Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
POOR STATISTICAL PERFORMANCE OF THE MANTEL TEST IN PHYLOGENETIC COMPARATIVE ANALYSES
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
POOR STATISTICAL PERFORMANCE OF THE MANTEL TEST IN PHYLOGENETIC COMPARATIVE ANALYSES
Do you wish to request the book?
POOR STATISTICAL PERFORMANCE OF THE MANTEL TEST IN PHYLOGENETIC COMPARATIVE ANALYSES
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
POOR STATISTICAL PERFORMANCE OF THE MANTEL TEST IN PHYLOGENETIC COMPARATIVE ANALYSES
2010
Overview
The Mantel test, based on comparisons of distance matrices, is commonly employed in comparative biology, but its statistical properties in this context are unknown. Here, we evaluate the performance of the Mantel test for two applications in comparative biology: testing for phylogenetic signal, and testing for an evolutionary correlation between two characters. We find that the Mantel test has poor performance compared to alternative methods, including low power and, under some circumstances, inflated type-l error. We identify a remedy for the inflated type-l error of three-way Mantel tests using phylogenetic permutations; however, this test still has considerably lower power than independent contrasts. We recommend that use of the Mantel test should be restricted to cases in which data can only be expressed as pairwise distances among taxa.
Publisher
Blackwell Publishing Inc,Wiley Periodicals Inc,Oxford University Press
Subject
