2006
DOI: 10.1007/s00360-006-0085-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Numbats and aardwolves—how low is low? A re-affirmation of the need for statistical rigour in evaluating regression predictions

Abstract: Many comparative physiological studies aim to determine if a particular species differs from a prediction based on a linear allometric regression for other species. However, the judgment as to whether the species in question conforms to this allometric relationship is often not based on any formal statistical analysis. An appropriate statistical method is to compare the new species' value with the 95% confidence limits for predicting an additional datum from the relationship for the other species. We examine t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
23
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 59 publications
1
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Chuditch were compared to conventional and phylogenetically independent log-transformed allometric regressions (except T b which was not log-transformed; data from Withers et al 2006) by examining their position relative to the 95% prediction limits for these relationships after Cooper and Withers (2006). The antilog predicted value for chuditch from logtransformed conventional regression was calculated using the minimum variance unbiased estimator (MVUE) of Shonkwiler (2006, 2007).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Chuditch were compared to conventional and phylogenetically independent log-transformed allometric regressions (except T b which was not log-transformed; data from Withers et al 2006) by examining their position relative to the 95% prediction limits for these relationships after Cooper and Withers (2006). The antilog predicted value for chuditch from logtransformed conventional regression was calculated using the minimum variance unbiased estimator (MVUE) of Shonkwiler (2006, 2007).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, compared to a more recent allometric relationship for FMR of marsupials (Cooper et al 2003), the honey possum has an FMR that is 133% of predicted. This falls within the 95% prediction limits for the relationship, but it is difficult to show statistical significance for FMR as the relationship is more variable and thus the prediction limits wider than for BMR, especially for a small species towards the lower limit of the regression (see 14 Cooper and Withers 2006). Thus it remains equivocal if the honey possum has an elevated FMR.…”
mentioning
confidence: 63%
“…Values of physiological variables for the honey possum were compared to standard (thermoneutral) values of other marsupials using the data summary of Withers et al (2006; where N = 61 for BMR, 59 for T b , 55 for C wet and 24 for EWL) and for ventilatory variables data of Hallam and Dawson (1993), Chappell and Dawson (1994), Dawson et al (2000), Larcombe (2002), Cooper and Withers (2004), , and . These comparisons were made by examining the position of the honey possum relative to the 95% prediction limits for the log 10 -transformed allometric regression (T b values were not log-transformed) after Cooper and Withers (2006). The magnitude of the difference between observed and predicted values was calculated using the minimum variance unbiased estimator (MVUE) of Shonkwiler (2006, 2007).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For mammals, low T b and low BMR correlate with the use of heterothermy and torpor (Geiser, 1998;Ruf and Geiser, 2014) and we assume a similarity in physiological drivers between convergently endothermic mammals and birds. We therefore compared here our standard physiological data for babblers with those of other birds (Table S6) using the 95% prediction limits (Cooper and Withers, 2006) for conventional and phylogenetically informed allometric regressions after Barker et al (2016), using the phylogenetic tree from birdtree.org (Jetz et al, 2012(Jetz et al, , 2014 with the Hackett backbone (Hackett et al, 2008).…”
Section: Standard Physiologymentioning
confidence: 99%