Allometry, Antilog Transformations, and the Perils of Prediction on the Original Scale
Authors:
- Jack P. HayesJHJack P. Hayes
- J. Scott ShonkwilerJSJ. Scott Shonkwiler
- 1 May 2006
- journal article
- research article
- Published by University of Chicago Press in Physiological and Biochemical Zoology
- Vol. 79 (3) , 665-674
Abstract
Biologists often use allometric equations that take the form of power functions (e.g., Y = aM(b), where M stands for mass and a and b are empirically fitted constants). Typically, these allometric equations are fitted by taking the antilog of log-log regressions. Predictions from these allometric equations are biased, and the bias my be appreciable. Methods for making predictions that correct for the bias are available, but they have rarely, if ever, been used by ecological and evolutionary physiologists. Just as physiologists would not use an instrument that was not properly calibrated, they should not use allometric equations to make predictions unless they account for the bias of those predictions. We analyzed 20 interspecific and 10 intraspecific data sets. We compared predictions from standard allometric equations with those from several alternative methods. Our analyses suggest that the bias of predictions from interspecific data sets may be substantial. For the intraspecific data sets we analyzed, the bias was likely to be small. Biologists, including ecological and evolutionary physiologists, should exercise care when using allometric equations to make predictions, particularly given that methods to adjust for bias are easily implemented.Keywords
This publication has 37 references indexed in Scilit:
- Kidney Mass and Relative Medullary Thickness of Rodents in Relation to Habitat, Body Size, and PhylogenyPhysiological and Biochemical Zoology, 2004
- Likelihood‐based confidence intervals for a log‐normal meanStatistics in Medicine, 2003
- Energy Expenditure and Water Flux of Rüppell’s Foxes in Saudi ArabiaPhysiological and Biochemical Zoology, 2002
- CONFIDENCE INTERVALS FOR THE LOG-NORMAL MEANStatistics in Medicine, 1997
- Bootstrap One-Sided Confidence Intervals for the Log-Normal MeanJournal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series D (The Statistician), 1994
- Determination of relative size: The “criterion of subtraction” problem in allometryJournal of Theoretical Biology, 1984
- Smearing Estimate: A Nonparametric Retransformation MethodJournal of the American Statistical Association, 1983
- A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for HeteroskedasticityEconometrica, 1980
- Estimation in Lognormal Linear ModelsJournal of the American Statistical Association, 1970
- On the Distribution of a Variate Whose Logarithm is Normally DistributedJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology, 1941