Journal article
L. Cayuela, N. Gotelli, R. K. Colwell
2015
2015
Semantic Scholar
DOI
Cite
Cite
APA
Click to copy
Cayuela, L., Gotelli, N., & Colwell, R. K. (2015). Ecological and biogeographic null hypotheses for comparing rarefaction curves.
Chicago/Turabian
Click to copy
Cayuela, L., N. Gotelli, and R. K. Colwell. “Ecological and Biogeographic Null Hypotheses for Comparing Rarefaction Curves” (2015).
MLA
Click to copy
Cayuela, L., et al. Ecological and Biogeographic Null Hypotheses for Comparing Rarefaction Curves. 2015.
BibTeX Click to copy
@article{l2015a,
title = {Ecological and biogeographic null hypotheses for comparing rarefaction curves},
year = {2015},
journal = {},
author = {Cayuela, L. and Gotelli, N. and Colwell, R. K.}
}
Abstract
The statistical framework of rarefaction curves and asymptotic estimators allows for an effective standardization of biodiversity measures. However, most statistical analyses still consist of point comparisons of diversity estimators for a particular sampling level. We introduce new randomization methods that incorporate sampling variability encompassing the entire length of the rarefaction curve and allow for statistical comparison of i ≥2 individual-based, sample-based, or coverage-based rarefaction curves. These methods distinguish between two distinct null hypotheses: the ecological null hypothesis (H0eco) and the biogeographical null hypothesis (H0biog). H0eco states that the i samples were drawn from a single assemblage, and any differences among them in species richness, composition, or relative abundance reflect only sampling effects. H0biog states that the i samples were drawn from assemblages that differ in their species composition but share similar species richness and species abundance distri...
