Grenyer et al. reply

Richard Grenyer (), C. David L. Orme, T. Jonathan Davies, Sarah F. Jackson, Richard G. Davies, Valerie A. Olson, Kate E. Jones, Kevin J. Gaston, Tim M. Blackburn, Gavin H. Thomas (), Peter M. Bennett (), Pamela C. Rasmussen, Tzung-Su Ding, John L. Gittleman () and Ian P. F. Owens ()
Additional contact information
Richard Grenyer: NERC Centre for Population Biology, Imperial College London, Silwood Park Campus
C. David L. Orme: Imperial College London, Silwood Park Campus
T. Jonathan Davies: ‡ National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, 735 State Street, Suite 300, Santa Barbara, California 93101, USA
Sarah F. Jackson: Biodiversity and Macroecology Group, University of Sheffield
Richard G. Davies: Centre for Ecology, Evolution and Conservation, School of Biological Sciences, University of East Anglia
Valerie A. Olson: University of Bath
Kate E. Jones: # Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, Regents Park, London NW1 4RY, UK
Kevin J. Gaston: Biodiversity and Macroecology Group, University of Sheffield
Tim M. Blackburn: # Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, Regents Park, London NW1 4RY, UK
Gavin H. Thomas: NERC Centre for Population Biology, Imperial College London, Silwood Park Campus
Peter M. Bennett: # Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, Regents Park, London NW1 4RY, UK
Pamela C. Rasmussen: Michigan State University Museum and Department of Zoology
Tzung-Su Ding: School of Forestry and Resource Conservation, National Taiwan University
John L. Gittleman: Odum School of Ecology, University of Georgia
Ian P. F. Owens: NERC Centre for Population Biology, Imperial College London, Silwood Park Campus

Nature, 2007, vol. 450, issue 7171, E20-E20

Abstract: Abstract Replying to: A. S. L. Rodrigues Nature 450, 10.1038/nature06374 (2007) Rodrigues1 criticizes our demonstration2 of low congruence in the global distributions of rare and threatened vertebrates on the grounds that we excluded locations where species counts were zero from our analyses. In practice, this makes no substantive difference to our conclusions. Some sample locations are not inhabited by any organisms of interest: such locations can inflate measures of covariation and association because their values for parameters of interest (in this case, zero counts of species) are identical. This bias has long been known (as ‘the double-zero problem’3); many ecological techniques and studies exclude double-zero data for this reason.

Date: 2007
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature06375 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:nat:nature:v:450:y:2007:i:7171:d:10.1038_nature06375

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.nature.com/

DOI: 10.1038/nature06375

Access Statistics for this article

Nature is currently edited by Magdalena Skipper

More articles in Nature from Nature
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().