Literature DB >> 28312847

On the stabilization of animal numbers. Problems of testing : 2. Conforntation with data from the field.

P J den Boer1, J Reddingius1.   

Abstract

When testing for regulation of population numbers, rather than using Bulmer's second test in cases where population numbers are estimated instead of measured, we prefer to correct Bulmer's first test for estimation error. A correction method is expounded, discussed, and applied to two series of census data: the pine looper of Klomp and the garden chafer of Milne. In neither case the tentative conclusion from using the uncorrected test was changed after correction. Therefore, in practice Bulmer's first test without correction can be used well as a first orientation. Twelve long series (more than 10 years) of census data of both univoltine and semelparous (a necessary condition) insects were tested for significant density dependence in the fluctuations of numbers with the randomization test of Pollard et al. None of the series, all we could find to meet the necessary condition as well as being longer than 10 years, showed significant density dependence at the 0.05 level, though the pine looper of Klomp did so at the 0.1 level. Next, the same series were tested for regulation in the sense of "keeping density within limits" with both the first test of Bulmer and the permutation test of Reddingius and Den Boer. Onky Klomp's pine looper population at "Hoge Veluwe" scored significantly. In a following paper this population will be considered more closely, in order to enable understanding of this test result.

Keywords:  Census data; Density dependence; Regulation; Trends

Year:  1989        PMID: 28312847     DOI: 10.1007/BF00388470

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oecologia        ISSN: 0029-8549            Impact factor:   3.225


  7 in total

1.  The statistical analysis of density dependence.

Authors:  M G Bulmer
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1975-12       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  On the stabilizing effect of density-dependent mortality factors.

Authors:  H J Pocthke; M Kirchberg
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1987-11       Impact factor: 3.225

3.  Density dependence and the stabilization of animal numbers : 1. The winter moth.

Authors:  P J den Boer
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1986-07       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Density dependence and the stabilization of animal numbers : 3. The winter moth reconsidered.

Authors:  P J den Boer
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1988-03       Impact factor: 3.225

5.  Do pupal predators regulate the winter moth?

Authors:  J Latto; M P Hassell
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1987-11       Impact factor: 3.225

6.  The impact of predation on the viburnum whitefly, (Aleurotrachelus jelinekii).

Authors:  T R E Southwood; P M Reader
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1988-01       Impact factor: 3.225

7.  On the stabilization of animal numbers. Problems of testing : I. Power estimates and estimation errors.

Authors:  J Reddingius; P J den Boer
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1989-01       Impact factor: 3.225

  7 in total
  7 in total

1.  Testing for density dependence : A cautionary note.

Authors:  Andrew R Solow
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  On the stabilization of animal numbers. Problems of testing : 3. What do we conclude from significant test results?

Authors:  P J Den Boer
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 3.225

3.  Density dependence, boundedness, and attraction: detecting stability in stochastic systems.

Authors:  P H Crowley
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Avoiding erroneously high levels of detection in combinations of semi-independent tests : An application to testing for density dependence.

Authors:  M Holyoak; P H Crowley
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1993-03       Impact factor: 3.225

5.  Models for testing : A secondary note.

Authors:  Johannes Reddingius
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 3.225

6.  Seeing the trees for the wood: random walks or bounded fluctuations of population size?

Authors:  P J den Boer
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1991-05       Impact factor: 3.225

7.  Density dependence tests, are they?

Authors:  Henk Wolda; Brian Dennis
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 3.225

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.