The effect of intraspecific sample size on type I and type II error rates in comparative studies

Citation:

L. J. Harmon and J. B. Losos. 2005. β€œThe effect of intraspecific sample size on type I and type II error rates in comparative studies.” Evolution, 59, Pp. 2705-10.
PDF234 KB

Abstract:

Comparative studies have increased greatly in number in recent years due to advances in statistical and phylogenetic methodologies. For these studies, a trade-off often exists between the number of species that can be included in any given study and the number of individuals examined per species. Here, we describe a simple simulation study examining the effect of intraspecific sample size on statistical error in comparative studies. We find that ignoring measurement error has no effect on type I error of nonphylogenetic analyses, but can lead to increased type I error under some circumstances when using independent contrasts. We suggest using ANOVA to evaluate the relative amounts of within- and between-species variation when considering a phylogenetic comparative study. If within-species variance is particularly large and intraspecific sample sizes small, then either larger sample sizes or comparative methods that account for measurement error are necessary.

Notes:

Harmon, Luke JLosos, Jonathan BengComparative StudyResearch Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.2006/03/11 09:00Evolution. 2005 Dec;59(12):2705-10.

Last updated on 08/16/2016