Model selection in ecology and evolution

Trends in Ecology and Evolution

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 101-108

  Johnson, Jerald B ^a   Omland, Kristian S ^b  

^a ALASKA FISHERIES SCIENCE CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ECOLOGICAL MODELING; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; METHODOLOGY;

EID: 1242296549     PISSN: 01695347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2003.10.013     Document Type: Review

References (69)

1. Hilborn R., Mangel M. The Ecological Detective: Confronting Models With Data. 1997;Princeton University Press.
2. Anderson D.R., et al. Null hypothesis testing: problems, prevalence, and an alternative. J. Wildl. Manage. 64:2000;912-923.
3. Burnham K.P., Anderson D.R. Model Selection and Multi-model Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach. 2002;Springer.
4. Posada D. Unit 6.5: Using MODELTEST and PAUP* to select a model of nucleotide substitution. Baxevanis A.D., et al. Current Protocols in Bioinformatics. Vol. 1:2003;6.5.1-6.5.28 John Wiley & Sons.
5. Chamberlain T.C. The method of multiple working hypotheses. Science. 15:1890;92-96.
6. Turchin P. Complex Population Dynamics: A Theoretical/Empirical Synthesis. 2003;Princeton University Press.
7. Sokal R.R., Rohlf F.J. Biometry: The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research. 1995;W.H. Freeman & Co.
8. Posada D., Crandall K.A. Selecting the best-fit model of nucleotide substitution. Syst. Biol. 50:2001;580-601.
9. Akaike H. Information theory as an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. Petrov B.N., Csaki F. Second International Symposium on Information Theory. 1973;267-281 Akademiai Kiado.
10. Schwarz G. Estimating the dimensions of a model. Ann. Stat. 6:1978;461-464.
11. Lebreton J.D., et al. Modeling survival and testing biological hypotheses using marked animals: a unified approach with case studies. Ecol. Monogr. 62:1992;67-118.
12. Schwarz C.J., Seber G.A.F. Estimating animal abundance: review III. Stat. Sci. 14:1999;427-456.
13. Schreiber E.A., et al. Effects of a chemical weapons incineration plant on red-tailed tropicbirds. J. Wildl. Manage. 65:2001;685-695.
14. Sillett T.S., Holmes R.T. Variation in survivorship of a migratory songbird throughout its annual cycle. J. Anim. Ecol. 71:2002;296-308.
15. Jorgenson J.T., et al. Effects of age, sex, disease, and density on survival of bighorn sheep. Ecology. 78:1997;1019-1032.
16. Esler D., et al. Winter survival of adult female harlequin ducks in relation to history of contamination by the Exxon Valdez oil spill. J. Wildl. Manage. 64:2000;839-847.
17. Boulinier T., et al. Estimating species richness: the importance of heterogeneity in species detectability. Ecology. 79:1998;1018-1028.
18. Connolly S.R., Miller A.I. Joint estimation of sampling and turnover rates from fossil databases: capture-mark-recapture methods revisited. Paleobiology. 27:2001;751-767.
19. Ellner S., Turchin P. Chaos in a noisy world: new methods and evidence from time-series analysis. Am. Nat. 145:1995;343-375.
20. Kendall B.E., et al. Why do populations cycle? A synthesis of statistical and mechanistic modeling approaches. Ecology. 80:1999;1789-1805.
21. Turchin P., Hanski I. Contrasting alternative hypotheses about rodent cycles by translating them into parameterized models. Ecol. Lett. 4:2001;267-276.
22. Dennis B., Otten M.R.M. Joint effects of density dependence and rainfall on abundance of San Joaquin kit fox. J. Wildl. Manage. 64:2000;388-400.
23. White G.C., Lubow B.C. Fitting population models to multiple sources of observed data. J. Wildl. Manage. 66:2002;300-309.
24. Felsenstein J. Inferring Phylogenies. 2003;Sinauer Associates.
25. Felsenstein J. Phylogenies from molecular sequences: inference and reliability. Annu. Rev. Genet. 22:1988;521-565.
26. Huelsenbeck J.P., Crandall K.A. Phylogeny estimation and hypothesis testing using maximum likelihood. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 28:1997;437-466.
27. Huelsenbeck J.P., Rannala R. Phylogenetic methods come of age: testing hypotheses in an evolutionary context. Science. 276:1997;227-232.
28. Lewis P.O. Phylogenetic systematics turns over a new leaf. Trends Ecol. Evol. 16:2001;30-37.
29. Lewis P.O. A likelihood approach to estimating phylogeny from discrete morphological character data. Syst. Biol. 50:2001;913-925.
30. Lytle D.A. Flash floods and aquatic insect life-history evolution: evaluation of multiple models. Ecology. 83:2002;370-385.
31. Johnson J.B. Divergent life histories among populations of the fish Brachyrhaphis rhabdophora: detecting putative agents of selection by candidate model analysis. Oikos. 96:2002;82-91.
32. Avise J. Phylogeography: The History and Formation of Species. 2000;Harvard University Press.
33. Hare M.P. Prospects for nuclear gene phylogeography. Trends Ecol. Evol. 16:2001;700-706.
34. Templeton A.R. Nested clade analyses of phylogeographic data: testing hypotheses about gene flow and population history. Mol. Ecol. 7:1998;381-397.
35. Wakeley J., Hey J. Testing speciation models with DNA sequence data. DeSalle R., Schierwater B. Molecular Approaches to Ecology. 1998;157-175 BirkVerlag-Verlag.
36. Knowles L.L., Maddison W.P. Statistical phylogeography. Mol. Ecol. 11:2002;2623-2635.
37. Williams R.J., Martinez N.D. Simple rules yield complex food webs. Nature. 404:2000;180-183.
38. Carpenter S.R., et al. Management of eutrophication for lakes subject to potentially irreversible change. Ecol. Appl. 9:1999;751-771.
39. Power M.E. Field biology, food web models, and management: challenges of context and scale. Oikos. 94:2001;118-129.
40. Strong D.R., et al. Model selection for a subterranean trophic cascade: root-feeding caterpillars and entomopathogenic nematodes. Ecology. 80:1999;2750-2761.
41. Dreitz V.J., et al. Spatial and temporal variability in nest success of snail kites in Florida: a meta-analysis. Condor. 103:2001;502-509.
42. Beissinger S.R., Snyder N.F.R. Water levels affect nest success of the snail kite in Florida: AIC and the omission of relevant candidate models. Condor. 104:2002;208-215.
43. Dreitz V.J., et al. Snail kite nest success and water levels: a reply to Beissinger and Snyder. Condor. 104:2002;216-221.
44. Krebs C.J., et al. Impact of food and predation on the snowshoe hare cycle. Science. 269:1995;1112-1115.
45. White G.C., Burnham K.P. Program MARK: survival estimation from populations of marked animals. Bird Stud. 46:1999;S120-S139.
46. Swofford D.L., et al. Phylogenetic inference. Hillis D., et al. Molecular Systematics. 1996;407-514 Sinauer Associates.
47. Zucchini W. An introduction to model selection. J. Math. Psychol. 44:2000;41-61.
48. Wasserman L. Bayesian model selection and model averaging. J. Math. Psychol. 44:2000;92-107.
49. Suchard M.A., et al. Bayesian selection of continuous-time Markov Chain evolutionary models. Mol. Biol. Evol. 18:2001;1001-1013.
50. Huelsenbeck J.P., et al. Bayesian inference of phylogeny and its impact on evolutionary biology. Science. 294:2001;2310-2314.
51. Sullivan J., Swofford D.L. Are guinea pigs rodents? The importance of adequate models in molecular phylogenetics. J. Mamm. Evol. 4:1997;77-86.
52. Sullivan J., et al. Comparative phylogeography of mesoamerican highland rodents: concerted versus independent response to past climatic fluctuations. Am. Nat. 155:2000;755-768.
53. Luh H.K., Croft B.A. Classification of generalist or specialist life styles of predaceous phytoseiid mites using a computer genetic algorithm, information theory, and life history traits. Environ. Entomol. 28:1999;915-923.
54. Erb J., et al. Spatial variation in mink and muskrat interactions in Canada. Oikos. 93:2001;365-375.
55. LaMontagne J.M., et al. Spatial patterns of population regulation in sage grouse (Centrocercus spp.) population viability analysis. J. Anim. Ecol. 71:2002;672-682.
56. Pease C.M., Mattson D.J. Demography of the Yellowstone grizzly bears. Ecology. 80:1999;957-975.
57. Hobbs N.T., et al. Herbivore functional response in heterogeneous environments: a contest among models. Ecology. 84:2003;666-681.
58. Van Buskirk J., et al. A test of the risk allocation hypothesis: tadpole responses to temporal change in predation risk. Behav. Ecol. 13:2002;526-530.
59. Zabel R.W. Using 'travel time' data to characterize the behavior of migrating animals. Am. Nat. 159:2002;372-387.
60. Beckage B., Stout I.J. Effects of repeated burning on species richness in a Florida pine savanna: a test of the intermediate disturbance hypothesis. J. Veg. Sci. 11:2000;113-122.
61. Swihart R.K., et al. Responses of 'resistant' vertebrates to habitat loss and fragmentation: the importance of niche breadth and range boundaries. Div. Distrib. 9:2003;1-18.
62. Yang Z., et al. Codon-substitution models for heterogeneous selection pressure at amino acid sites. Genetics. 155:2000;431-449.
63. Posada D., Crandall K.A. Selecting models of nucleotide substitution: an application to human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1). Mol. Biol. Evol. 18:2001;897-906.
64. Jordan S., et al. Molecular systematics and adaptive radiation of Hawaii's endemic damselfly genus Megalagrion (Odonata: Coenagrionidae). Syst. Biol. 52:2003;89-109.
65. Buckley T.R., et al. Combined data, Bayesian phylogenetics, and the origin of the New Zealand cicada genera. Syst. Biol. 51:2002;4-18.
66. Paradis E. Detecting shifts in diversification rates without fossils. Am. Nat. 152:1998;176-187.
67. Sillanpää M.J., Corander J. Model choice in gene mapping: what and why. Trends Genet. 18:2002;301-307.
68. Roach J.L., et al. Genetic structure of a metapopulation of black-tailed prairie dogs. J. Mammal. 82:2001;946-959.
69. Strimmer K., Pybus O.G. Exploring the demographic history of DNA sequences using the generalized skyline plot. Mol. Biol. Evol. 18:2001;2298-2305.