The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Do not log‐transform count data
Abstract
Summary: 1. Ecological count data (e.g. number of individuals or species) are often log‐transformed to satisfy parametric test assumptions. 2. Apart from the fact that generalized linear models are better suited in dealing with count data, a log‐transformation of counts has the additional quandary in how to deal with zero observations. With just one zero observation (if this observation represents a sampling unit), the whole data set needs to be fudged by adding a value (usually 1) before transformation. 3. Simulating data from a negative binomial distribution, we compared the outcome of fitting models that were transformed in various ways (log, square root) with results from fitting models using quasi‐Poisson and negative binomial models to untransformed count data. 4. We found that the transformations performed poorly, except when the dispersion was small and the mean counts were large. The quasi‐Poisson and negative binomial models consistently performed well, with little bias. 5. We recommend that count data should not be analysed by log‐transforming it, but instead models based on Poisson and negative binomial distributions should be used.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Leaving the covariates untransformed following literature guidance for count data in ecology (O'Hara & Kotze, 2010), log-transforming the covariates with listwise deletion of zero counts and log-transforming the covariates with zero counts handled by adding a constant prior to log transformation obtained similar findings; conclusions were not changed.”
From Bigfoot: If it's there, could it be a bear? (2024) · cites this paper as O'Hara & Kotze, 2010
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
McCullagh, P., & Nelder, J. A. (1989) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-3242-6 · Cited by 16,836
Quasi-Poisson vs. negative binomial regression: how should we model overdispersed count data?
Ver Hoef, J. M., & Boveng, P. L. (2007) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/07-0043.1 · Cited by 1,238
Research works printed but not linked: 20
- Box G.E.P., 1964, An analysis of transformations, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B, 26, 211, 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1964.tb00553.x · DOI · Paper page
- Crawley M.J., 2003, Statistical Computing. An Introduction to Data Analysis using S‐Plus
- 10.1016/j.envpol.2007.06.073 · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2007.06.073
- 10.1111/j.0013-8703.2004.00158.x · DOI
- 10.1023/A:1014514007744 · doi:10.1023/a:1014514007744
- 10.1139/f03-149 · doi:10.1139/f03-149
- 10.1007/s10531-004-7307-8 · doi:10.1007/s10531-004-7307-8
- Maindonald J., 2007, Data Analysis and Graphics Using R – An Example‐Based Approach
- Miller R.G., 1997, Beyond anova, 10.1201/b15236 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.5735/086.046.0205 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2134/agronj2008.0226x · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2009.03.024 · DOI
- Sokal R.R., 1995, Biometry
- 10.1007/978-0-387-21706-2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2307/2265753 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2307/2845487 · DOI · Paper page
- Zar J.H., 1999, Biostatistical Analysis
- 10.1007/978-0-387-45972-1 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/978-0-387-87458-6 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.2041-210X.2009.00001.x · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
A brief introduction to mixed effects modelling and multi-model inference in ecology
Harrison, X. A., Donaldson, L., Correa-Cano, M. E., Evans, J., Fisher, D. N., Goodwin, C. E. D., Robinson, B. S., Hodgson, D. J., & Inger, R. (2018) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.4794 · Cited by 2,094
Harrison, X. A. (2014) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.616 · Cited by 1,150
So Many Variables: Joint Modeling in Community Ecology
Warton, D. I., Blanchet, F. G., O’Hara, R. B., Ovaskainen, O., Taskinen, S., Walker, S. C., & Hui, F. K. C. (2015) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2015.09.007 · Cited by 854
Self-citationCan You Gig It? An Empirical Examination of the Gig Economy and Entrepreneurial Activity
Burtch, G., Carnahan, S., & Greenwood, B. N. (2018) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2017.2916 · Cited by 785
Violating the normality assumption may be the lesser of two evils
Knief, U., & Forstmeier, W. (2021) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-021-01587-5 · Cited by 654
Metadata
- Authors
- O’Hara, R. B., & Kotze, D. J.
- Venue
- Methods in Ecology and Evolution
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-05-04
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 118-122
- ISSN
- 2041-210X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1644145788
- Cited by
- 1,268
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 37.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Do not log‐transform count data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.2041-210x.2010.00021.x
- The paper
- O’Hara, R. B., & Kotze, D. J. (2010). Do not log‐transform count data. Methods in Ecology and Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-210x.2010.00021.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.