IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1005124.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Novel Covariance-Based Neutrality Test of Time-Series Data Reveals Asymmetries in Ecological and Economic Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Alex D Washburne
  • Joshua W Burby
  • Daniel Lacker

Abstract

Systems as diverse as the interacting species in a community, alleles at a genetic locus, and companies in a market are characterized by competition (over resources, space, capital, etc) and adaptation. Neutral theory, built around the hypothesis that individual performance is independent of group membership, has found utility across the disciplines of ecology, population genetics, and economics, both because of the success of the neutral hypothesis in predicting system properties and because deviations from these predictions provide information about the underlying dynamics. However, most tests of neutrality are weak, based on static system properties such as species-abundance distributions or the number of singletons in a sample. Time-series data provide a window onto a system’s dynamics, and should furnish tests of the neutral hypothesis that are more powerful to detect deviations from neutrality and more informative about to the type of competitive asymmetry that drives the deviation. Here, we present a neutrality test for time-series data. We apply this test to several microbial time-series and financial time-series and find that most of these systems are not neutral. Our test isolates the covariance structure of neutral competition, thus facilitating further exploration of the nature of asymmetry in the covariance structure of competitive systems. Much like neutrality tests from population genetics that use relative abundance distributions have enabled researchers to scan entire genomes for genes under selection, we anticipate our time-series test will be useful for quick significance tests of neutrality across a range of ecological, economic, and sociological systems for which time-series data are available. Future work can use our test to categorize and compare the dynamic fingerprints of particular competitive asymmetries (frequency dependence, volatility smiles, etc) to improve forecasting and management of complex adaptive systems.Author Summary: From fisheries and forestries to game parks and gut microbes, managing a community of organisms is much like managing a portfolio. Managers care about diversity, and calculations of risk—for extinction or financial ruin—require accurate models of the covariance between the parts of the portfolio. To model the covariances in portfolios or communities which may have some direct or diffuse competition over limiting resources, it helps to start simple with a null model assuming the equivalence of species or companies relative to one another (termed “neutrality”) and then testing whether or not the data suggest otherwise. Researchers in biology and finance have independently entertained and tested neutral models, but the existing tests have used snapshots of communities or the variance of fluctuations of individual populations, whereas tests of the covariances between species can better inform the development of alternative models. We develop a covariance-based neutrality test for time-series data and use it to show that the human microbiome, North American birds, and companies in the S&P 500 all have a similar deviation from neutrality. Understanding and incorporating this non-neutral covariance structure can yield more accurate alternative models of community dynamics which can improve our management of “portfolios” of multi-species systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Alex D Washburne & Joshua W Burby & Daniel Lacker, 2016. "Novel Covariance-Based Neutrality Test of Time-Series Data Reveals Asymmetries in Ecological and Economic Systems," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-14, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1005124
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005124
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005124
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005124&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005124?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rémy Chicheportiche & Jean-Philippe Bouchaud, 2011. "Goodness-of-Fit tests with Dependent Observations," Post-Print hal-00621061, HAL.
    2. Lawrence A. David & Corinne F. Maurice & Rachel N. Carmody & David B. Gootenberg & Julie E. Button & Benjamin E. Wolfe & Alisha V. Ling & A. Sloan Devlin & Yug Varma & Michael A. Fischbach & Sudha B. , 2014. "Diet rapidly and reproducibly alters the human gut microbiome," Nature, Nature, vol. 505(7484), pages 559-563, January.
    3. Jérôme Chave & David Alonso & Rampal S. Etienne, 2006. "Comparing models of species abundance," Nature, Nature, vol. 441(7089), pages 1-1, May.
    4. Remy Chicheportiche & Jean-Philippe Bouchaud, 2011. "Goodness-of-Fit tests with Dependent Observations," Papers 1106.3016, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2011.
    5. White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-838, May.
    6. Igor Volkov & Jayanth R. Banavar & Stephen P. Hubbell & Amos Maritan, 2003. "Neutral theory and relative species abundance in ecology," Nature, Nature, vol. 424(6952), pages 1035-1037, August.
    7. Black, Fischer & Scholes, Myron S, 1973. "The Pricing of Options and Corporate Liabilities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 81(3), pages 637-654, May-June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yeap, Claudia & Kwok, Simon S. & Choy, S. T. Boris, 2016. "A Flexible Generalised Hyperbolic Option Pricing Model and its Special Cases," Working Papers 2016-14, University of Sydney, School of Economics.
    2. Markus Natter, 2018. "Options‐based benchmark indices—A review of performance and (in)appropriate measures," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(2), pages 271-288, February.
    3. Linnenluecke, Martina K. & Chen, Xiaoyan & Ling, Xin & Smith, Tom & Zhu, Yushu, 2017. "Research in finance: A review of influential publications and a research agenda," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 188-199.
    4. Yenn-Ru Chen & Carl R. Chen & Chih-Kang Chu, 2014. "The Effect of Executive Stock Options on Corporate Innovative Activities," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 43(2), pages 271-290, June.
    5. Mamatzakis, E & Koutsomanoli, A, 2009. "Risk in the EU banking industry and efficiency under quantile analysis," MPRA Paper 22492, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Core, John E. & Schrand, Catherine M., 1999. "The effect of accounting-based debt covenants on equity valuation1," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 1-34, February.
    7. Muhammad Zaim Razak & Haniza Khalid & Azhar Mohamad, 2018. "Speculative Behavior in Vacant Land Development: Evidence for Real Options in Malaysia," The Developing Economies, Institute of Developing Economies, vol. 56(4), pages 245-266, December.
    8. William R. Emmons & Frank A. Schmid, 2000. "The Asian crisis and the exposure of large U.S. firms," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, vol. 82(Jan), pages 15-34.
    9. Andreou, Christoforos K. & Lambertides, Neophytos & Panayides, Photis M., 2021. "Distress risk anomaly and misvaluation," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(5).
    10. Maclachlan, Iain C, 2007. "An empirical study of corporate bond pricing with unobserved capital structure dynamics," MPRA Paper 28416, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Gouriéroux, Christian, 1994. "Modèles économétriques : utilisation et interprétation (les)," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Couverture Orange) 9423, CEPREMAP.
    12. Baller, Stefanie & Entrop, Oliver & Schober, Alexander & Wilkens, Marco, 2017. "What drives performance in the speculative market of short-term exchange-traded retail products?," Passauer Diskussionspapiere, Betriebswirtschaftliche Reihe B-26-17, University of Passau, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    13. Vajanne, Laura, . "The Exchange Rate Under Target Zones," ETLA A, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy, number 16, June.
    14. Zhang, Hong & Wu, Zheyang, 2022. "The general goodness-of-fit tests for correlated data," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    15. Vance Martin & Yoshihiko Nishiyama & John Stachurski, 2011. "A Goodness of Fit Test for Ergodic Markov Processes," ANU Working Papers in Economics and Econometrics 2011-557, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics.
    16. Gueyie, Jean-Pierre & Lai, Van Son, 2003. "Bank moral hazard and the introduction of official deposit insurance in Canada," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 247-273.
    17. Norden, Lars, 2001. "Hedging of American equity options: do call and put prices always move in the direction as predicted by the movement in the underlying stock price?," Journal of Multinational Financial Management, Elsevier, vol. 11(4-5), pages 321-340, December.
    18. Nikkinen, Jussi & Sahlstrom, Petri, 2004. "International transmission of uncertainty implicit in stock index option prices," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15.
    19. Asjeet S. Lamba & Vivek M. Miranda, 2010. "The Role of Executive Stock Options in On‐Market Share Buybacks," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 10(3), pages 339-363, September.
    20. Benjamin M Blau & Ryan J Whitby, 2017. "Range-based volatility, expected stock returns, and the low volatility anomaly," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(11), pages 1-19, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1005124. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.