Bayesian methods for comparing species physiological and ecological response curves

Indexado

WoS: WOS:000380082300004

Scopus: SCOPUS_ID:84964829664

Año

2016

Tipo

artículo de investigación

0
Citas Totales
0
Autores Afiliación Chile
0
Instituciones Chile
0
% Participación Internacional
0
Autores Afiliación Extranjera
0
Instituciones Extranjeras

Abstract

Many ecological questions require information on species' optimal conditions or critical limits along environmental gradients. These attributes can be compared to answer questions on niche partitioning, species coexistence and niche conservatism. However, these comparisons are unconvincing when existing methods do not quantify the uncertainty in the attributes or rely on assumptions about the shape of species' responses to the environmental gradient. The aim of this study was to develop a model to quantify the uncertainty in the attributes of species response curves and allow them to be tested for substantive differences without making assumptions about the shape of the responses. We developed a model that used Bayesian penalised splines to produce and compare response curves for any two given species. These splines allow the data to determine the shape of the response curves rather than making a priori assumptions. The models were implemented using the R2OpenBUGS package for R, which uses Markov Chain Monte Carlo simulation to repetitively fit alternative response curves to the data. As each iteration produces a different curve that varies in optima, niche breadth and limits, the model estimates the uncertainty in each of these attributes and the probability that the two curves are different. The models were tested using two datasets of mosses from Antarctica. Both datasets had a high degree of scatter, which is typical of ecological research. This noise resulted in considerable uncertainty in the optima and limits of species response curves, but substantive differences were found. Schistidium antarctici was found to inhabit wetter habitats than Ceratodon purpureus, and Polytrichastrum alpinum had a lower optimal temperature for photosynthesis than Chorisodontium aciphyllum under high light conditions. Our study highlights the importance of considering uncertainty in physiological optima and other attributes of species response curves. We found that apparent differences in optima of 7.5 degrees C were not necessarily substantive when dealing with noisy ecological data, and it is necessary to consider the uncertainty in attributes when comparing the curves for different species. The model introduced here could increase the robustness of research on niche partitioning, species coexistence and niche conservatism. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Revista

Métricas Externas

PlumX Altmetric Dimensions
INFORMACIÓN

Muestra métricas de impacto externas asociadas a la publicación. Para mayor detalle:

Disciplinas de Investigación

WOS
Ecology
Scopus
Computer Science Applications
Ecology
Ecology, Evolution, Behavior And Systematics
Modeling And Simulation
Applied Mathematics
Ecological Modeling
Computational Theory And Mathematics
SciELO
Sin Disciplinas
INFORMACIÓN

Muestra la distribución de disciplinas para esta publicación.

Publicaciones WoS (Ediciones: ISSHP, ISTP, AHCI, SSCI, SCI), Scopus, SciELO Chile.

Colaboración Institucional

INFORMACIÓN

Muestra la distribución de colaboración, tanto nacional como extranjera, generada en esta publicación.

Autores - Afiliación

INFORMACIÓN

Muestra la afiliación y género (detectado) para los co-autores de la publicación.

Origen de Citas Identificadas - Pais

INFORMACIÓN

Muestra la distribución de países cuyos autores citan a la publicación consultada.

Citas identificadas: Las citas provienen de documentos incluidos en la base de datos de DATACIENCIA

Citas Identificadas: 0.0 %
Citas No-identificadas: 100.0 %

Origen de Citas Identificadas - Institución

INFORMACIÓN

Muestra la distribución de instituciones nacionales o extranjeras cuyos autores citan a la publicación consultada.

Citas identificadas: Las citas provienen de documentos incluidos en la base de datos de DATACIENCIA

Citas Identificadas: 0.0 %
Citas No-identificadas: 100.0 %

Financiamiento

Fuente
FONDECYT
National Science Foundation
CEDENNA
Fondo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico
INACH
Australian Research Council
U.S. National Science Foundation
Fondo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico, Tecnológico y de Innovación Tecnológica
Instituto Antártico Argentino
Australian Antarctic Science
VRIDEI, USACH
Proyectos Basales, VRIDEI, USACH
COE funding scheme
ARC DP funding scheme
QUT Institute for Future Environments
Australian Postgraduate and AINSE Awards
Centro para el Desarrollo de la Nanociencia y la Nanotecnologia
Institute for Future Environments, Queensland University of Technology
Institut chilien de l'Antarctique
INFORMACIÓN

Muestra la fuente de financiamiento declarada en la publicación.

Agradecimientos

Agradecimiento
This research was primarily funded through Australian Research Council DP110101714 and Australian Antarctic Science grants AAS1313 and AAS4046 with logistical support from the Australian Antarctic Division for visits to Casey Station and Instituto Antartico Chileno (INACH) for Julio Escudero Station. ACK was supported by the grant FONDECYT 1120895, and INACH FR 0112 and the VRIDEI, USACH; GEZ was supported by the grant FONDECYT 1140189, CEDENNA and Proyectos Basales, VRIDEI, USACH. TNR was supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation (grants 1341742 and 1258225). KM acknowledges support from ARC DP and COE funding schemes and from the QUT Institute for Future Environments. MW held Australian Postgraduate and AINSE Awards during the time of the study. JW held an APA at the time of field data collection.
This research was primarily funded through Australian Research Council DP110101714 and Australian Antarctic Science grants AAS1313 and AAS4046 with logistical support from the Australian Antarctic Division for visits to Casey Station and Instituto Antártico Chileno (INACH) for Julio Escudero Station. ACK was supported by the grant FONDECYT 1120895 , and INACH FR 0112 and the VRIDEI, USACH; GEZ was supported by the grant FONDECYT 1140189 , CEDENNA and Proyectos Basales, VRIDEI, USACH. TNR was supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation (grants 1341742 and 1258225 ). KM acknowledges support from ARC DP and COE funding schemes and from the QUT Institute for Future Environments. MW held Australian Postgraduate and AINSE Awards during the time of the study. JW held an APA at the time of field data collection.
INFORMACIÓN

Muestra la fuente de financiamiento declarada en la publicación.

Descarga los datos de esta página

Perfil Artículo