Random sampling does not exclude spatial dependence: The importance of neutral models for ecological hypothesis testing
- Carlo Ricotta
- … show all 1 hide
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
Lájer (2007) notes that, to investigate phytosociological and ecological relationships, many authors apply traditional inferential tests to sets of relevés obtained by non-random methods. Unfortunately, this procedure does not provide reliable support for hypothesis testing because non-random sampling violates the assumptions of independence required by many parametric inferential tests. Instead, a random sampling scheme is recommended. Nonetheless, random sampling will not eliminate spatial autocorrelation. For instance, a classical law of geography holds that everything in a piece of (biotic) space is interrelated, but near objects are more related than distant ones. Because most ecological processes that shape community structure and species coexistence are spatially explicit, spatial autocorrelation is a vital part of almost all ecological data. This means that, independently from the underlying sampling design, ecological data are generally spatially autocorrelated, violating the assumption of independence that is generally required by traditional inferential tests. To overcome this drawback, randomization tests may be used. Such tests evaluate statistical significance based on empirical distributions generated from the sample and do not necessarily require data independence. However, as concerns hypothesis testing, randomization tests are not the universal remedy for ecologists, because the choice of inadequate null models can have significant effects on the ecological hypotheses tested. In this paper, I emphasize the need of developing null models for which the statistical assumptions match the underlying biological mechanisms.
- Atmar W. &Patterson B.D. (1993): The measure of order and disorder in the distribution of species in fragmented habitat.Oecologia 96: 373–382. CrossRef
- Atmar W. &Patterson B.D. (1995):The Nestedness Temperature Calculator, a visual BASIC program, including 294 presence-absence matrices. AICS Research Inc., University Park, New Mexico, and the Field Museum, Chicago, Illinois.
- Bartha S. &Kertész M. (1998): The importance of neutral-models in detecting interspecific spatial associations from ‘trainsect’ data.Tiscia 31: 85–98.
- Bever D.J. (1994): Feedback between plants and their soil communities in an old field community.Ecology 75: 1965–1977. CrossRef
- Bonanomi G., Giannino F. &Mazzoleni S. (2005): Negative plant-soil feedback and species coexistence.Oikos 111: 311–321. CrossRef
- Bruun H.H. &Moen J. (2003): Nested communities of alpine plants on isolated mountains: relative importance of colonization and extinction.J. Biogeogr. 30: 297–303. CrossRef
- Chiarucci A., Foggi B. &Selvi F. (1995): Garigue plant communities of ultramafic outcrops of Tuscany (Italy).Webbia 49: 179–192.
- Chiarucci A., Maccherini S., Bonini I. &de Dominicis V. (1998a): Effects of nutrient addition on species diversity and ground cover of “serpentine” vegetation.Pl. Biosystems 132: 143–150.
- Chiarucci A., Robinson B.H., Bonini I., Petit D., Brooks R.R. &de Dominicis V. (1998b): Vegetation of Tuscan ultramafic soils in relation to edaphic and physical factors.Folia Geobot. 33: 113–131.
- Chiarucci A., Maccherini S., Bonini I. &de Dominics V. (1999): Effects of nutrient addition on community productivity and structure of serpentine vegetation.Pl. Biol. 1: 121–126. CrossRef
- Connor E.F. &Simberloff D. (1979): The assembly of species communities: Chance or competition?Ecology 60: 1132–1140. CrossRef
- Fortin M.J. &Jacquez G.M. (2000): Randomization tests and spatially autocorrelated data.Bull. Ecol. Soc. Amer. 81: 201–205.
- Gaston K.J. (1994):Rarity. Chapman & Hall, London.
- Gotelli N.J. &Graves G.R. (1996):Null models in ecology. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington.
- Gotelli N.J. (2001): Research frontiers in null model analysis.Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 10: 337–343. CrossRef
- Guimarães P.R. jr.,Rico-Gray V., Furtado Dos Reis S. &Thompson J.N. (2006): Asymmetries in specialization in ant-plant mutualistic networks.Proc. Roy. Soc. London, Ser. B, Biol. Sci. 273: 2041–2047. CrossRef
- Hecnar S.J., Casper G.S., Russell R.W., Hecnar D.R. &Robinson J.N. (2002): Nested species assemblages of amphibians and reptiles on islands in the Laurentian Great Lakes.J. Biogeogr. 29: 475–489. CrossRef
- Honnay O., Hermy M. &Coppin P. (1999): Nested plant communities in deciduous forest fragments: species relaxation or nested habitats?Oikos 84: 119–129. CrossRef
- Huston M.A. (1994):Biological diversity: the coexistence of species on changing landscapes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
- Lájer K. (2007): Statistical tests as inappropriate tools for data analysis performed on non-random samples of plant communities.Folia Geobot. 42: 115–122. CrossRef
- Legendre P. &Fortin M.J. (1989): Spatial pattern and ecological analysis.Vegetatio 80: 107–138. CrossRef
- Matthews J.W. (2004): Effects of sites and species characteristics on nested patterns of species composition in sedge meadows.Pl. Ecol. 174: 271–278. CrossRef
- Moore P.D. &Chapman S.B. (1986):Methods in plant ecology. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford.
- Palmer M.W. &van der Maarel E. (1995): Variance in species richness, species association, and niche limitation.Oikos 73: 203–213. CrossRef
- Pärtel M., Moora M. &Zobel M. (2001): Variation in species richness within and between calcareous (alvar) grassland stands: The role of core and satellite species.Pl. Ecol. 157: 205–213. CrossRef
- Patterson B.D. &Atmar W. (1986): Nested subsets and the structure of insular mammalian faunas and archipelagos.Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 28: 65–82. CrossRef
- Podani J., Csontos P., Tamás J. &Miklós I. (2005): A new multivariate approach to studying temporal changes of vegetation.Pl. Ecol. 181: 1–16. CrossRef
- Ricotta C., Avena G.C. &Chiarucci A. (2005): Quantifying the effects of nutrient addition on the taxonomic distinctness of serpentine vegetation.Pl. Ecol. 179: 21–29. CrossRef
- Ricotta C., Chiarucci A. &Avena G.C. (2004): Quantifying the effects of nutrient addition on community diversity of serpentine vegetation using parametric entropy of type.Acta Oecol. 25: 61–65. CrossRef
- Tilman D. &Pacala S. (1993): The maintenance of species richness in plant communities. In:Ricklefs R.E. &Schluter D. (eds.),Species diversity in ecological communities, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 13–25.
- Tilman D. (1994): Competition and biodiversity in spatially structured habitats.Ecology 75: 2–16. CrossRef
- Tobler W. (1970): A computer movie simulating urban growth in the Detroit region.Econ. Geogr. 46: 234–40. CrossRef
- Wright D.H., Patterson B.D., Mikkelson G.M., Cutler A. &Atmar W. (1998): A comparative analysis of nested subset patterns of species composition.Oecologia 113: 1–20. CrossRef
- Random sampling does not exclude spatial dependence: The importance of neutral models for ecological hypothesis testing
Volume 42, Issue 2 , pp 153-160
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Community structure
- Species co-ocurrences
- Statistical inference
- Carlo Ricotta (1)
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Plant Biology, University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Piazzale Aldo Moro 5, I-00185, Rome, Italy