...
首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of Ecology >Why we do not expect dispersal probability density functions based on a single mechanism to fit real seed shadows
【24h】

Why we do not expect dispersal probability density functions based on a single mechanism to fit real seed shadows

机译:为什么我们不必基于单一机制来适应真实种子阴影的分散概率密度函数

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Bullock etal. (Journal of Ecology 105:6-19, 2017) have suggested that the theory behind the Wald Analytical Long Distance (WALD) model for wind dispersal from a point source needs to be re-examined. This is on the basis that an inverse Gaussian probability density function (pdf) does not provide the best fit to seed shadows around individual source plants known to be dispersed by wind. We present two reasons why we would not necessarily expect any of the standard mechanistically derived pdfs to fit real seed shadows any better than empirical functions. Firstly, the derivation of off-the-shelf pdfs such as the Gaussian, exponential and inverse Gaussian involves only one of the processes and factors that together generate a real seed shadow. It is implausible to expect that a single-process model, no matter how sophisticated in detail, will capture the behaviour of an entire, complex system, which may involve a number of sequential random processes, or a superposition of parallel random processes, or both. Secondly, even if there is only one process involved and we have a perfect model for that process, the basic parameters of the model would be difficult to pin down precisely. Moreover, these parameters are unlikely to remain constant over a dispersal season, so that effectively we observe the outcome of a linear combination of dispersal events with different parameter values, constituting a form of averaging over the parameters of the distribution. Simple examples show that averaging a pdf over its parameters can lead to a pdf from an entirely different class.Synthesis. The failure of the inverse Gaussian model to fit seed shadow data is not in itself a reason to doubt the validity of the Wald Analytical Long Distance model for movement of particles through the air under specified environmental conditions. A greater awareness is needed of the differences between the Wald Analytical Long Distance and the inverse Gaussian (or Wald) and the purposes for which they are used. The complexity of dispersing populations of seeds means that any of the standard mechanistically derived pdfs will actually be merely empirical in this context. Shape and flexibility of a pdf is far more important for adequately describing data than some perceived higher status.
机译:Bullock etal。 (生态学杂志105:6-19,2017)建议,Wald分析长距离(WALD)模型的理论需要重新检查来自点源的风声分散。这是在基于逆高斯概率密度函数(PDF)的基础上,不提供围绕已知由风分散的各个源植物的种子阴影。我们提出了两个原因,为什么我们不一定期望任何标准的机械主义衍生的PDF,以便比经验函数更好地适应真实的种子阴影。首先,诸如高斯,指数和逆高斯等现成的PDF的推导涉及一个过程和因素,其中包括一起生成真实的种子阴影。令人难以置信的是,无论多么细致,都会捕获一个单程模型,将捕获整个复杂系统的行为,这可能涉及许多顺序随机过程,或者并行随机过程的叠加,或两者。其次,即使只有一个进程涉及并且我们对该过程有一个完美的模型,即使是该过程的完美模型,模型的基本参数难以精确地销钉。此外,这些参数不太可能在分散季节保持恒定,因此有效地观察到具有不同参数值的分散事件的线性组合的结果,构成了在分布参数上的平均的形式。简单的例子表明,在其参数上平均PDF可以导致来自完全不同的类的PDF。合成。逆高斯模型以适应种子阴影数据的故障本身并不是一个原因怀疑沃尔德分析长距离模型在特定环境条件下通过空气移动粒子的有效性。需要更大的意识,即沃尔德分析长距离和逆高斯(或沃尔德)的差异以及使用它们的目的。种子分散群体的复杂性意味着任何标准机械衍生的PDF都实际上仅仅是经验在这种情况下的。 PDF的形状和灵活性对于充分描述数据比某些感知的更高状态更为重要。

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