Correspondence site: http://www.respond2articles.com/MEE/
When can we ignore the problem of imperfect detection in comparative studies?
Article first published online: 23 AUG 2011
© 2011 The Authors. Methods in Ecology and Evolution © 2011 British Ecological Society
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
Volume 3, Issue 1, pages 188–194, February 2012
How to Cite
Archaux, F., Henry, P.-Y. and Gimenez, O. (2012), When can we ignore the problem of imperfect detection in comparative studies?. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 3: 188–194. doi: 10.1111/j.2041-210X.2011.00142.x
- Issue published online: 1 FEB 2012
- Article first published online: 23 AUG 2011
- Received 29 October 2010; accepted 10 June 2011 Handling Editor: Robert Freckleton
Appendix S1. R functions “TypeIerror.2treatments” and “Max.deltap.2treatments.Jack2”
Appendix S2. Maximum acceptable difference in mean detectability between the two treatments (p2-p1) ensuring nominal rejection rate (αsim≤0.056) when Chao2 estimator is used instead of raw data.
As a service to our authors and readers, this journal provides supporting information supplied by the authors. Such materials may be re-organized for online delivery, but are not copy-edited or typeset. Technical support issues arising from supporting information (other than missing files) should be addressed to the authors.
|MEE3_142_sm_AppendixS1.doc||86K||Supporting info item|
|MEE3_142_sm_AppendixS2.doc||128K||Supporting info item|
Please note: Wiley Blackwell is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.