ArticleOecologia2017
Bayesian characterization of uncertainty in species interaction strengths.
Article in Oecologia, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Exact probabilities for the indeterminacy of complex networks as perceived through press perturbations.Journal of mathematical biology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Considerable effort has been devoted to the estimation of species interaction strengths. This effort has focused primarily on statistical significance testing and obtaining point estimates of parameters that contribute to interaction strength magnitudes, leaving the characterization of uncertainty associated with those estimates unconsidered. We consider a means of characterizing the uncertainty of a generalist predator's interaction strengths by formulating an observational method for estimating a predator's prey-specific per capita attack rates as a Bayesian statistical model. This formulation permits the explicit incorporation of multiple sources of uncertainty. A key insight is the informative nature of several so-called non-informative priors that have been used in modeling the sparse data typical of predator feeding surveys. We introduce to ecology a new neutral prior and provide evidence for its superior performance. We use a case study to consider the attack rates in a New Zealand intertidal whelk predator, and we illustrate not only that Bayesian point estimates can be made to correspond with those obtained by frequentist approaches, but also that estimation uncertainty as described by 95% intervals is more useful and biologically realistic using the Bayesian method. In particular, unlike in bootstrap confidence intervals, the lower bounds of the Bayesian posterior intervals for attack rates do not include zero when a predator-prey interaction is in fact observed. We conclude that the Bayesian framework provides a straightforward, probabilistic characterization of interaction strength uncertainty, enabling future considerations of both the deterministic and stochastic drivers of interaction strength and their impact on food webs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28424892What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.