Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
Monte Carlo simulations were conducted to evaluate robustness of four tests to detect density dependence, from series of population abundances, to the addition of sampling variance. Population abundances were generated from random walk, stochastic exponential growth, and density-dependent population models. Population abundance estimates were generated with sampling variances distributed as lognormal and constant coefficients of variation ( cv ) from 0.00 to 1.00. In general, when data were generated under a random walk, Type I error rates increased rapidly for Bulmer’’s R, Pollard et al.’’s, and Dennis and Taper’’s tests with increasing magnitude of sampling variance for n > 5 yr and all values of process variation. Bulmer’’s R ** test maintained a constant 5%% Type I error rate for n > 5 yr and all magnitudes of sampling variance in the population abundance estimates. When abundances were generated from two stochastic exponential growth models ( R == 0.05 and R == 0.10), Type I errors again increased with increasing sampling variance; magnitude of Type I error rates were higher for the slower growing population. Therefore, sampling error inflated Type I error rates, invalidating the tests, for all except Bulmer’’s R ** test. Comparable simulations for abundance estimates generated from a density-dependent growth rate model were conducted to estimate power of the tests. Type II error rates were influenced by the relationship of initial population size to carrying capacity ( K ), length of time series, as well as sampling error. Given the inflated Type I error rates for all but Bulmer’’s R **, power was overestimated for the remaining tests, resulting in density dependence being detected more often than it existed. Population abundances of natural populations are almost exclusively estimated rather than censused, assuring sampling error. Therefore, because these tests have been shown to be either invalid when only sampling variance occurs in the population abundances (Bulmer’’s R, Pollard et al.’’s, and Dennis and Taper’’s tests) or lack power (Bulmer’’s R ** test), little justification exists for use of such tests to support or refute the hypothesis of density dependence.
Ecological Monographs – Ecological Society of America
Published: Aug 1, 1998
Keywords: Bulmer’’s R test ; Bulmer’’s R** test ; Dennis and Taper’’s test for density dependence ; density dependence ; Monte Carlo simulation ; Pollard et al.’’s randomization test ; process variation ; sampling variance ; statistical power ; Type I error rates
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.