Abstract
Statisticians work with figures, whereas scientists work with estimated quantities. Every direct (physical) measurement has some degree of uncertainty. Single numbers pose no problems, and an implied range can always be specified. Difficulties arise when those numbers or sets of numbers are used to calculate derived figures. Statistical measures such as ratios can be skewed if uncertainty about the actual measurements used to derive those quantities is not taken into account. This lack of consideration may lead to incorrect figures being used and calls into question the criteria used to diagnose, identify or delimit new species. In this case study, I use data gathered from the literature on different species of the clade Hydrachnidia (Acari, Parasitengona) to show how range ratios of important characters differ when uncertainty is considered. I outline the successive steps taken during the measuring process—from microscope calibration to the calculation of several statistical values from the direct measurements—and suggest some corrections. I anticipate that the results and recommendations presented here will be applicable to other taxonomic groups for which linear measurements play a central role in the description and identification of species.
Funder
Ministry of Science and Innovation
Reference25 articles.
1. Measurement and meaning in biology;Houle;Q. Rev. Biol.,2011
2. Evidence-Based Taxonomy: Labels as Illocutionary Acts;Valdecasas;Taxonomy,2022
3. A slippery reality: The epistemological shifting sands of tokogeny, phylogeny, lineages and species delimitation;Brower;Syst. Biodivers.,2021
4. Simpson, G.G., Roe, A., and Lewontin, R.C. (1960). Quantitative Zoology, Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc.
5. Sokal, R.R., and Rohlf, J. (2011). Biometry: Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research, W.H. Freeman and Company.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献