MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Estimating and controlling for spatial structure in the study of ecological communities

2009· article· en· W2098601886 on OpenAlexafffund
Pedro R. Peres‐Neto, Pierre Legendre

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Ecology and Biogeography · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSpatial analysisSelection (genetic algorithm)StatisticsSpatial ecologyEcologyComputer scienceComponent (thermodynamics)Type I and type II errorsVariation (astronomy)Spatial variabilityMathematicsMachine learningBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Aim Variation partitioning based on canonical analysis is the most commonly used analysis to investigate community patterns according to environmental and spatial predictors. Ecologists use this method in order to understand the pure contribution of the environment independent of space, and vice versa, as well as to control for inflated type I error in assessing the environmental component under spatial autocorrelation. Our goal is to use numerical simulations to compare how different spatial predictors and model selection procedures perform in assessing the importance of the spatial component and in controlling for type I error while testing environmental predictors. Innovation We determine for the first time how the ability of commonly used (polynomial regressors) and novel methods based on eigenvector maps compare in the realm of spatial variation partitioning. We introduce a novel forward selection procedure to select spatial regressors for community analysis. Finally, we point out a number of issues that have not been previously considered about the joint explained variation between environment and space, which should be taken into account when reporting and testing the unique contributions of environment and space in patterning ecological communities. Main conclusions In tests of species‐environment relationships, spatial autocorrelation is known to inflate the level of type I error and make the tests of significance invalid. First, one must determine if the spatial component is significant using all spatial predictors (Moran's eigenvector maps). If it is, consider a model selection for the set of spatial predictors (an individual‐species forward selection procedure is to be preferred) and use the environmental and selected spatial predictors in a partial regression or partial canonical analysis scheme. This is an effective way of controlling for type I error in such tests. Polynomial regressors do not provide tests with a correct level of type I error.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.072
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.072
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations441
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Ecology and BiogeographySame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207