Spatial Heterogeneity and the Design of Ecological Field Experiments

Experimental design should be accommodated to spatial heterogeneity in nature as well as indoors, whether it is a nuisance or a characteristic of interest, combined or not with assessment of treatment effects. The following analysis—of—variance approach to quantification of spatial heterogeneity is based on the adequate design of ecological field experiments, according to the type and the scale of heterogeneity of concern (at small scale, patches, one— or two—dimensional gradients). There are no recipes for doing so and judgment must be exercised every time: the experimenter's knowledge about the experimental material, combined with premanipulation or control, then, provides a useful prerequisite. For patches and environmental gradients, in the presence of treatment assignment, recommended designs require the blocking principle of grouping similar experimental units, which allows avoidance of spurious treatment effects and inflated error mean square. Completely randomized designs should only be used in the very particular case of spatial homogeneity at large scale. Illustrations in ecological field experimentation are given and discussed.

[1]  P. Legendre.  Spatial Autocorrelation: Trouble or New Paradigm? , 1993 .

[2]  Pierre Dutilleul,et al.  Spatial Heterogeneity against Heteroscedasticity: An Ecological Paradigm versus a Statistical Concept , 1993 .

[3]  G. Bell,et al.  The ecology and genetics of fitness in forest plants. II : microspatial heterogeneity of the edaphic environment , 1991 .

[4]  G. Bell,et al.  THE ECOLOGY AND GENETICS OF FITNESS IN FOREST PLANTS. I. ENVIRONMENTAL HETEROGENEITY MEASURED BY EXPLANT TRIALS , 1991 .

[5]  Chris Cosner,et al.  The effects of spatial heterogeneity in population dynamics , 1991 .

[6]  R. Haining.  Spatial Data Analysis in the Social and Environmental Sciences , 1990 .

[7]  N. B. Kotliar,et al.  Multiple scales of patchiness and patch structure: a hierarchical framework for the study of heterogeneity , 1990 .

[8]  Catherine Potvin,et al.  THE STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF ECOPHYSIOLOGICAL RESPONSE CURVES OBTAINED FROM EXPERIMENTS INVOLVING REPEATED MEASURES , 1990 .

[9]  C. Pringle.  Nutrient Spatial Heterogeneity: Effects on Community Structure, Physiognomy, and Diversity of Stream Algae , 1990 .

[10]  D. Hand,et al.  Analysis of Repeated Measures , 1990 .

[11]  G. Bell,et al.  Spatial, temporal, and species-specific patterns of heterogeneity in growth chamber experiments , 1990 .

[12]  R. Mead,et al.  The Design of Experiments: Statistical Principles for Practical Applications. , 1989 .

[13]  William L. Baker,et al.  Effect of scale and spatial heterogeneity on fire-interval distributions , 1989 .

[14]  J. Downing,et al.  Spatial Heterogeneity in Freshwater Zooplankton: Variation with Body Size, Depth, and Scale , 1988 .

[15]  H. Mader.  Effects of increased spatial heterogeneity on the biocenosis in rural landscapes , 1988 .

[16]  D. Strayer,et al.  Spatial Heterogeneity and Habitat Interactions in Lake Communities , 1988 .

[17]  Donald L. DeAngelis,et al.  Scale in the Design and Interpretation of Aquatic Community Research , 1988 .

[18]  C. Potvin,et al.  Sources of variability and experimental designs in growth chambers , 1988 .

[19]  R. Stevens,et al.  Spatial Heterogeneity of Nutrients and Organic Matter in Lake Ontario , 1987 .

[20]  E. Satorre,et al.  Spatial heterogeneity of the root system of grasses in the Patagonian arid steppe , 1987 .

[21]  Noel A Cressie.  Spatial Data Analysis by Example—Volume I: Point Pattern and Quantitative Data , 1987 .

[22]  Julian Besag,et al.  Statistical Analysis of Field Experiments Using Neighbouring Plots , 1986 .

[23]  P. Richerson,et al.  Temporal Variation, Spatial Heterogeneity, and Competition for Resources in Plankton Systems: A Theoretical Model , 1985, The American Naturalist.

[24]  Ellen Gilinsky,et al.  The Role of Fish Predation and Spatial Heterogeneity in Determining Benthic Community Structure , 1984 .

[25]  L. Weider.  Spatial heterogeneity of Daphnia genotypes: Vertical migration and habitat partitioning' , 1984 .

[26]  S. Hurlbert.  Pseudoreplication and the Design of Ecological Field Experiments , 1984 .

[27]  R. Mead,et al.  Statistical Methods in Agriculture and Experimental Biology , 1984 .

[28]  G. Nachman.  A SIMULATION MODEL OF SPATIAL HETEROGENEITY AND NON-RANDOM SEARCH IN AN INSECT HOST-PARASITOID SYSTEM , 1981 .

[29]  H. D. Patterson,et al.  Block designs for variety trials , 1978, The Journal of Agricultural Science.

[30]  M. S. Bartlett,et al.  Nearest Neighbour Models in the Analysis of Field Experiments , 1978 .

[31]  S. Pearce.  Row-And-Column Designs , 1975 .

[32]  H. Huynh,et al.  Conditions under Which Mean Square Ratios in Repeated Measurements Designs Have Exact F-Distributions , 1970 .

[33]  H. Rouanet,et al.  COMPARISON BETWEEN TREATMENTS IN A REPEATED‐MEASUREMENT DESIGN: ANOVA AND MULTIVARIATE METHODS , 1970 .

[34]  F. James Rohlf,et al.  Biometry: The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research , 1969 .

[35]  Seymour Geisser,et al.  Statistical Principles in Experimental Design , 1963 .

[36]  R. L. Plackett,et al.  The Analysis of Variance , 1960 .

[37]  G. Box.  Some Theorems on Quadratic Forms Applied in the Study of Analysis of Variance Problems, I. Effect of Inequality of Variance in the One-Way Classification , 1954 .

[38]  P. Greig-Smith,et al.  The Use of Random and Contiguous Quadrats in the Study of the Structure of Plant Communities , 1952 .

[39]  R Fisher,et al.  Design of Experiments , 1936 .