Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 468

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Investigating species co‐occurrence patterns when species are detected imperfectly

Open access
MacKenzie, Darryl I., Bailey, Larissa L., Nichols, James. D.·2004·Journal of Animal Ecology

Abstract

Summary: Over the last 30 years there has been a great deal of interest in investigating patterns of species co‐occurrence across a number of locations, which has led to the development of numerous methods to determine whether there is evidence that a particular pattern may not have occurred by random chance. A key aspect that seems to have been largely overlooked is the possibility that species may not always be detected at a location when present, which leads to ‘false absences’ in a species presence/absence matrix that may cause incorrect inferences to be made about co‐occurrence patterns. Furthermore, many of the published methods for investigating patterns of species co‐occurrence do not account for potential differences in the site characteristics that may partially (at least) explain non‐random patterns (e.g. due to species having similar/different habitat preferences). Here we present a statistical method for modelling co‐occurrence patterns between species while accounting for imperfect detection and site characteristics. This method requires that multiple presence/absence surveys for the species be conducted over a reasonably short period of time at most sites. The method yields unbiased estimates of probabilities of occurrence, and is practical when the number of species is small (< 4). To illustrate the method we consider data collected on two terrestrial salamander species, Plethodon jordani and members of the Plethodon glutinosus complex, collected in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, USA. We find no evidence that the species do not occur independently at sites once site elevation has been allowed for, although we find some evidence of a statistical interaction between species in terms of detectability that we suggest may be due to changes in relative abundances.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.0021-8790.2004.00828.x

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 41 references

Cited by

See all 468

Metadata

Authors
MacKenzie, D. I., Bailey, L. L., & Nichols, J. D.
Venue
Journal of Animal Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-04-16
Volume
73
Issue
3
Pages
546-555
ISSN
  • 0021-8790 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2656
OpenAlex
W2095982103
Cited by
468
References
41
FWCI
7.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Investigating species co‐occurrence patterns when species are detected imperfectly. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.0021-8790.2004.00828.x
The paper
MacKenzie, D. I., Bailey, L. L., & Nichols, J. D. (2004). Investigating species co‐occurrence patterns when species are detected imperfectly. Journal of Animal Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-8790.2004.00828.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.