Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Understanding species richness––productivity relationships: the importance of meta-analyses

Understanding species richness––productivity relationships: the importance of meta-analyses Ecology, 91(9), 2010, pp. 2540–2544 Ó 2010 by the Ecological Society of America GARY G. MITTELBACH1 W.K. Kellogg Biological Station and Department of Zoology, Michigan State University, Hickory Corners, Michigan 49060 USA Hence our truth is the intersection of independent lies. —R. Levins (1966) In the above quote, Levins was referring to ‘‘truth’’ and ‘‘lies’’ in model building, however, I believe his comments are relevant to the analysis of empirical data as well. We all recognize that published papers differ in quality, even those that are predominantly descriptive. Whittaker (2010), in his critique of meta-analyses of species richness productivity relationship (SRPRs), argues that few of the studies used in past meta-analyses of SRPRs are fit for the purpose. This leads him to ‘‘call time’’ on any further meta-analyses of SRPRs and to denounce the findings of previous meta-analyses as unreliable. Whittaker (2010:2524) states, ‘‘If the data aren’t appropriate to meta-analysis, it is invalid to proceed with one. The solution [my italics] is to read the literature, think about it, and do one of the following: (1) devise some critical experimental or other rigorous field study that will make a meaningful contribution to the question to hand, (2) undertake http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Ecology Ecological Society of America

Understanding species richness––productivity relationships: the importance of meta-analyses

Mittelbach, Gary G.
Ecology , Volume 91 (9) – Sep 1, 2010
Download PDF
5 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/ecological-society-of-america/understanding-species-richness-productivity-relationships-the-gkpRjtEXOv

References (32)

Publisher
Ecological Society of America
Copyright
Copyright © 2010 by the Ecological Society of America
Subject
Forum——Species richness and productivity
ISSN
0012-9658
DOI
10.1890/09-1029.1
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Ecology, 91(9), 2010, pp. 2540–2544 Ó 2010 by the Ecological Society of America GARY G. MITTELBACH1 W.K. Kellogg Biological Station and Department of Zoology, Michigan State University, Hickory Corners, Michigan 49060 USA Hence our truth is the intersection of independent lies. —R. Levins (1966) In the above quote, Levins was referring to ‘‘truth’’ and ‘‘lies’’ in model building, however, I believe his comments are relevant to the analysis of empirical data as well. We all recognize that published papers differ in quality, even those that are predominantly descriptive. Whittaker (2010), in his critique of meta-analyses of species richness productivity relationship (SRPRs), argues that few of the studies used in past meta-analyses of SRPRs are fit for the purpose. This leads him to ‘‘call time’’ on any further meta-analyses of SRPRs and to denounce the findings of previous meta-analyses as unreliable. Whittaker (2010:2524) states, ‘‘If the data aren’t appropriate to meta-analysis, it is invalid to proceed with one. The solution [my italics] is to read the literature, think about it, and do one of the following: (1) devise some critical experimental or other rigorous field study that will make a meaningful contribution to the question to hand, (2) undertake

Journal

Ecology – Ecological Society of America

Published: Sep 1, 2010

There are no references for this article.