The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Using the negative binomial distribution to model overdispersion in ecological count data
Abstract
A Poisson process is a commonly used starting point for modeling stochastic variation of ecological count data around a theoretical expectation. However, data typically show more variation than implied by the Poisson distribution. Such overdispersion is often accounted for by using models with different assumptions about how the variance changes with the expectation. The choice of these assumptions can naturally have apparent consequences for statistical inference. We propose a parameterization of the negative binomial distribution, where two overdispersion parameters are introduced to allow for various quadratic mean-variance relationships, including the ones assumed in the most commonly used approaches. Using bird migration as an example, we present hypothetical scenarios on how overdispersion can arise due to sampling, flocking behavior or aggregation, environmental variability, or combinations of these factors. For all considered scenarios, mean-variance relationships can be appropriately described by the negative binomial distribution with two overdispersion parameters. To illustrate, we apply the model to empirical migration data with a high level of overdispersion, gaining clearly different model fits with different assumptions about mean-variance relationships. The proposed framework can be a useful approximation for modeling marginal distributions of independent count data in likelihood-based analyses.
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.
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
Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach.
Guthery, F. S., Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. (2003) · The Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.2307/3802723 · Cited by 41,495
Zero-Inflated Poisson Regression, with an Application to Defects in Manufacturing
Lambert, D. (1992) · Technometrics · doi:10.2307/1269547 · Cited by 3,988
Cited by
Spread and dynamics of the COVID-19 epidemic in Italy: Effects of emergency containment measures
Gatto, M., Bertuzzo, E., Mari, L., Miccoli, S., Carraro, L., Casagrandi, R., & Rinaldo, A. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2004978117 · Cited by 1,051
Thorson, J. T. (2019) · Fisheries Research · doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2018.10.013 · Cited by 304
For testing the significance of regression coefficients, go ahead and log‐transform count data
Ives, A. R. (2015) · Methods in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.12386 · Cited by 248
Three points to consider when choosing a LM or GLM test for count data
Warton, D. I., Lyons, M., Stoklosa, J., & Ives, A. R. (2016) · Methods in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.12552 · Cited by 192
Park, T. H., Park, S., Cho, M. K., & Kim, S. (2022) · Clinical and Experimental Dermatology · doi:10.1111/ced.14910 · Cited by 67
Metadata
- Authors
- Lindén, A., & Mäntyniemi, S.
- Venue
- Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-07
- Volume
- 92
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1414-1421
- ISSN
- 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2116100710
- Cited by
- 558
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 10.29
- 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: Using the negative binomial distribution to model overdispersion in ecological count data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1890/10-1831.1
- The paper
- Lindén, A., & Mäntyniemi, S. (2011). Using the negative binomial distribution to model overdispersion in ecological count data. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1890/10-1831.1
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.