首页> 外文期刊>Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology: An International Journal for the Geo-Sciences >Perception of paleocommunities at different taxonomic levels: How low must you go?
【24h】

Perception of paleocommunities at different taxonomic levels: How low must you go?

机译:在不同分类学层次上对古群落的认识:您必须走多低?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

To obtain meaningful information from paleocommunities, researchers must collect assemblages that are sufficiently complete to accurately represent the once-living community and large enough to produce statistically robust results. A key decision in community paleoecological research is the level of taxonomic identification. Here, we conducted a meta-analysis of 28 datasets from the Paleobiology Database (PBDB) to determine whether paleocommunity analyses at higher taxonomic levels produce similar results to those analyzed at the generic level. For each dataset, we composed taxon-sample matrices (series of samples containing multiple taxa of varying abundances) at the genus-, family-, order-, and class-levels. We then compared the multivariate paleocommunity results of each of the three higher taxonomic levels (family, order, and class) to the genus-level result. High goodness-of-fit statistics (using three different statistical comparison methods) resulted between comparisons of genus- and family-level taxonomic identifications for 28 paleocommunity datasets. However, 15 of the 28 genus- and family-level taxonomic identification comparisons were determined to produce different paleocommunity results based on qualitative-visual comparisons. Thus, family-level identification of specimens may often lead to the same paleocommunity conclusions as genus-level identification; however, inconsistencies generate enough uncertainty that paleocommunity research would benefit from genus-level identification of specimens. Due to the moderate-to-low goodness-of-fit statistics between genus-order and genus-class comparisons of paleocommunities as well as the clear differences found in the qualitative-visual comparisons, order and class did not reliably reproduce genus-level results. Thus, family-level identifications may be sufficient some of the time for studies employing multivariate statistical methods to compare paleocommunities that would otherwise use the genus level; order- and class-level identifications are probably never sufficient.
机译:为了从古群落中获得有意义的信息,研究人员必须收集足够完整的组合,以准确地代表曾经生活过的社区,并且足够大以产生统计上可靠的结果。群落古生态学研究的一个关键决定是分类学鉴定的水平。在这里,我们对古生物学数据库(PBDB)的28个数据集进行了荟萃分析,以确定较高分类学等级的古群落分析是否产生与普通等级分析相似的结果。对于每个数据集,我们在属,家庭,顺序和类级别上组成了分类单元样本矩阵(一系列包含不同丰度的多个分类单元的样本)。然后,我们将三个较高分类标准(家庭,顺序和类别)中的每一个的多元古群落结果与属水平结果进行了比较。在对28个古社区数据集的属级分类分类识别与比较级分类识别之间进行比较时,得出了高度拟合优度统计(使用三种不同的统计比较方法)。但是,在定性-视觉比较的基础上,确定了28个属和家庭级分类学鉴定比较中的15个,以产生不同的古群落结果。因此,对标本进行家庭水平的鉴定可能会得出与属水平鉴定相同的古群落结论。但是,不一致产生了足够的不确定性,古生物学研究将从标本的属级鉴定中受益。由于古群落的属序和属类比较之间的适度至低拟合优度统计,以及定性-视觉比较中发现的明显差异,因此次序和类不能可靠地再现属水平的结果。因此,对于使用多元统计方法比较原本会使用属水平的古群落的研究,在某些时候家庭水平的鉴定就足够了。订单和类级别的标识可能永远是不够的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号