SIMILARITY COEFFICIENTS - MEASURES OF CO-OCCURRENCE AND ASSOCIATION OR SIMPLY MEASURES OF OCCURRENCE
SIMILARITY COEFFICIENTS - MEASURES OF CO-OCCURRENCE AND ASSOCIATION OR SIMPLY MEASURES OF OCCURRENCE
复制标题
DOI：
10.1086/284927
复制
发表时间：
1989-03-01
影响因子：
2.9
通讯作者：
HARVEY, HH
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
JACKSON, DA;SOMERS, KM;HARVEY, HH
数据的存在或不存在的25种鱼类在调查的52个湖泊的流域的黑和空心河中南部安大略[加拿大]进行了分析与8个相似系数。比较了Jaccard，Ochiai，Phi，Rogers-Tanimoto，Russell和Rao，简单匹配。Sorensen-Dice和Yule相似性系数使用R型聚类分析、主坐标分析（PCoA）和非度量多维尺度的结果。系数分为代表措施的同现和测量协会。共现系数（即，Jaccard，Rogers-Tanimoto，Russell和Rao，Simple Matching和Sorensen-Dice）结合了与分析的鱼类出现频率相关的信息。树状图忠实地揭示了这种规模效应。同样，PCoA的第一轴是物种出现频率的线性或曲线函数。相关措施（即，Phi和Yule）和Ochiai's系数受发生频率的影响较小。PCoA的第一轴，基于中心系数（即，Phi，Yule和Ochiai），高度相关的第二轴从排序使用共生系数。中心系数分析的第二轴与基于非中心测量的第三轴相关。我们建议，共现系数反映了一般的大小效应类似于常见的主成分分析。关联的措施和Ochiai的系数纳入隐式中心变换，减少与发生频率相关的大小的影响。使用共现系数的聚类分析最容易受到这种大小效应的影响。我们认为，许多树状图的解释未能认识到使用非中心相似性系数（例如，Strauss 1982; Nemec and Brinkhurst 1987）。 此外，对比表型和系统发育方法的参数可能会不知不觉地辩论中心与非中心系数的效用，因为大小效应无疑有助于系统发育方法的明显优势。
Data on the presence or absence of 25 fish species in a survey of 52 lakes from the watersheds of the Black and Hollow rivers of south-central Ontario [Canada] were analyzed with eight similarity coefficients. Comparisons were made of Jaccard, Ochiai, Phi, Rogers-Tanimoto, Russell and Rao, Simple Matching. Sorensen-Dice, and Yule similarity coefficients using results from R-mode cluster analysis, principal-coordinates analysis (PCoA), and nonmetric multidimensional scaling. Coefficients were grouped into those representing measures of co-occurrence and those measuring association. Coefficients of co-occurrence (i.e., Jaccard, Rogers-Tanimoto, Russell and Rao, Simple Matching, and Sorensen-Dice) incorporate information associated with the frequency of occurrence of the fish species analyzed. Dendrograms faithfully revealed this size effect. Similarly, first axes of PCoA were linear or curvilinear functions of species'' frequency of occurrence. Measures of association (i.e., Phi and Yule) and Ochiai''s coefficient were less affected by the frequency of occurrence. The first axes of PCoA, based on centered coefficients (i.e., Phi, Yule, and Ochiai), were highly correlated with the second axes from ordinations using co-occurrence coefficients. The second axes from analyses of centered coefficients were correlated with the third axes based on non-centered measures. We propose that co-occurrence coefficients reflect a general size effect similar to that commonly found in prinicipal-components analysis. Measures of association and Ochiai''s coefficient incorporate implicit centering transformations that reduce the size influence associated with the frequency of occurrence. Cluster analyses using co-occurrence coefficients are most susceptible to this size effect. We believe that the interpretations of many dendrograms fail to recognize size effects that arise from employing non-centered similarity coefficients (e.g., Strauss 1982; Nemec and Brinkhurst 1987). Additionally, arguments contrasting phenetic and phylogenetic methods may unknowingly debate the utility of centered versus non-centered coefficients, since the size effect undoubtedly contributes to the apparent strength of phylogenetic approaches.