. This weighted-mean approach is frequently used by vegetation ecologists to relate species attributes like plant functional traits or Ellenberg-like species indicator values to sample attributes like measured environmental variables, biotic properties, species richness or sample scores in ordination analysis.\n\nThe problem with the weighted-mean approach is that, in certain cases, it yields biased results in terms of both effect size and P-values, and this bias is contingent upon the beta diversity of the species composition data. The reason is that CWM values calculated from samples of communities sharing some species are not independent of each other. This influences the number of effective degrees of freedom, which is usually lower than the actual number of samples, and the difference further increases with decreasing beta diversity of the data set. The discrepancy between the number of effective degrees of freedom and the number of samples in analysis turns into biased effect sizes and an inflated Type I error rate in those cases where the significance of the relationship is tested by standard tests, a problem which is analogous to analysis of two spatially autocorrelated variables. Consequently, results of studies using rather homogeneous (although not necessarily small) compositional data sets may be overly optimistic, and effect sizes of studies based on data sets differing by their beta diversity are not directly comparable.\n\nHere, I introduce guidelines on how to decide in which situation the bias is actually a problem when interpreting results, recognizing that there are several types of species and sample attributes with different properties and that ecological hypotheses commonly tested by the weighted-mean approach fall into one of three broad categories. I also compare available analytical solutions accounting for the bias (modified permutation test and sequential permutation test using the fourth-corner statistic) and suggest rules for their use.\n\nAbbreviations

Explore related subjects

EcologyPreprint

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

David Zeleny. 2016-04-05. Bias in community-weighted mean analysis relating species attributes to sample attributes: justification and remedy. https://doi.org/10.1101/046946

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

bioRxiv2016

Temperature drives plant and soil microbial diversity patterns across an elevation gradient from the Andes to the Amazon

More than 200 years ago, von Humboldt reported decreases in tropical plant species richness with increasing elevation and decreasing temperature. Surprisingly, co-ordinated patterns in plant, bacterial and fungal diversity on tropical mountains are yet to be observed, despite the central role of soil microorganisms in terrestrial biogeochemistry. We studied an Andean transect traversing 3.5 km in elevation to test whether the species diversity and composition of tropical forest plants, soil bacteria and fungi can follow similar biogeographical patterns with shared environmental drivers. We found co-ordinated changes with elevation in all three groups: species richness declined as elevation increased, and the compositional-dissimilarity of communities increased with increased separation in elevation, although changes in plant diversity were larger than in bacteria and fungi. Temperature was the dominant driver of these diversity gradients, with weak influences of edaphic properties, including soil pH. The gradients in microbial diversity were strongly correlated with the activities of enzymes involved in organic matter cycling, and were accompanied by a transition in microbial traits towards slower-growing, oligotrophic taxa at higher elevations. We provide the first evidence of co-ordinated temperature-driven patterns in the diversity and distribution of three major biotic groups in tropical ecosystems: soil bacteria, fungi and plants. These findings suggest that, across landscape scales of relatively constant soil pH, inter-related patterns of plant and microbial communities with shared environmental drivers can occur, with large implications for tropical forest communities under future climate change.

Ecology↗
bioRxiv2016

A roadmap for a quantitative ecosystem-based environmental impact assessment

A new roadmap for quantitative methodologies of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is proposed, using an ecosystem-based approach. EIA recommendations are currently based on case-by-case rankings, distant from statistical methodologies, and based on ecological ideas that lack proof of generality or predictive capacities. These qualitative approaches ignore process dynamics, scales of variations and interdependencies and are unable to address societal demands to link socio-economic and ecological processes (e.g. population dynamics). We propose to re-focus EIA around the systemic formulation of interactions between organisms (organized in populations and communities) and their environments but inserted within a strict statistical framework. A systemic formulation allows scenarios to be built that simulate impacts on chosen receptors. To illustrate the approach, we design a minimum ecosystem model that demonstrates non-trivial effects and complex responses to environmental changes. We suggest further that an Ecosystem-Based EIA - in which the socio-economic system is an evolving driver of the ecological one - is more promising than a socio-economic-ecological system where all variables are treated as equal. This refocuses the debate on cause-and-effect, processes, identification of essential portable variables, and a potential for quantitative comparisons between projects, which is important in cumulative effects determinations.

Ecology↗
bioRxiv2016

MaxEnt′s parameter configuration and small samples: Are we paying attention to recommendations?

Environmental niche modeling (ENM) is commonly used to develop probabilistic maps of species distribution. Among available ENM techniques, MaxEnt has become one of the most popular tools for modeling species distribution, with hundreds of peer-reviewed articles published each year. MaxEnts popularity is mainly due to the use of a graphical interface and automatic parameter configuration capabilities. However, recent studies have shown that using the default automatic configuration may not be always appropriate because it can produce non-optimal models; particularly when dealing with a small number of species presence points. Thus, the recommendation is to evaluate the best potential combination of parameters (feature classes and regularization multiplier) to select the most appropriate model. In this work we reviewed 244 articles from 142 journals between 2013 and 2015 to assess whether researchers are following recommendations to avoid using the default parameter configuration when dealing with small sample sizes, or if they are using MaxEnt as a \"black box tool\". Our results show that in only 16% of analyzed articles authors evaluated best feature classes, in 6.9% evaluated best regularization multipliers, and in a meager 3.7% evaluated simultaneously both parameters before producing the definitive distribution model. These results are worrying, because publications are potentially reporting over-complex or over-simplistic models that can undermine the applicability of their results. Of particular importance are studies used to inform policy making. Therefore, researchers, practitioners, reviewers and editors need to be very judicious when dealing with MaxEnt, particularly when the modelling process is based on small sample sizes.

Ecology↗