Patterns of ordination and classification instability resulting from changes in input data order

. Random rearrangement of entry order in three data sets often changed ordination and classification results based on Reciprocal Averaging. Results varied with the data set and method used. Eliminating infrequently occurring species largely reduced, but did not always eliminate, the variability. Overall, results appeared related to data set complexity, the type of data or transformation, and the analysis method used. Detrended Correspondence Analysis had the greatest variability of the ordination methods tested. Results from quantitative data were usually more variable than presence/absence data. Variation in cluster analysis was related to the number of tie values in the similarity matrix. Detailed tests using randomization of entry order of individual data sets with each of the programs to be used are needed to individually assess the effects on the results.; Keywords:; Cluster analysis; DECORANA; Ecological group; Entry order; Environmental gradient; TWINSPAN

[1]  D. F. Morrison,et al.  Multivariate Statistical Methods , 1968 .

[2]  E. W. Beals,et al.  Ordination: mathematical elegance and ecological naivete , 1973 .

[3]  Mark Hill,et al.  Indicator species analysis, a divisive polythetic method of classification, and its application to a survey of native pinewoods in Scotland , 1975 .

[4]  M. O. Hill,et al.  TWINSPAN: a FORTRAN program of arranging multivariate data in an ordered two way table by classification of individual and attributes , 1979 .

[5]  M. O. Hill,et al.  DECORANA - A FORTRAN program for detrended correspondence analysis and reciprocal averaging. , 1979 .

[6]  David S. Johnson,et al.  Computers and In stractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. W. H Freeman, San Fran , 1979 .

[7]  M. Hill,et al.  Detrended correspondence analysis: an improved ordination technique , 1980 .

[8]  R. Whittaker,et al.  Hierarchical Classification of Community Data , 1981 .

[9]  Hugh G. Gauch,et al.  Multivariate analysis in community ecology , 1984 .

[10]  C. Braak.  Correspondence Analysis of Incidence and Abundance Data:Properties in Terms of a Unimodal Response Model , 1985 .

[11]  B. Manly.  Multivariate Statistical Methods : A Primer , 1986 .

[12]  S. Ferson,et al.  Putting Things in Order: A Critique of Detrended Correspondence Analysis , 1987, The American Naturalist.

[13]  An application of detrended correspondance analysis and non-metric multidimensional scaling to the idebtification and analysis of environmental factor complexes and vegetation structures , 1987 .

[14]  T. F. H. Allen,et al.  Hierarchical complexity in ecology: a noneuclidean conception of the data space , 1987 .

[15]  Peter R. Minchin,et al.  An evaluation of the relative robustness of techniques for ecological ordination , 1987 .

[16]  R. Knox,et al.  Putting Things in Order: The Advantages of Detrended Correspondence Analysis , 1988, The American Naturalist.

[17]  David W. Roberts,et al.  Analysis of forest succession with fuzzy graph theory , 1989 .

[18]  Charles E. McCulloch,et al.  MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS IN ECOLOGY AND SYSTEMATICS: PANACEA OR PANDORA'S BOX? , 1990 .

[19]  Miguel Equihua,et al.  Fuzzy clustering of ecological data. , 1990 .

[20]  K. Hawkes,et al.  African populations and the evolution of human mitochondrial DNA. , 1991, Science.

[21]  H. V. Groenewoud.  The robustness of Correspondence, Detrended Correspondence, and TWINSPAN Analysis , 1992 .

[22]  A Gibbons.  Mitochondrial Eve: wounded, but not dead yet. , 1992, Science.

[23]  Lee Belbin,et al.  Comparing three classification strategies for use in ecology , 1993 .