Big Decisions and Sparse Data: Adapting Scientific Publishing to the Needs of Practical Conservation

The biggest challenge in conservation biology is breaking down the gap between research and practical management. A major obstacle is the fact that many researchers are unwilling to tackle projects likely to produce sparse or messy data because the results would be difficult to publish in refereed journals. The obvious solution to sparse data is to build up results from multiple studies. Consequently, we suggest that there needs to be greater emphasis in conservation biology on publishing papers that can be built on by subsequent research rather than on papers that produce clear results individually. This building approach requires: (1) a stronger theoretical framework, in which researchers attempt to anticipate models that will be relevant in future studies and incorporate expected differences among studies into those models; (2) use of modern methods for model selection and multi-model inference, and publication of parameter estimates under a range of plausible models; (3) explicit incorporation of prior information into each case study; and (4) planning management treatments in an adaptive framework that considers treatments applied in other studies. We encourage journals to publish papers that promote this building approach rather than expecting papers to conform to traditional standards of rigor as stand-alone papers, and believe that this shift in publishing philosophy would better encourage researchers to tackle the most urgent conservation problems.

Comparing sampling needs for variograms of soil properties computed by the method of moments and residual maximum likelihood

It has been generally accepted that the method of moments (MoM) variogram, which has been widely applied in soil science, requires about 100 sites at an appropriate interval apart to describe the variation adequately. This sample size is often larger than can be afforded for soil surveys of agricultural fields or contaminated sites. Furthermore, it might be a much larger sample size than is needed where the scale of variation is large. A possible alternative in such situations is the residual maximum likelihood (REML) variogram because fewer data appear to be required. The REML method is parametric and is considered reliable where there is trend in the data because it is based on generalized increments that filter trend out and only the covariance parameters are estimated. Previous research has suggested that fewer data are needed to compute a reliable variogram using a maximum likelihood approach such as REML, however, the results can vary according to the nature of the spatial variation. There remain issues to examine: how many fewer data can be used, how should the sampling sites be distributed over the site of interest, and how do different degrees of spatial variation affect the data requirements? The soil of four field sites of different size, physiography, parent material and soil type was sampled intensively, and MoM and REML variograms were calculated for clay content. The data were then sub-sampled to give different sample sizes and distributions of sites and the variograms were computed again. The model parameters for the sets of variograms for each site were used for cross-validation. Predictions based on REML variograms were generally more accurate than those from MoM variograms with fewer than 100 sampling sites. A sample size of around 50 sites at an appropriate distance apart, possibly determined from variograms of ancillary data, appears adequate to compute REML variograms for kriging soil properties for precision agriculture and contaminated sites. (C) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.