1 / 49

500 likes | 673 Views

EcoSim: Null Models Software for Ecologists. Nicholas J. Gotelli Department of Biology University of Vermont Burlington, VT USA. Limitations of Ecological Data. Non-normality Small sample sizes Non-independence. Null Model Analysis. Monte Carlo simulation of ecological data

Download Presentation
## EcoSim: Null Models Software for Ecologists

**An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation**
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.
Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only.
Download presentation by click this link.
While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

**EcoSim: Null Models Software for Ecologists**Nicholas J. Gotelli Department of Biology University of Vermont Burlington, VT USA**Limitations of Ecological Data**• Non-normality • Small sample sizes • Non-independence**Null Model Analysis**• Monte Carlo simulation of ecological data • Generates patterns expected in the absence of a mechanism • Allows for statistical tests of patterns • Wide applicability to community data**Steps in Null Model Analysis**• Define community metric X • Calculate Xobs for observed data • Randomize data subject to constraints • Calculate Xsim for randomized data • Repeat 1000 randomizations • Compare Xobs to histogram of Xsim • Measure P(Xobs£ Xsim)**Quantify Pattern as a single metric**Average pairwise niche overlap = 0.17**Statistical Comparison with Observed Niche Overlap**• Observed = 0.17**Features of Null Models**• Distinction between pattern/process • Possibility of no effect • Principle of parsimony • Principle of falsification • Potential importance of stochastic mechanisms**Criticisms of Null Models**• Ecological hypotheses cannot be stated in a way for formal proof/disproof • Interactions between factors may confound null model tests • Understanding only increased when null hypothesis is rejected • Using same data to build and test model is circular**Controversy over Null Model Analysis**• Early studies challenged conventional examples • Philosophical debate over falsification • Statistical debate over null model construction • Lack of powerful software**EcoSim Software**• Programmed in Delphi • Object-oriented design • Graphical user interface • Optimized for Windows • Supported by NSF • Created by Acquired Intelligence, Inc.**Analysis of MacArthur’s (1958) warblers**• 5 coexisting species of warblers in NE forests • Insectivores • Similar body sizes, diets • Paradox for classical niche theory • How could all species co-occur?**Spatial niche segregation**2 6 25 25 25 25 25 49 18 Cape May warbler Myrtle warbler**How much niche overlap of MacArthur’s warblers would be**expected in the absence of species interactions?**Diamond’s (1975) Assembly Rules**• Not all species combinations found in nature • Those that are not found are “forbidden” • Competition and niche adjustment lead to a small number of stable species combinations**Connor and Simberloff’s (1979) challenge**• Assembly rules are tautologies • How much coexistence would be expected in the absence of competition • Construction of a null model to test community patterns**Connor and Simberloff’s (1979) null model**• Species by site co-occurrence matrix • Create random matrices that maintain row totals (= species occurrences) and column totals (= number of species per site)**Criticisms of C&S null model**• Competitive effects “smuggled in” with row and column totals • Cannot detect certain checkerboard distributions • Constraints guarantee that simulated matrices are very similar to observed matrices**Evaluating Co-occurrence Algorithms**• Type I error (incorrectly rejecting null) • Type II error (incorrectly accepting null)**Evaluating Type I Error**• Use null model tests on “random matrices” • A well-behaved model should reject the null hypothesis 5% of the time**Evaluating Type II Error**• Begin with perfectly “structured” data set • Add increasing amounts of random noise • Determine how much noise the test can tolerate and still detect non-randomness**Type II Error**P-value Ideal Curve 0.05 Type I Error % Noise Added**Summary of Error Analyses**• Best algorithm depends on co-occurrence index • Maintaining row totals (= species occurrences) necessary to control Type I error • Modified version of C&S (fixed,fixed) has low Type I, Type II errors for C-score**Meta-analyses of co-occurrence**• 98 presence-absence matrices from literature • analyzed for # of checkerboards, # combinations, C-score • standardized effect size using fixed,fixed null model**Results**• Larger C-score than expected by chance • More checkerboard species pairs than expected by chance • Fewer species combinations than expected by chance**Conclusions**• Published presence-absence matrices are highly non-random • Patterns match the predictions of Diamond’s assembly rules model! • Consistent with small-scale experimental studies demonstrating importance of species interactions**Causes of Non-random Co-occurrence Patterns**• Negative species interactions • Habitat checkerboards • Historical, evolutionary processes**Statistical covariates of effect size**• Number of species in matrix • Number of sites in matrix • % fill of matrix**Statistical covariates of effect size**• Number of species in matrix • Number of sites in matrix • % fill of matrix**Biological correlates of effect size**• Area (patch, geographic extent) • Insularity (island, mainland) • Biogeographic Province (Nearctic, Palearctic) • Latitude, Longitude • Taxonomic group (plants, mammals, birds)**Biological correlates of effect size**• Area (patch, geographic extent) • Insularity (island, mainland) • Biogeographic Province (Nearctic, Palearctic) • Latitude, Longitude • Taxonomic group (plants, mammals, birds)**Conclusion**• Homeotherm matrices highly structured • Poikilotherm matrices random co-occurrence • Ants, plant matrices highly structured • Energetic constraints may affect community co-occurrence patterns**Conclusions**• Null models are useful tools for analyses of community structure • Species co-occurrence in published matrices is less than expected by chance • Patterns match the predictions of Diamond’s (1975) assembly rules model • Co-occurrence patterns differ for homeotherm vs. poikilotherm matrices • EcoSim software available for analysis**EcoSim Website**http://homepages.together.net/~gentsmin/ecosim.htm

More Related