scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Wolfgang Forstmeier

Other affiliations: University of Sheffield
Bio: Wolfgang Forstmeier is an academic researcher from Max Planck Society. The author has contributed to research in topics: Zebra finch & Population. The author has an hindex of 39, co-authored 120 publications receiving 5915 citations. Previous affiliations of Wolfgang Forstmeier include University of Sheffield.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Full model tests and P value adjustments can be used as a guide to how frequently type I errors arise by sampling variation alone, and favour the presentation of full models, since they best reflect the range of predictors investigated and ensure a balanced representation also of non-significant results.
Abstract: Fitting generalised linear models (GLMs) with more than one predictor has become the standard method of analysis in evolutionary and behavioural research. Often, GLMs are used for exploratory data analysis, where one starts with a complex full model including interaction terms and then simplifies by removing non-significant terms. While this approach can be useful, it is problematic if significant effects are interpreted as if they arose from a single a priori hypothesis test. This is because model selection involves cryptic multiple hypothesis testing, a fact that has only rarely been acknowledged or quantified. We show that the probability of finding at least one ‘significant’ effect is high, even if all null hypotheses are true (e.g. 40% when starting with four predictors and their two-way interactions). This probability is close to theoretical expectations when the sample size (N) is large relative to the number of predictors including interactions (k). In contrast, type I error rates strongly exceed even those expectations when model simplification is applied to models that are over-fitted before simplification (low N/k ratio). The increase in false-positive results arises primarily from an overestimation of effect sizes among significant predictors, leading to upward-biased effect sizes that often cannot be reproduced in follow-up studies (‘the winner's curse’). Despite having their own problems, full model tests and P value adjustments can be used as a guide to how frequently type I errors arise by sampling variation alone. We favour the presentation of full models, since they best reflect the range of predictors investigated and ensure a balanced representation also of non-significant results.

795 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is shown that random slope models have the potential to reduce residual variance by accounting for between-individual variation in slopes, which makes it easier to detect treatment effects that are applied between individuals, hence reducing type II errors as well.
Abstract: Mixed-effect models are frequently used to control for the nonindependence of data points, for example, when repeated measures from the same individuals are available. The aim of these models is often to estimate fixed effects and to test their significance. This is usually done by including random intercepts, that is, intercepts that are allowed to vary between individuals. The widespread belief is that this controls for all types of pseudoreplication within individuals. Here we show that this is not the case, if the aim is to estimate effects that vary within individuals and individuals differ in their response to these effects. In these cases, random intercept models give overconfident estimates leading to conclusions that are not supported by the data. By allowing individuals to differ in the slopes of their responses, it is possible to account for the nonindependence of data points that pseudoreplicate slope information. Such random slope models give appropriate standard errors and are easily implemented in standard statistical software. Because random slope models are not always used where they are essential, we suspect that many published findings have too narrow confidence intervals and a substantially inflated type I error rate. Besides reducing type I errors, random slope models have the potential to reduce residual variance by accounting for between-individual variation in slopes, which makes it easier to detect treatment effects that are applied between individuals, hence reducing type II errors as well.

744 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is argued that a culture of ‘you can publish if your study is rigorous’ creates a systematic bias against the null hypothesis which renders meta‐analyses questionable and may even lead to a situation where hypotheses become difficult to falsify.
Abstract: Recently there has been a growing concern that many published research findings do not hold up in attempts to replicate them. We argue that this problem may originate from a culture of 'you can publish if you found a significant effect'. This culture creates a systematic bias against the null hypothesis which renders meta-analyses questionable and may even lead to a situation where hypotheses become difficult to falsify. In order to pinpoint the sources of error and possible solutions, we review current scientific practices with regard to their effect on the probability of drawing a false-positive conclusion. We explain why the proportion of published false-positive findings is expected to increase with (i) decreasing sample size, (ii) increasing pursuit of novelty, (iii) various forms of multiple testing and researcher flexibility, and (iv) incorrect P-values, especially due to unaccounted pseudoreplication, i.e. the non-independence of data points (clustered data). We provide examples showing how statistical pitfalls and psychological traps lead to conclusions that are biased and unreliable, and we show how these mistakes can be avoided. Ultimately, we hope to contribute to a culture of 'you can publish if your study is rigorous'. To this end, we highlight promising strategies towards making science more objective. Specifically, we enthusiastically encourage scientists to preregister their studies (including a priori hypotheses and complete analysis plans), to blind observers to treatment groups during data collection and analysis, and unconditionally to report all results. Also, we advocate reallocating some efforts away from seeking novelty and discovery and towards replicating important research findings of one's own and of others for the benefit of the scientific community as a whole. We believe these efforts will be aided by a shift in evaluation criteria away from the current system which values metrics of 'impact' almost exclusively and towards a system which explicitly values indices of scientific rigour.

291 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Current knowledge of how natural drive systems function, how drivers spread through natural populations, and the factors that limit their invasion are reviewed.
Abstract: Meiotic drivers are genetic variants that selfishly manipulate the production of gametes to increase their own rate of transmission, often to the detriment of the rest of the genome and the individual that carries them. This genomic conflict potentially occurs whenever a diploid organism produces a haploid stage, and can have profound evolutionary impacts on gametogenesis, fertility, individual behaviour, mating system, population survival, and reproductive isolation. Multiple research teams are developing artificial drive systems for pest control, utilising the transmission advantage of drive to alter or exterminate target species. Here, we review current knowledge of how natural drive systems function, how drivers spread through natural populations, and the factors that limit their invasion.

286 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A positive correlation between recombination rate and GC content, as well as GC-rich sequence motifs and levels of linkage disequilibrium were significantly higher in regions of low recombination, showing that heterogeneity in recombination rates have left a footprint on the genomic landscape of LD in zebra finch populations.
Abstract: Understanding the causes and consequences of variation in the rate of recombination is essential since this parameter is considered to affect levels of genetic variability, the efficacy of selection, and the design of association and linkage mapping studies. However, there is limited knowledge about the factors governing recombination rate variation. We genotyped 1920 single nucleotide polymorphisms in a multigeneration pedigree of more than 1000 zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata) to develop a genetic linkage map, and then we used these map data together with the recently available draft genome sequence of the zebra finch to estimate recombination rates in 1 Mb intervals across the genome. The average zebra finch recombination rate (1.5 cM/Mb) is higher than in humans, but significantly lower than in chicken. The local rates of recombination in chicken and zebra finch were only weakly correlated, demonstrating evolutionary turnover of the recombination landscape in birds. The distribution of recombination events was heavily biased toward ends of chromosomes, with a stronger telomere effect than so far seen in any organism. In fact, the recombination rate was as low as 0.1 cM/Mb in intervals up to 100 Mb long in the middle of the larger chromosomes. We found a positive correlation between recombination rate and GC content, as well as GC-rich sequence motifs. Levels of linkage disequilibrium (LD) were significantly higher in regions of low recombination, showing that heterogeneity in recombination rates have left a footprint on the genomic landscape of LD in zebra finch populations.

219 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal Article
TL;DR: For the next few weeks the course is going to be exploring a field that’s actually older than classical population genetics, although the approach it’ll be taking to it involves the use of population genetic machinery.
Abstract: So far in this course we have dealt entirely with the evolution of characters that are controlled by simple Mendelian inheritance at a single locus. There are notes on the course website about gametic disequilibrium and how allele frequencies change at two loci simultaneously, but we didn’t discuss them. In every example we’ve considered we’ve imagined that we could understand something about evolution by examining the evolution of a single gene. That’s the domain of classical population genetics. For the next few weeks we’re going to be exploring a field that’s actually older than classical population genetics, although the approach we’ll be taking to it involves the use of population genetic machinery. If you know a little about the history of evolutionary biology, you may know that after the rediscovery of Mendel’s work in 1900 there was a heated debate between the “biometricians” (e.g., Galton and Pearson) and the “Mendelians” (e.g., de Vries, Correns, Bateson, and Morgan). Biometricians asserted that the really important variation in evolution didn’t follow Mendelian rules. Height, weight, skin color, and similar traits seemed to

9,847 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors make a case for the importance of reporting variance explained (R2) as a relevant summarizing statistic of mixed-effects models, which is rare, even though R2 is routinely reported for linear models and also generalized linear models (GLM).
Abstract: Summary The use of both linear and generalized linear mixed-effects models (LMMs and GLMMs) has become popular not only in social and medical sciences, but also in biological sciences, especially in the field of ecology and evolution. Information criteria, such as Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), are usually presented as model comparison tools for mixed-effects models. The presentation of ‘variance explained’ (R2) as a relevant summarizing statistic of mixed-effects models, however, is rare, even though R2 is routinely reported for linear models (LMs) and also generalized linear models (GLMs). R2 has the extremely useful property of providing an absolute value for the goodness-of-fit of a model, which cannot be given by the information criteria. As a summary statistic that describes the amount of variance explained, R2 can also be a quantity of biological interest. One reason for the under-appreciation of R2 for mixed-effects models lies in the fact that R2 can be defined in a number of ways. Furthermore, most definitions of R2 for mixed-effects have theoretical problems (e.g. decreased or negative R2 values in larger models) and/or their use is hindered by practical difficulties (e.g. implementation). Here, we make a case for the importance of reporting R2 for mixed-effects models. We first provide the common definitions of R2 for LMs and GLMs and discuss the key problems associated with calculating R2 for mixed-effects models. We then recommend a general and simple method for calculating two types of R2 (marginal and conditional R2) for both LMMs and GLMMs, which are less susceptible to common problems. This method is illustrated by examples and can be widely employed by researchers in any fields of research, regardless of software packages used for fitting mixed-effects models. The proposed method has the potential to facilitate the presentation of R2 for a wide range of circumstances.

7,749 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is argued that researchers using LMEMs for confirmatory hypothesis testing should minimally adhere to the standards that have been in place for many decades, and it is shown thatLMEMs generalize best when they include the maximal random effects structure justified by the design.

6,878 citations

01 Jan 2016
TL;DR: The modern applied statistics with s is universally compatible with any devices to read, and is available in the digital library an online access to it is set as public so you can download it instantly.
Abstract: Thank you very much for downloading modern applied statistics with s. As you may know, people have search hundreds times for their favorite readings like this modern applied statistics with s, but end up in harmful downloads. Rather than reading a good book with a cup of coffee in the afternoon, instead they cope with some harmful virus inside their laptop. modern applied statistics with s is available in our digital library an online access to it is set as public so you can download it instantly. Our digital library saves in multiple countries, allowing you to get the most less latency time to download any of our books like this one. Kindly say, the modern applied statistics with s is universally compatible with any devices to read.

5,249 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A common pattern of phylogenetic conservatism in ecological character is recognized and the challenges of using phylogenies of partial lineages are highlighted and phylogenetic approaches to three emergent properties of communities: species diversity, relative abundance distributions, and range sizes are reviewed.
Abstract: ▪ Abstract As better phylogenetic hypotheses become available for many groups of organisms, studies in community ecology can be informed by knowledge of the evolutionary relationships among coexisting species. We note three primary approaches to integrating phylogenetic information into studies of community organization: 1. examining the phylogenetic structure of community assemblages, 2. exploring the phylogenetic basis of community niche structure, and 3. adding a community context to studies of trait evolution and biogeography. We recognize a common pattern of phylogenetic conservatism in ecological character and highlight the challenges of using phylogenies of partial lineages. We also review phylogenetic approaches to three emergent properties of communities: species diversity, relative abundance distributions, and range sizes. Methodological advances in phylogenetic supertree construction, character reconstruction, null models for community assembly and character evolution, and metrics of community ...

3,615 citations