2015
DOI: 10.1890/14-0471.1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A new twist on a very old binary similarity coefficient

Abstract: Pairwise similarity coefficients are downward biased when samples only record presences and sampling is partial. A simple but forgotten index proposed by Stephen Forbes in 1907 can help solve this problem. His original equation requires knowing the number of species absent in both samples that could have been present. It is proposed that this count should simply be ignored and that the coefficient should be adjusted using a simple heuristic correction. Four analyses show that the corrected equation outperforms… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
51
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 48 publications
(53 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
(88 reference statements)
0
51
1
Order By: Relevance
“…A recent modification of the Forbes similarity index [27], hereafter referred to as Forbes* index, was used to compare the faunas in the four latitudinal bins: palaeotemperate and equatorial in both the Kungurian and Roadian. The Inta fauna (Kungurian palaeotemperate) is found to show greater similarity to the Kungurian equatorial formation than to the Roadian palaeotemperate fauna from Golyurshma (table 1).…”
Section: Results and Discussion (A) Analysis Of Faunal Similaritymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A recent modification of the Forbes similarity index [27], hereafter referred to as Forbes* index, was used to compare the faunas in the four latitudinal bins: palaeotemperate and equatorial in both the Kungurian and Roadian. The Inta fauna (Kungurian palaeotemperate) is found to show greater similarity to the Kungurian equatorial formation than to the Roadian palaeotemperate fauna from Golyurshma (table 1).…”
Section: Results and Discussion (A) Analysis Of Faunal Similaritymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Because most pair-wise dissimilarity coefficients are upward biased when sampling is partial [49], we were concerned about potential biases introduced by collating many surveys undertaken by a large number of researchers using a variety of methodologies. To account for potential differences in sampling effort we opted to use a modification of the Forbes FÂŽ index on presence-absence data only [49]. FÂŽ assumes that sampling is partial and is consequently a robust measure of compositional dissimilarity for incidence data obtained under a broad array of sampling conditions.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Presence/absence data were examined using the Dice, Simpson and Raup–Crick indices. A ‘corrected’ Forbes index was also used due to its purported superior accuracy and resistance to sample-size effects (Alroy, 2015a). The Jaccard, Ochiai and Kulczynski coefficients were not used due to their high correlation with the Dice index (Alroy, 2015a).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A ‘corrected’ Forbes index was also used due to its purported superior accuracy and resistance to sample-size effects (Alroy, 2015a). The Jaccard, Ochiai and Kulczynski coefficients were not used due to their high correlation with the Dice index (Alroy, 2015a). The ‘unweighted pair group method using arithmetic averages’ (UPGMA) and neighbour-joining clustering algorithms were used with each of the indices (Saitou & Nei, 1987; Popov, Gerasimov & Marinska, 1994; Brenchley & Harper, 1998; Etter, 1999; Hammer, Harper & Ryan, 2001).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%