CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 110Academic Publishing and Open AccessResearch Data Management PracticesMeta-analysis and systematic reviews

Replicating research in ecology and evolution: feasibility, incentives, and the cost-benefit conundrum

Open access
Nakagawa, Shinichi, Parker, Timothy H.·2015·BMC Biology
DOI 10.1186/s12915-015-0196-3PMC PMC4624660
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We believe that replicating studies in ecology and evolution is extremely valuable, but replication within species and systems is troublingly rare, and even 'quasi-replications' in different systems are often insufficient. We make a case for supporting multiple types of replications and point out that the current incentive structure needs to change if ecologists and evolutionary biologist are to value scientific replication sufficiently.

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 · 10.1186/s12915-015-0196-3

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • The tautological structure of the Kauffman and Cummings model invalidates Ripple et al.'s analysis because applying it violates the principle that conclusions must be supported by evidence independent of the data used to generate them.

    “The tautological structure of the Kauffman and Cummings model invalidates Ripple et al.'s analysis because applying it violates the scientific principle that conclusions must be supported by evidence that is independent of the data used to generate them (Hurlbert 1984; Nakagawa & Parker 2015).”

    From Flawed analysis invalidates claim of a strong Yellowstone trophic cascade after wolf reintroduction: A comment on Ripple et al. (2025) (2025) · cites this paper as Nakagawa & Parker 2015

    The sections “What role should replication play in evolution and ecology?” and “Scientific replication and generality” argue that separate replications strengthen confidence in findings and help assess validity. They do not discuss the Kauffman and Cummings model or Ripple et al.’s analysis, nor do they state a categorical rule that using the same data to develop and support a conclusion invalidates it. The paper supports the general value of independent testing, but not the specific methodological judgment attributed to it. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 21

  1. [2]Carpenter S Psychology’s bold initiative Science 2012 335 1558 61 10.1126/science.335.6076.1558 22461583 · DOI
  2. [3]Klein RA Ratliff KA Vianello M Adams RB Jr Bahník Š Bernstein MJ Investigating variation in replicability Soc Psychol Germany 2014 45 142 52 10.1027/1864-9335/a000178 · DOI · Paper page
  3. [5]Seguin A Forstmeier W No band color effects on male courtship rate or body mass in the zebra finch: four experiments and a meta-analysis PLoS One 2012 7 10.1371/journal.pone.0037785 22685545 PMC3369886 · DOI
  4. [6]Parker TH What do we really know about the signalling role of plumage colour in blue tits? A case study of impediments to progress in evolutionary biology Biol Rev 2013 88 511 36 10.1111/brv.12013 23279555 · DOI
  5. [7]Jennions MD Moller AP Relationships fade with time: a meta-analysis of temporal trends in publication in ecology and evolution Proc Biol Sci 2002 269 43 8 10.1098/rspb.2001.1832 11788035 PMC1690867 · DOI
  6. [8]Jennions MD Moller AP Publication bias in ecology and evolution: an empirical assessment using the ‘trim and fill’ method Biol Rev 2002 77 211 22 10.1017/S1464793101005875 12056747 · DOI
  7. [9]Palmer AR Quasi-replication and the contract of error: lessons from sex ratios, heritabilities and fluctuating asymmetry Annu Rev Ecol Syst 2000 31 441 80 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.31.1.441 · DOI · Paper page
  8. [10]Kelly CD Replicating empirical research in behavioral ecology: How and why it should be done but rarely ever is Q Rev Biol 2006 81 221 36 10.1086/506236 17051829 · DOI
  9. [12]Chan KMA Value and advocacy in conservation biology: Crisis discipline or discipline in crisis ? Conserv Biol 2008 22 1 3 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00869.x 18254846 · DOI
  10. [13]Clutton-Brock T Sheldon BC Individuals and populations: the role of long-term, individual-based studies of animals in ecology and evolutionary biology Trends Ecol Evol 2010 25 562 73 10.1016/j.tree.2010.08.002 20828863 · DOI
  11. [15]Nakagawa S Poulin R Meta-analytic insights into evolutionary ecology: an introduction and synthesis Evol Ecol 2012 26 1085 99 10.1007/s10682-012-9593-z · DOI · Paper page
  12. [18]Korsten P Dijkstra TH Komdeur J Is UV signalling involved in male-male territorial conflict in the blue tit (Cyanistes caeruleus)? A new experimental approach Behaviour 2007 144 447 70 10.1163/156853907780756030 · DOI
  13. [19]Remy A Gregoire A Perret P Doutrelant C Mediating male-male interactions: the role of the UV blue crest coloration in blue tits Behav Ecol Sociobiol 2010 64 1839 47 10.1007/s00265-010-0995-z · DOI
  14. [23]Siepielski AM DiBattista JD Carlson SM It’s about time: the temporal dynamics of phenotypic selection in the wild Ecol Lett 2009 12 1261 76 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01381.x 19740111 · DOI
  15. [24]Morrissey M Hadfield J Directional selection in temporally replicated studies is remarkably consistent Evol Int J Org Evol 2012 66 435 42 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2011.01444.x 22276539 · DOI
  16. [25]Tian X Azpurua J Hine C Vaidya A Myakishev-Rempel M Ablaeva J High-molecular-mass hyaluronan mediates the cancer resistance of the naked mole rat Nature 2013 499 346 U122 10.1038/nature12234 23783513 PMC3720720 · DOI
  17. [27]McNutt M Journals unite for reproducibility Science 2014 346 679 10.1126/science.aaa1724 25383411 · DOI
  18. [28]Simons DJ Holcombe AO Spellman BA An introduction to registered replication reports at perspectives on psychological science Perspect Psychol Sci 2014 9 552 5 10.1177/1745691614543974 26186757 · DOI
  19. [30]Endler JA Writing scientific papers, with special reference to evolutionary ecology Evol Ecol 2015 29 465 78 10.1007/s10682-015-9773-8 · DOI
  20. [31]Kelly CD Jennions MD The h index and career assessment by numbers Trends Ecol Evol 2006 21 167 70 10.1016/j.tree.2006.01.005 16701079 · DOI
  21. [32]Westneat DF Bokony V Burke T Chastel O Jensen H Kvalnes T Multiple aspects of plasticity in clutch size vary among populations of a globally distributed songbird J Anim Ecol 2014 83 876 87 10.1111/1365-2656.12191 24286484 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nakagawa, S., & Parker, T. H.
Affiliations
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • Whitman College (US)
Corresponding author
Nakagawa, Shinichi
ORCID
Nakagawa, Shinichi
Venue
BMC Biology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2015-10-28
Volume
13
Issue
1
Pages
88-88
ISSN
1741-7007 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/s12915-015-0196-3
PMC
PMC4624660
OpenAlex
W1848063219
Cited by
110
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 9
FWCI
3.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • BMC Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Australian Research Council (FT130100268)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Research Data Management Practices
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Keywords
replication, ecology, evolution, research incentives, research funding
MeSH terms
Cost-Benefit Analysis, Ecology, Biological Evolution, Genetic Techniques, Research Design

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