Can environmental constraints determine random patterns of plant species co-occurrence?

Plant community ecologists use the null model approach to infer assembly processes from observed patterns of species co-occurrence. In about a third of published studies, the null hypothesis of random assembly cannot be rejected. When this occurs, plant ecologists interpret that the observed random pattern is not environmentally constrained - but probably generated by stochastic processes. The null model approach (using the C-score and the discrepancy index) was used to test for random assembly under two simulation algorithms. Logistic regression, distance-based redundancy analysis, and constrained ordination were used to test for environmental determinism (species segregation along environmental gradients or turnover and species aggregation). This article introduces an environmentally determined community of alpine hydrophytes that presents itself as randomly assembled. The pathway through which the random pattern arises in this community is suggested to be as follows: Two simultaneous environmental processes, one leading to species aggregation and the other leading to species segregation, concurrently generate the observed pattern, which results to be neither aggregated nor segregated - but random. A simulation study supports this suggestion. Although apparently simple, the null model approach seems to assume that a single ecological factor prevails or that if several factors decisively influence the community, then they all exert their influence in the same direction, generating either aggregation or segregation. As these assumptions are unlikely to hold in most cases and assembly processes cannot be inferred from random patterns, we would like to propose plant ecologists to investigate specifically the ecological processes responsible for observed random patterns, instead of trying to infer processes from patterns

How Does the New Keynesian Monetary Model Fit in the U.S. and the Eurozone? an Indirect Inference Approach

This paper estimates a standard version of the New Keynesian monetary (NKM) model under alternative specifications of the monetary policy rule using U.S. and Eurozone data. The estimation procedure implemented is a classical method based on the indirect inference principle. An unrestricted VAR is considered as the auxiliary model. On the one hand, the estimation method proposed overcomes some of the shortcomings of using a structural VAR as the auxiliary model in order to identify the impulse response that defines the minimum distance estimator implemented in the literature. On the other hand, by following a classical approach we can further assess the estimation results found in recent papers that follow a maximum-likelihood Bayesian approach. The estimation results show that some structural parameter estimates are quite sensitive to the specification of monetary policy. Moreover, the estimation results in the U.S. show that the fit of the NKM under an optimal monetary plan is much worse than the fit of the NKM model assuming a forward-looking Taylor rule. In contrast to the U.S. case, in the Eurozone the best fit is obtained assuming a backward-looking Taylor rule, but the improvement is rather small with respect to assuming either a forward-looking Taylor rule or an optimal plan.