2018
DOI: 10.1111/jvs.12688
View full text | Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: Aims The community‐weighted mean (CWM) approach is used to analyse the relationship between species attributes (traits, Ellenberg‐type indicator values) and sample attributes (environmental variables, richness) via the community matrix. It has recently been shown to suffer from inflated Type I error rate if tested by a standard test and the results of many published studies are probably affected. I review the current knowledge about this problem, and clarify which studies are likely affected and by how much. M… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
44
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 63 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 63 publications
(140 reference statements)
0
44
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The standard regression analysis on CWM and environment variables is too sensitive to a few species that contribute to the correlation between trait and environment. This results in increased type I error rates (ter Braak, Peres‐Neto, & Dray, ; Zelený, ). Thus, we used the max test approach to explore the correlation of CWM with elevation and PCA1 (ter Braak et al., ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The standard regression analysis on CWM and environment variables is too sensitive to a few species that contribute to the correlation between trait and environment. This results in increased type I error rates (ter Braak, Peres‐Neto, & Dray, ; Zelený, ). Thus, we used the max test approach to explore the correlation of CWM with elevation and PCA1 (ter Braak et al., ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The relationships of functional diversity and SES of functional diversity with the environmental gradient (elevation and PCA1) were analyzed by using linear regression models.The standard regression analysis on CWM and environment variables is too sensitive to a few species that contribute to the correlation between trait and environment. This results in increased type I error rates(ter Braak, Peres-Neto, & Dray, 2018;Zelený, 2018). Thus, we used the max test approach to explore the correlation of CWM with elevation and PCA1(ter Braak et al, 2018).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We also provide synoptic tables containing diagnostic, constant and dominant species, Ellenberg indicator values (EIV; Ellenberg et al, ), and geographical distribution of the clusters as Appendices . Statistical comparison of clusters on the basis of variables dependent on compositional information (e.g., diversity indices, aggregated species attributes) often result in false positive tests due to the so‐called ‘similarity issue’ (Zelený, ; Zelený & Schaffers, ) and other structural biases (Hawkins et al, ) if the same occurrence information had been used for the definition of clusters. To avoid false conclusions we refrain from formal statistical tests in the case of between‐cluster comparisons and present only boxes‐and‐whiskers plots.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(Ter Braak, Šmilauer, & Dray, ) and implemented in Canoco 5.11. This approach allows testing for links between species composition and species traits, and species composition and the environment (Zelený, ); avoiding the inflated type I error that has been reported for approaches based only on CWMs (Peres‐Neto, Dray, & ter Braak, ). The Canoco projects calculating dc‐CAs are provided as Appendix .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%