Ecotoxicology is not normal: A comparison of statistical approaches for analysis of count and proportion data in ecotoxicology

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

Volumn 22, Issue 18, 2015, Pages 13990-13999

  Szöcs, Eduard ^a   Schäfer, Ralf B ^a  

^a Rheinland Pfälzische Technische Universität Kaiserslautern Landau   (Germany)

Author keywords

Generalized linear models; Power; Simulation; Transformations; Type I error

Indexed keywords

BOOTSTRAPPING; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DATA INTERPRETATION; DATA SET; ECOTOXICOLOGY; ERROR ANALYSIS; LINEARITY; MODEL TEST; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT;

ANIMAL; BINOMIAL DISTRIBUTION; ECOTOXICOLOGY; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; POISSON DISTRIBUTION; POLLUTION; SAMPLE SIZE; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ANIMALS; BINOMIAL DISTRIBUTION; ECOTOXICOLOGY; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION; LINEAR MODELS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; POISSON DISTRIBUTION; SAMPLE SIZE;

EID: 84941169949     PISSN: 09441344     EISSN: 16147499     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-015-4579-3     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Anderson MJ, Crist TO, Chase JM, Vellend M, Inouye BD, Freestone AL, Sanders NJ, Cornell HV, Comita LS, Davies KF, Harrison SP, Kraft NJB, Stegen JC, Swenson NG (2011) Navigating the multiple meanings of beta diversity: a roadmap for the practicing ecologist. Ecol Lett 14(1):19–28
2. Bolker B, Brooks M, Clark C, Geange S, Poulsen J, Stevens M, White J (2009) Generalized linear mixed models: a practical guide for ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 24(3):127–135
3. ter Braak CJF, Šmilauer P (2014) Topics in constrained and unconstrained ordination. Plant Ecol. doi:10.1007/s11258-014-0356-5
4. van den Brink PJ, Hattink J, Brock TCM, Bransen F, van Donk E (2000) Impact of the fungicide carbendazim in freshwater microcosms. II. Zooplankton, primary producers and final conclusions. Aquat Toxicol 48 (2-3):251–264
5. Brock TCM, Hammers-Wirtz M, Hommen U, Preuss TG, Ratte HT, Roessink I, Strauss T, Van den Brink PJ (2015) The minimum detectable difference (MDD) and the interpretation of treatment-related effects of pesticides in experimental ecosystems. Environ Sci Pollut Res 22(2):1160–1174
6. Dunnett CW (1955) A multiple comparison procedure for comparing several treatments with a control. J Am Stat Assoc 50(272):1096–1121
7. EFSA PPR (2013) Guidance on tiered risk assessment for plant protection products for aquatic organisms in edge-of-field surface waters. EFSA J 11(7):3290
8. EPA (2002) Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
9. Faraway JJ (2006) Extending the linear model with R: Generalized linear, mixed effects and nonparametric regression models. Chapman & Hall, Boca Raton
10. Gelman A, Stern H (2006) The difference between “significant” and “not significant” is not itself statistically significant. Am Stat 60(4):328–331
11. Hauck WW, Donner A (1977) Wald’s test as applied to hypotheses in logit analysis. J Am Stat Assoc 72(360):851
12. Hilbe JM (2014) Modeling Count Data. Cambridge University Press, New York
13. Holm S (1979) A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scand J Stat 6(2):65–70
14. Hothorn LA (2014) Statistical evaluation of toxicological bioassays—a review. Toxicol Res 3(6):418–432
15. Hothorn T, Bretz F, Westfall P (2008) Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biom J 50(3):346–363
16. Ives AR (2015) For testing the significance of regression coefficients, go ahead and log-transform count data. Methods Ecol Evol. doi:10.1111/2041-210X.12386
17. Jaki T, Hothorn LA (2013) Statistical evaluation of toxicological assays: Dunnett or Williams test—take both. Arch Toxicol 87(11):1901–1910
18. Johnson PCD, Barry SJE, Ferguson HM, Müller P (2015) Power analysis for generalized linear mixed models in ecology and evolution. Methods Ecol Evol 6(2):133–142
19. Konietschke F, Hothorn LA, Brunner E (2012) Rank-based multiple test procedures and simultaneous confidence intervals. Electron J Stat 6:738–759
20. Kuiper RM, Gerhard D, Hothorn LA (2014) Identification of the minimum effective dose for normally distributed endpoints using a model selection approach. Stat Biopharmaceutical Res 6(1):55–66
21. Landis WG, Chapman PM (2011) Well past time to stop using NOELs and LOELs. Integr Environ Assess Manag 7(4):vi–viii
22. Laskowski R (1995) Some good reasons to ban the use of NOEC, LOEC and related concepts in ecotoxicology. Oikos 73(1):140–144
23. Nelder JA, Wedderburn RWM (1972) Generalized linear models. J R Stat Soc Ser A (General) 135(3):370–384
24. Newman MC (1993) Regression analysis of log-transformed data: Statistical bias and its correction. Environ Toxicol Chem 12(6):1129–1133
25. Newman MC (2012) Quantitative ecotoxicology. Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton
26. OECD (2006) Current Approaches in the Statistical Analysis of Ecotoxicity Data: A Guidance to Application. No. 54. In: Series on Testing and Assessment. OECD, Paris
27. O’Hara RB, Kotze DJ (2010) Do not log-transform count data. Methods Ecol Evol 1(2):118–122
28. Quinn GP, Keough MJ (2009) Experimental design and data analysis for biologists. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
29. R Core Team (2014) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/
30. Rothery P (1988) A cautionary note on data transformation: bias in back-transformed means. Bird Study 35(3):219–221
31. Sanderson H (2002) Pesticide studies. Environ Sci Pollut Res 9(6):429–435
32. Stroup WW (2014) Rethinking the analysis of non-normal data in plant and soil science. Agron J. doi:10.2134/agronj2013.0342
33. Szöcs E, Brink PJVd, Lagadic L, Caquet T, Roucaute M, Auber A, Bayona Y, Liess M, Ebke P, Ippolito A, Braak CJFt, Brock TCM, Schäfer RB (2015) Analysing chemical-induced changes in macroinvertebrate communities in aquatic mesocosm experiments: a comparison of methods. Ecotoxicology 24(4):760–769
34. Venables WN, Ripley BD (2002) Modern Applied Statistics with S, 4th edn. Springer, New York
35. Ver Hoef JM, Boveng PL (2007) Quasi-Poisson vs. negative binomial regression: how should we model overdispersed count data? Ecology 88(11):2766–2772
36. Wang M, Riffel M (2011) Making the right conclusions based on wrong results and small sample sizes: interpretation of statistical tests in ecotoxicology. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 74(4): 684–92
37. Warton DI (2005) Many zeros does not mean zero inflation: comparing the goodness-of-fit of parametric models to multivariate abundance data. Environmetrics 16(3):275–289
38. Warton DI, Hui FKC (2011) The arcsine is asinine: the analysis of proportions in ecology. Ecology 92(1):3–10
39. Warton DI, Wright ST, Wang Y (2012) Distance-based multivariate analyses confound location and dispersion effects. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 3(1):89–101
40. Weber CI, Peltier WH, Norbert-King TJ, Horning WB, Kessler F, Menkedick JR, Neiheisel TW, Lewis PA, Klemm DJ, Pickering Q, Robinson EL, Lazorchak JM, Wymer L, Freyberg RW (1989) Short-term methods for estimating the chronic toxicity of effluents and receiving waters to fresh- water organisms. Tech. Rep. EPA/600/4–89/001, Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH: Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
41. Wilks SS (1938) The large-sample distribution of the likelihood ratio for testing composite hypotheses. Ann Math Stat 9(1):60–62
42. Williams DA (1972) The comparison of several dose levels with a zero dose control. Biometrics:519–531
43. Williams DA (1982) Extra-Binomial variation in logistic linear models. J R Stat Soc Ser C (Appl Stat) 31(2):144–148. doi:10.2307/2347977. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2347977
44. Zuur AF (2013) A beginner’s guide to GLM and GLMM with R: a frequentist and Bayesian perspctive for ecologists. Highland Statistics, Newburgh