Estimating the Richness of a Population When the Maximum Number of Classes Is Fixed: A Nonparametric Solution to an Archaeological Problem

Background Estimating assemblage species or class richness from samples remains a challenging, but essential, goal. Though a variety of statistical tools for estimating species or class richness have been developed, they are all singly-bounded: assuming only a lower bound of species or classes. Nevertheless there are numerous situations, particularly in the cultural realm, where the maximum number of classes is fixed. For this reason, a new method is needed to estimate richness when both upper and lower bounds are known. Methodology/Principal Findings Here, we introduce a new method for estimating class richness: doubly-bounded confidence intervals (both lower and upper bounds are known). We specifically illustrate our new method using the Chao1 estimator, rarefaction, and extrapolation, although any estimator of asymptotic richness can be used in our method. Using a case study of Clovis stone tools from the North American Lower Great Lakes region, we demonstrate that singly-bounded richness estimators can yield confidence intervals with upper bound estimates larger than the possible maximum number of classes, while our new method provides estimates that make empirical sense. Conclusions/Significance Application of the new method for constructing doubly-bound richness estimates of Clovis stone tools permitted conclusions to be drawn that were not otherwise possible with singly-bounded richness estimates, namely, that Lower Great Lakes Clovis Paleoindians utilized a settlement pattern that was probably more logistical in nature than residential. However, our new method is not limited to archaeological applications. It can be applied to any set of data for which there is a fixed maximum number of classes, whether that be site occupancy models, commercial products (e.g. athletic shoes), or census information (e.g. nationality, religion, age, race).

[1]  Anne Chao,et al.  Measuring and Estimating Species Richness, Species Diversity, and Biotic Similarity from Sampling Data , 2013 .

[2]  Robert K. Colwell,et al.  Models and estimators linking individual-based and sample-based rarefaction, extrapolation and comparison of assemblages , 2012 .

[3]  John D. Holland,et al.  Overshot Flaking at the Arc Site, Genesee County, New York: Examining the Clovis-Gainey Connection , 2011 .

[4]  M. Eren,et al.  Clovis Blades at Paleo Crossing (33ME274), Ohio , 2011 .

[5]  Jesse L. Grismer,et al.  Who’s your mommy? Identifying maternal ancestors of asexual species of Leiolepis Cuvier, 1829 and the description of a new endemic species of asexual Leiolepis Cuvier, 1829 from Southern Vietnam , 2010 .

[6]  Todd A. Surovell Toward a Behavioral Ecology of Lithic Technology: Cases from Paleoindian Archaeology , 2009 .

[7]  Robert D. Leonard,et al.  Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology , 2009 .

[8]  David Hinkley,et al.  Bootstrap Methods: Another Look at the Jackknife , 2008 .

[9]  Michael D. Glascock,et al.  Reduction Strategies and Geochemical Characterization of Lithic Assemblages: A Comparison of Three Case Studies from Western North America , 2007, American Antiquity.

[10]  M. Kenward,et al.  An Introduction to the Bootstrap , 2007 .

[11]  A. Chao Species Estimation and Applications , 2006 .

[12]  A. Chao,et al.  APPLICATION OF LAPLACE'S BOUNDARY‐MODE APPROXIMATIONS TO ESTIMATE SPECIES AND SHARED SPECIES RICHNESS , 2006 .

[13]  Kevin M. Clarke,et al.  Estimating Species Richness , 2005 .

[14]  Robert K. Colwell,et al.  INTERPOLATING, EXTRAPOLATING, AND COMPARING INCIDENCE-BASED SPECIES ACCUMULATION CURVES , 2004 .

[15]  Grant W. G. Cochrane,et al.  Artefact attribute richness and sample size adequacy , 2003 .

[16]  A. Chao,et al.  PREDICTING THE NUMBER OF NEW SPECIES IN FURTHER TAXONOMIC SAMPLING , 2003 .

[17]  Michael J. O'Brien,et al.  Cladistics and archaeology , 2003 .

[18]  J. Andrew Royle,et al.  ESTIMATING SITE OCCUPANCY RATES WHEN DETECTION PROBABILITIES ARE LESS THAN ONE , 2002, Ecology.

[19]  M. J. Baxter Methodological Issues in the Study of Assemblage Diversity , 2001, American Antiquity.

[20]  J. Hughes,et al.  Counting the Uncountable: Statistical Approaches to Estimating Microbial Diversity , 2001, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[21]  Robert K. Colwell,et al.  Quantifying biodiversity: procedures and pitfalls in the measurement and comparison of species richness , 2001 .

[22]  Michael S. Bisson,et al.  Nineteenth Century Tools for Twenty-First Century Archaeology? Why the Middle Paleolithic Typology of François Bordes Must Be Replaced , 2000 .

[23]  M. J. O’Brien,et al.  Applying Evolutionary Archaeology: A Systematic Approach , 2000 .

[24]  D. Grayson,et al.  Stone Tool Assemblage Richness during the Middle and Early Upper Palaeolithic in France , 1998 .

[25]  D. Caulkins,et al.  Evaluating consistency in typology and classification , 1998 .

[26]  D. Kaufman,et al.  Measuring Archaeological Diversity: An Application of the Jackknife Technique , 1998, American Antiquity.

[27]  P. Storck,et al.  Two Newly Recognized Paleoindian Tool Types: Single- and Double-Scribe Compass Gravers and Coring Gravers , 1997, American Antiquity.

[28]  Michael J. Shott,et al.  Activity and Formation as Sources of Variation in Great Lakes Palaeoindian Assemblages , 1997 .

[29]  Robert K. Colwell,et al.  Estimating terrestrial biodiversity through extrapolation. , 1994, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[30]  J. Bunge,et al.  Estimating the Number of Species: A Review , 1993 .

[31]  S. Kent Studying Variability in the Archaeological Record: An Ethnoarchaeological Model for Distinguishing Mobility Patterns , 1992, American Antiquity.

[32]  R. Bettinger Hunter-Gatherers: Archaeological and Evolutionary Theory , 1991 .

[33]  P. Mellars The Emergence of Modern Humans: An Archaeological Perspective , 1991 .

[34]  C. Redman,et al.  Perspectives on Southwestern Prehistory , 1990 .

[35]  S. Plog Ritual, Exchange, And The Development Of Regional Systems , 1989 .

[36]  W. N. Melhorn,et al.  The archaeology of Monitor Valley. 3, Survey and additional excavations. Anthropological papers of the AMNH ; v. 66, pt. 2 , 1988 .

[37]  A. Chao Estimating the population size for capture-recapture data with unequal catchability. , 1987, Biometrics.

[38]  Keith W. Kintigh,et al.  Measuring Archaeological Diversity by Comparison with Simulated Assemblages , 1984, American Antiquity.

[39]  A. Chao Nonparametric estimation of the number of classes in a population , 1984 .

[40]  P. Fish Consistency in Archaeological Measurement and Classification: A Pilot Study , 1978, American Antiquity.

[41]  J. Yellen Archaeological approaches to the present: Models for reconstructing the past , 1977 .

[42]  G. Belle,et al.  Explicit Calculation of the Rarefaction Diversity Measurement and the Determination of Sufficient Sample Size , 1975 .

[43]  S. Hurlbert The Nonconcept of Species Diversity: A Critique and Alternative Parameters. , 1971, Ecology.

[44]  Robert C. Dunnell,et al.  Systematics in Prehistory , 1971 .

[45]  H. L. Sanders,et al.  Marine Benthic Diversity: A Comparative Study , 1968, The American Naturalist.