IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0045174.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Incorrect Likelihood Methods Were Used to Infer Scaling Laws of Marine Predator Search Behaviour

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew M Edwards
  • Mervyn P Freeman
  • Greg A Breed
  • Ian D Jonsen

Abstract

Background: Ecologists are collecting extensive data concerning movements of animals in marine ecosystems. Such data need to be analysed with valid statistical methods to yield meaningful conclusions. Principal Findings: We demonstrate methodological issues in two recent studies that reached similar conclusions concerning movements of marine animals (Nature 451∶1098; Science 332∶1551). The first study analysed vertical movement data to conclude that diverse marine predators (Atlantic cod, basking sharks, bigeye tuna, leatherback turtles and Magellanic penguins) exhibited “Lévy-walk-like behaviour”, close to a hypothesised optimal foraging strategy. By reproducing the original results for the bigeye tuna data, we show that the likelihood of tested models was calculated from residuals of regression fits (an incorrect method), rather than from the likelihood equations of the actual probability distributions being tested. This resulted in erroneous Akaike Information Criteria, and the testing of models that do not correspond to valid probability distributions. We demonstrate how this led to overwhelming support for a model that has no biological justification and that is statistically spurious because its probability density function goes negative. Re-analysis of the bigeye tuna data, using standard likelihood methods, overturns the original result and conclusion for that data set. The second study observed Lévy walk movement patterns by mussels. We demonstrate several issues concerning the likelihood calculations (including the aforementioned residuals issue). Re-analysis of the data rejects the original Lévy walk conclusion. Conclusions: We consequently question the claimed existence of scaling laws of the search behaviour of marine predators and mussels, since such conclusions were reached using incorrect methods. We discourage the suggested potential use of “Lévy-like walks” when modelling consequences of fishing and climate change, and caution that any resulting advice to managers of marine ecosystems would be problematic. For reproducibility and future work we provide R source code for all calculations.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew M Edwards & Mervyn P Freeman & Greg A Breed & Ian D Jonsen, 2012. "Incorrect Likelihood Methods Were Used to Infer Scaling Laws of Marine Predator Search Behaviour," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(10), pages 1-13, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0045174
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0045174
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0045174
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0045174&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0045174?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marina E Wosniack & Marcos C Santos & Ernesto P Raposo & Gandhi M Viswanathan & Marcos G E da Luz, 2017. "The evolutionary origins of Lévy walk foraging," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-31, October.
    2. Toby A. Patterson & Alison Parton & Roland Langrock & Paul G. Blackwell & Len Thomas & Ruth King, 2017. "Statistical modelling of individual animal movement: an overview of key methods and a discussion of practical challenges," AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis, Springer;German Statistical Society, vol. 101(4), pages 399-438, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0045174. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.