How do plant ecologists use matrix population models?

Matrix projection models are among the most widely used tools in plant ecology. However, the way in which plant ecologists use and interpret these models differs from the way in which they are presented in the broader academic literature. In contrast to calls from earlier reviews, most studies of plant populations are based on < 5 matrices and present simple metrics such as deterministic population growth rates. However, plant ecologists also cautioned against literal interpretation of model predictions. Although academic studies have emphasized testing quantitative model predictions, such forecasts are not the way in which plant ecologists find matrix models to be most useful. Improving forecasting ability would necessitate increased model complexity and longer studies. Therefore, in addition to longer term studies with better links to environmental drivers, priorities for research include critically evaluating relative/comparative uses of matrix models and asking how we can use many short-term studies to understand long-term population dynamics.

[1]  Roberto Salguero-Gómez,et al.  Matrix projection models meet variation in the real world , 2010 .

[2]  M. Burgman Risks and Decisions for Conservation and Environmental Management: Experts, stakeholders and elicitation , 2005 .

[3]  D. Ludwig Is it meaningful to estimate a probability of extinction , 1999 .

[4]  Paulette Bierzychudek,et al.  LOOKING BACKWARDS: ASSESSING THE PROJECTIONS OF A TRANSITION MATRIX MODEL , 1999 .

[5]  Stephen P. Ellner,et al.  When is it meaningful to estimate an extinction probability , 2000 .

[6]  E. Crone IS SURVIVORSHIP A BETTER FITNESS SURROGATE THAN FECUNDITY? , 2001, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[7]  Steven R. Beissinger,et al.  Emerging Issues in Population Viability Analysis , 2002, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[8]  James D. Nichols,et al.  ESTIMATING STATE-TRANSITION PROBABILITIES FOR UNOBSERVABLE STATES USING CAPTURE–RECAPTURE/RESIGHTING DATA , 2002 .

[9]  William N. Venables,et al.  Modern Applied Statistics with S , 2010 .

[10]  R. Lande,et al.  A Quantitative Genetic Theory of Life History Evolution , 1982 .

[11]  Johan Ehrlén,et al.  Empirical tests of life‐history evolution theory using phylogenetic analysis of plant demography , 2010 .

[12]  Colin J. Thompson,et al.  Expected minimum population size as a measure of threat , 2001 .

[13]  Hans de Kroon,et al.  Elasticity Analysis in Population Biology: Methods and Applications1 , 2000 .

[14]  Daniel F. Doak,et al.  Population viability management: ecological standards to guide adaptive management for rare species , 2009 .

[15]  Ingrid M. Parker,et al.  Evaluating approaches to the conservation of rare and endangered plants , 1994 .

[16]  Stephen P. Ellner,et al.  Precision of Population Viability Analysis , 2002, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[17]  Larry B. Crowder,et al.  A Stage‐Based Population Model for Loggerhead Sea Turtles and Implications for Conservation , 1987 .

[18]  T Coulson,et al.  The use and abuse of population viability analysis. , 2001, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[19]  D. Doak,et al.  Book Review: Quantitative Conservation biology: Theory and Practice of Population Viability analysis , 2004, Landscape Ecology.

[20]  Elizabeth E Crone,et al.  Causes and consequences of variation in plant population growth rate: a synthesis of matrix population models in a phylogenetic context. , 2010, Ecology letters.

[21]  John Sabo,et al.  Morris, W. F., and D. F. Doak. 2003. Quantitative Conservation Biology: Theory and Practice of Population Viability Analysis. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA , 2003 .

[22]  D. Pyke,et al.  THE EFFECT OF STOCHASTIC TECHNIQUE ON ESTIMATES OF POPULATION VIABILITY FROM TRANSITION MATRIX MODELS , 2003 .

[23]  D. Simberloff How Much Information on Population Biology Is Needed to Manage Introduced Species? , 2003 .

[24]  Wilfried Thuiller,et al.  Predicting extinction risks under climate change: coupling stochastic population models with dynamic bioclimatic habitat models , 2008, Biology Letters.

[25]  Miguel Franco,et al.  comparative plant demography - relative importance of life-cycle components to the finite rate of increase in woody and herbaceous perennials , 1993 .

[26]  Amy W. Ando,et al.  On the Use of Demographic Models of Population Viability in Endangered Species Management , 1998 .

[27]  Shripad Tuljapurkar,et al.  Plant populations track rather than buffer climate fluctuations. , 2010, Ecology letters.

[28]  B. Kendall,et al.  Longevity can buffer plant and animal populations against changing climatic variability. , 2008, Ecology.

[29]  Helen M. Regan,et al.  Comparing predictions of extinction risk using models and subjective judgement , 2004 .

[30]  Steven V. Viscido,et al.  A statistical approach to quasi-extinction forecasting. , 2007, Ecology letters.

[31]  H. Resit Akçakaya,et al.  Predictive accuracy of population viability analysis in conservation biology , 2000, Nature.

[32]  H. Caswell Matrix population models : construction, analysis, and interpretation , 2001 .

[33]  E. Menges,et al.  Population viability analyses in plants: challenges and opportunities. , 2000, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[34]  W. Morris,et al.  POPULATION VIABILITY ANALYSIS IN ENDANGERED SPECIES RECOVERY PLANS: PAST USE AND FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS , 2002 .

[35]  H. Akçakaya,et al.  Population viability analyses in conservation planning : an overview , 2004 .

[36]  Hal Caswell,et al.  Transient Behavior and Life History Analysis of Teasel (Dipsacus Sylvestris Huds.) , 1978 .

[37]  Stephen P Ellner,et al.  Commentary on Holmes et al. (2007): resolving the debate on when extinction risk is predictable. , 2008, Ecology letters.

[38]  Kevin Gross,et al.  UNDERSTANDING AND PREDICTING THE EFFECTS OF SPARSE DATA ON DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSES , 2005 .