Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36634090›Full record

ReviewPloS one2023

Difficulties in summing log-normal distributions for abundance and potential solutions.

Emma J Talis, Christian Che-Castaldo, Heather J Lynch

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Emma J TalisDepartment of Applied Mathematics and Statistics, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7231-2607
Christian Che-CastaldoInstitute for Advanced Computational Science, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, United States of America.
Heather J LynchInstitute for Advanced Computational Science, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The log-normal distribution, often used to model animal abundance and its uncertainty, is central to ecological modeling and conservation but its statistical properties are less intuitive than those of the normal distribution. The right skew of the log-normal distribution can be considerable for highly uncertain estimates and the median is often chosen as a point estimate. However, the use of the median can become complicated when summing across populations since the median of the sum of log-normal distributions is not the sum of the constituent medians. Such estimates become sensitive to the spatial or taxonomic scale over which abundance is being summarized and the naive estimate (the median of the distribution representing the sum across populations) can become grossly inflated. Here we review the statistical issues involved and some alternative formulations that might be considered by ecologists interested in modeling abundance. Using a recent estimate of global avian abundance as a case study (Callaghan et al. 2021), we investigate the properties of several alternative methods of summing across species' abundance, including the sorted summing used in the original study (Callaghan et al. 2021) and the use of shifted log-normal distributions, truncated normal distributions, and rectified normal distributions. The appropriate method of summing across distributions was intimately tied to the use of the mean or median as the measure of central tendency used as the point estimate. Use of the shifted log-normal distribution, however, generated scale-consistent estimates for global abundance across a spectrum of contexts. Our paper highlights how seemingly inconsequential decisions regarding the estimation of abundance yield radically different estimates of global abundance and its uncertainty, with conservation consequences that are underappreciated and require careful consideration.

Indexed as

BirdsAnimalsNormal DistributionStatistical Distributions

Identifiers

PMID36634090
PMCPMC9836268

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.