Department of Biological Science, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, 32306, USA.
Marine Science Institute, University of California, Santa Barbara, California, 93106, USA.
Ecol Appl. 2021 Jun;31(4):e02304. doi: 10.1002/eap.2304. Epub 2021 Mar 17.
Distinguishing between human impacts and natural variation in abundance remains difficult because most species exhibit complex patterns of variation in space and time. When ecological monitoring data are available, a before-after-control-impact (BACI) analysis can control natural spatial and temporal variation to better identify an impact and estimate its magnitude. However, populations with limited distributions and confounding spatial-temporal dynamics can violate core assumptions of BACI-type designs. In this study, we assessed how such properties affect the potential to identify impacts. Specifically, we quantified the conditions under which BACI analyses correctly (or incorrectly) identified simulated anthropogenic impacts in a spatially and temporally replicated data set of fish, macroalgal, and invertebrate species found on nearshore subtidal reefs in southern California, USA. We found BACI failed to assess very localized impacts, and had low power but high precision when assessing region-wide impacts. Power was highest for severe impacts of moderate spatial scale, and impacts were most easily detected in species with stable, widely distributed populations. Serial autocorrelation in the data greatly inflated false impact detection rates, and could be partly controlled for statistically, while spatial synchrony in dynamics had no consistent effect on power or false detection rates. Unfortunately, species that offer high power to detect real impacts were also more likely to detect impacts where none had occurred. However, considering power and false detection rates together can identify promising indicator species, and collectively analyzing data for similar species improved the net ability to assess impacts. These insights set expectations for the sizes and severities of impacts that BACI analyses can detect in real systems, point to the importance of serial autocorrelation (but not of spatial synchrony), and indicate how to choose the species, and groups of species, that can best identify impacts.
区分人为影响和丰度的自然变化仍然很困难,因为大多数物种在空间和时间上表现出复杂的变化模式。当有生态监测数据时,可以进行前后对照控制影响(BACI)分析,以控制自然的时空变化,从而更好地识别影响并估计其规模。然而,分布范围有限且时空动态混杂的种群可能会违反 BACI 型设计的核心假设。在这项研究中,我们评估了这些特性如何影响识别影响的能力。具体来说,我们量化了在加利福尼亚州南部近岸潮下带暗礁上发现的鱼类、大型藻类和无脊椎动物的空间和时间重复数据集中,BACI 分析正确(或错误)识别模拟人为影响的条件。我们发现 BACI 无法评估非常局部的影响,并且在评估区域范围的影响时,其功效较低但精度较高。对于中等空间尺度的严重影响,功效最高,而在种群稳定、分布广泛的物种中,影响最容易检测到。数据中的序列自相关极大地增加了错误影响检测率,可以通过统计学方法部分控制,而动态的空间同步对功效或错误检测率没有一致的影响。不幸的是,提供高功效来检测真实影响的物种也更有可能检测到没有发生影响的地方。然而,综合考虑功效和错误检测率可以识别有希望的指示物种,并且对类似物种的数据进行集体分析可以提高评估影响的总体能力。这些见解为 BACI 分析在真实系统中可以检测到的影响的大小和严重程度设定了预期,指出了序列自相关(但不是空间同步)的重要性,并指出了如何选择可以最好地识别影响的物种和物种组。