模拟研究:比较分析植物物种-生境关联的常用方法

IF 2.2 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY
Maximilian H. K. Hesselbarth, Kerstin Wiegand
{"title":"模拟研究:比较分析植物物种-生境关联的常用方法","authors":"Maximilian H. K. Hesselbarth,&nbsp;Kerstin Wiegand","doi":"10.1111/jvs.13243","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Question</h3>\n \n <p>Species-specific habitat associations are one of several processes that lead to a clustered spatial pattern of plant populations. This pattern occurs in tropical and temperate forests. To analyze species–habitat associations, four methods are commonly used when determining species–habitat associations from spatial point pattern and environmental raster data. Two of the methods randomize the spatial point pattern of plants, and two randomize the raster data of habitat patches. However, the strengths and weaknesses of the four methods have never been analyzed in detail.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We conducted a simulation study to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the four most used methods. The methods are the gamma test, pattern reconstruction, the torus-translation test and the randomized-habitats procedure. We simulated neutral landscapes representing habitat patches and point patterns representing fine-scale plant distributions. We built into our simulations known positive and negative species–habitat associations.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>All four methods were equally good at detecting species–habitat associations. Detected positive associations better than negative ones. Furthermore, correct detections were mostly influenced by the initial spatial distribution of the point patterns, landscape fragmentation and the number of simulated null model randomizations.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The four methods have advantages and disadvantages, and which is the most suitable method largely depends on the characteristics of the available data. However, our simulation study shows that the results are consistent between methods.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":49965,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Vegetation Science","volume":"35 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jvs.13243","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A simulation study comparing common methods for analyzing species–habitat associations of plants\",\"authors\":\"Maximilian H. K. Hesselbarth,&nbsp;Kerstin Wiegand\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jvs.13243\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Question</h3>\\n \\n <p>Species-specific habitat associations are one of several processes that lead to a clustered spatial pattern of plant populations. This pattern occurs in tropical and temperate forests. To analyze species–habitat associations, four methods are commonly used when determining species–habitat associations from spatial point pattern and environmental raster data. Two of the methods randomize the spatial point pattern of plants, and two randomize the raster data of habitat patches. However, the strengths and weaknesses of the four methods have never been analyzed in detail.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We conducted a simulation study to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the four most used methods. The methods are the gamma test, pattern reconstruction, the torus-translation test and the randomized-habitats procedure. We simulated neutral landscapes representing habitat patches and point patterns representing fine-scale plant distributions. We built into our simulations known positive and negative species–habitat associations.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>All four methods were equally good at detecting species–habitat associations. Detected positive associations better than negative ones. Furthermore, correct detections were mostly influenced by the initial spatial distribution of the point patterns, landscape fragmentation and the number of simulated null model randomizations.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>The four methods have advantages and disadvantages, and which is the most suitable method largely depends on the characteristics of the available data. However, our simulation study shows that the results are consistent between methods.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49965,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Vegetation Science\",\"volume\":\"35 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jvs.13243\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Vegetation Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jvs.13243\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Vegetation Science","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jvs.13243","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

问题 物种特有的生境关联是导致植物种群集群空间模式的几个过程之一。这种模式出现在热带和温带森林中。在分析物种与生境的关联时,通常使用四种方法从空间点模式和环境栅格数据中确定物种与生境的关联。其中两种方法对植物的空间点模式进行随机化处理,两种方法对生境斑块的栅格数据进行随机化处理。然而,这四种方法的优缺点从未被详细分析过。 方法 我们进行了一项模拟研究,以分析最常用的四种方法的优缺点。这四种方法分别是伽马检验法、模式重建法、环形平移检验法和随机生境程序。我们模拟了代表栖息地斑块的中性景观和代表精细尺度植物分布的点模式。我们在模拟中加入了已知的物种-栖息地正负关联。 结果 所有四种方法在检测物种-生境关联方面都同样出色。阳性关联的检测结果优于阴性关联。此外,正确检测主要受点模式的初始空间分布、景观破碎化和模拟空模型随机化次数的影响。 结论 这四种方法各有利弊,哪种方法最合适在很大程度上取决于可用数据的特征。不过,我们的模拟研究表明,不同方法的结果是一致的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

A simulation study comparing common methods for analyzing species–habitat associations of plants

A simulation study comparing common methods for analyzing species–habitat associations of plants

Question

Species-specific habitat associations are one of several processes that lead to a clustered spatial pattern of plant populations. This pattern occurs in tropical and temperate forests. To analyze species–habitat associations, four methods are commonly used when determining species–habitat associations from spatial point pattern and environmental raster data. Two of the methods randomize the spatial point pattern of plants, and two randomize the raster data of habitat patches. However, the strengths and weaknesses of the four methods have never been analyzed in detail.

Methods

We conducted a simulation study to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the four most used methods. The methods are the gamma test, pattern reconstruction, the torus-translation test and the randomized-habitats procedure. We simulated neutral landscapes representing habitat patches and point patterns representing fine-scale plant distributions. We built into our simulations known positive and negative species–habitat associations.

Results

All four methods were equally good at detecting species–habitat associations. Detected positive associations better than negative ones. Furthermore, correct detections were mostly influenced by the initial spatial distribution of the point patterns, landscape fragmentation and the number of simulated null model randomizations.

Conclusions

The four methods have advantages and disadvantages, and which is the most suitable method largely depends on the characteristics of the available data. However, our simulation study shows that the results are consistent between methods.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Vegetation Science
Journal of Vegetation Science 环境科学-林学
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
3.60%
发文量
60
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Vegetation Science publishes papers on all aspects of plant community ecology, with particular emphasis on papers that develop new concepts or methods, test theory, identify general patterns, or that are otherwise likely to interest a broad international readership. Papers may focus on any aspect of vegetation science, e.g. community structure (including community assembly and plant functional types), biodiversity (including species richness and composition), spatial patterns (including plant geography and landscape ecology), temporal changes (including demography, community dynamics and palaeoecology) and processes (including ecophysiology), provided the focus is on increasing our understanding of plant communities. The Journal publishes papers on the ecology of a single species only if it plays a key role in structuring plant communities. Papers that apply ecological concepts, theories and methods to the vegetation management, conservation and restoration, and papers on vegetation survey should be directed to our associate journal, Applied Vegetation Science journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信