IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0157985.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Evaluation of the Plant Density Estimator the Point-Centred Quarter Method (PCQM) Using Monte Carlo Simulation

Author

Listed:
  • Md Nabiul Islam Khan
  • Renske Hijbeek
  • Uta Berger
  • Nico Koedam
  • Uwe Grueters
  • S M Zahirul Islam
  • Md Asadul Hasan
  • Farid Dahdouh-Guebas

Abstract

Background: In the Point-Centred Quarter Method (PCQM), the mean distance of the first nearest plants in each quadrant of a number of random sample points is converted to plant density. It is a quick method for plant density estimation. In recent publications the estimator equations of simple PCQM (PCQM1) and higher order ones (PCQM2 and PCQM3, which uses the distance of the second and third nearest plants, respectively) show discrepancy. This study attempts to review PCQM estimators in order to find the most accurate equation form. We tested the accuracy of different PCQM equations using Monte Carlo Simulations in simulated (having ‘random’, ‘aggregated’ and ‘regular’ spatial patterns) plant populations and empirical ones. Principal Findings: PCQM requires at least 50 sample points to ensure a desired level of accuracy. PCQM with a corrected estimator is more accurate than with a previously published estimator. The published PCQM versions (PCQM1, PCQM2 and PCQM3) show significant differences in accuracy of density estimation, i.e. the higher order PCQM provides higher accuracy. However, the corrected PCQM versions show no significant differences among them as tested in various spatial patterns except in plant assemblages with a strong repulsion (plant competition). If N is number of sample points and R is distance, the corrected estimator of PCQM1 is 4(4N − 1)/(π ∑ R2) but not 12N/(π ∑ R2), of PCQM2 is 4(8N − 1)/(π ∑ R2) but not 28N/(π ∑ R2) and of PCQM3 is 4(12N − 1)/(π ∑ R2) but not 44N/(π ∑ R2) as published. Significance: If the spatial pattern of a plant association is random, PCQM1 with a corrected equation estimator and over 50 sample points would be sufficient to provide accurate density estimation. PCQM using just the nearest tree in each quadrant is therefore sufficient, which facilitates sampling of trees, particularly in areas with just a few hundred trees per hectare. PCQM3 provides the best density estimations for all types of plant assemblages including the repulsion process. Since in practice, the spatial pattern of a plant association remains unknown before starting a vegetation survey, for field applications the use of PCQM3 along with the corrected estimator is recommended. However, for sparse plant populations, where the use of PCQM3 may pose practical limitations, the PCQM2 or PCQM1 would be applied. During application of PCQM in the field, care should be taken to summarize the distance data based on ‘the inverse summation of squared distances’ but not ‘the summation of inverse squared distances’ as erroneously published.

Suggested Citation

  • Md Nabiul Islam Khan & Renske Hijbeek & Uta Berger & Nico Koedam & Uwe Grueters & S M Zahirul Islam & Md Asadul Hasan & Farid Dahdouh-Guebas, 2016. "An Evaluation of the Plant Density Estimator the Point-Centred Quarter Method (PCQM) Using Monte Carlo Simulation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-18, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0157985
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0157985
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0157985
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0157985&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0157985?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. Grimm, Volker & Berger, Uta & DeAngelis, Donald L. & Polhill, J. Gary & Giske, Jarl & Railsback, Steven F., 2010. "The ODD protocol: A review and first update," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(23), pages 2760-2768.
    2. Renske Hijbeek & Nico Koedam & Md Nabiul Islam Khan & James Gitundu Kairo & Johan Schoukens & Farid Dahdouh-Guebas, 2013. "An Evaluation of Plotless Sampling Using Vegetation Simulations and Field Data from a Mangrove Forest," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(6), pages 1-10, June.
    3. Baddeley, Adrian & Turner, Rolf, 2005. "spatstat: An R Package for Analyzing Spatial Point Patterns," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 12(i06).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Reza BASIRI & Mostafa MORADI & Bahman KIANI & Maryam MAASUMI BABAARABI, 2018. "Evaluation of distance methods for estimating population density in Populus euphratica Olivier natural stands (case study: Maroon riparian forests, Iran)," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 64(5), pages 230-244.

    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. Arundel, Jonathan & Oldroyd, Benjamin P. & Winter, Stephan, 2012. "Modelling honey bee queen mating as a measure of feral colony density," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 247(C), pages 48-57.
    2. Arundel, Jonathan & Oldroyd, Benjamin P. & Winter, Stephan, 2013. "Modelling estimates of honey bee (Apis spp.) colony density from drones," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 267(C), pages 1-10.
    3. Grueters, U. & Seltmann, T. & Schmidt, H. & Horn, H. & Pranchai, A. & Vovides, A.G. & Peters, R. & Vogt, J. & Dahdouh-Guebas, F. & Berger, U., 2014. "The mangrove forest dynamics model mesoFON," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 291(C), pages 28-41.
    4. Tardy, Olivia & Lenglos, Christophe & Lai, Sandra & Berteaux, Dominique & Leighton, Patrick A., 2023. "Rabies transmission in the Arctic: An agent-based model reveals the effects of broad-scale movement strategies on contact risk between Arctic foxes," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 476(C).
    5. Vimercati, Giovanni & Hui, Cang & Davies, Sarah J. & Measey, G. John, 2017. "Integrating age structured and landscape resistance models to disentangle invasion dynamics of a pond-breeding anuran," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 356(C), pages 104-116.
    6. Arii, Ken & Caspersen, John P. & Jones, Trevor A. & Thomas, Sean C., 2008. "A selection harvesting algorithm for use in spatially explicit individual-based forest simulation models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 211(3), pages 251-266.
    7. Jagadish, Arundhati & Dwivedi, Puneet & McEntire, Kira D. & Chandar, Mamta, 2019. "Agent-based modeling of “cleaner” cookstove adoption and woodfuel use: An integrative empirical approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-1.
    8. Jiao Jieying & Hu Guanyu & Yan Jun, 2021. "A Bayesian marked spatial point processes model for basketball shot chart," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 17(2), pages 77-90, June.
    9. Hinker, Jonas & Hemkendreis, Christian & Drewing, Emily & März, Steven & Hidalgo Rodríguez, Diego I. & Myrzik, Johanna M.A., 2017. "A novel conceptual model facilitating the derivation of agent-based models for analyzing socio-technical optimality gaps in the energy domain," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 1219-1230.
    10. Frank Davenport, 2017. "Estimating standard errors in spatial panel models with time varying spatial correlation," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 96, pages 155-177, March.
    11. Tianran Ding & Wouter Achten, 2023. "Coupling agent-based modeling with territorial LCA to support agricultural land-use planning," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/359527, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    12. Jascha-Alexander Koch & Jens Lausen & Moritz Kohlhase, 2021. "Internalizing the externalities of overfunding: an agent-based model approach for analyzing the market dynamics on crowdfunding platforms," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 91(9), pages 1387-1430, November.
    13. Crevier, Lucas Phillip & Salkeld, Joseph H & Marley, Jessa & Parrott, Lael, 2021. "Making the best possible choice: Using agent-based modelling to inform wildlife management in small communities," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 446(C).
    14. Leandro, Camila & Jay-Robert, Pierre & Mériguet, Bruno & Houard, Xavier & Renner, Ian W., 2020. "Is my sdm good enough? insights from a citizen science dataset in a point process modeling framework," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 438(C).
    15. Ulfia A. Lenfers & Julius Weyl & Thomas Clemen, 2018. "Firewood Collection in South Africa: Adaptive Behavior in Social-Ecological Models," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-17, August.
    16. David, Viviane & Joachim, Sandrine & Tebby, Cleo & Porcher, Jean-Marc & Beaudouin, Rémy, 2019. "Modelling population dynamics in mesocosms using an individual-based model coupled to a bioenergetics model," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 398(C), pages 55-66.
    17. Lorscheid, Iris & Meyer, Matthias, 2016. "Divide and conquer: Configuring submodels for valid and efficient analyses of complex simulation models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 326(C), pages 152-161.
    18. Moritz Kersting & Andreas Bossert & Leif Sörensen & Benjamin Wacker & Jan Chr. Schlüter, 2021. "Predicting effectiveness of countermeasures during the COVID-19 outbreak in South Africa using agent-based simulation," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-15, December.
    19. Meli, Mattia & Auclerc, Apolline & Palmqvist, Annemette & Forbes, Valery E. & Grimm, Volker, 2013. "Population-level consequences of spatially heterogeneous exposure to heavy metals in soil: An individual-based model of springtails," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 250(C), pages 338-351.
    20. Groeneveld, Jürgen & Johst, Karin & Kawaguchi, So & Meyer, Bettina & Teschke, Mathias & Grimm, Volker, 2015. "How biological clocks and changing environmental conditions determine local population growth and species distribution in Antarctic krill (Euphausia superba): a conceptual model," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 303(C), pages 78-86.

    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:pone00:0157985. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.