F. Mekik et P. Loubere, Quantitative paleo-estimation: hypothetical experiments with extrapolationand the no-analog problem, MAR MICROPA, 36(4), 1999, pp. 225-248
We experiment with artificial data to test the response of five numerical t
echniques in extrapolating paleo-environments for no-analog conditions. No-
analog conditions are those beyond the technique calibration (modern) data
set and will be encountered in applications to the geologic past, though th
ey may not be easy to recognize. In the ideal, a numerical technique will c
orrectly extrapolate to no-analog conditions. Failing this, the technique w
ill have a consistent, predictable error response to increasing no-analog c
onditions, as these are measured by a reliable index. The no-analog conditi
ons that we used are a natural extension of the calibration conditions we c
reated. Thus we test techniques for their response to shifting environmenta
l conditions rather than for factors unrelated to the ecology of the taxa (
e.g. post-depositional fossil preservation). Five numerical techniques we t
est with our hypothetical data are (1) multivariate regression of species p
ercents, (2) correlation-based principal components with linear regression,
(3) covariance-based principal components with linear regression, (4) corr
elation-based principal components with non-linear regression, and (5) the
Imbrie and Kipp technique. All the techniques show increasing estimation er
ror as conditions depart from those of the calibration data set. There are
two main causes of error in our estimates: (1) the distorting effects of ma
trix closure on taxon abundances; and (2) generation of ratio no-analogs am
ong species abundances because of non-linear responses to conditions depart
ing progressively from the calibration range. With all the techniques, the
distribution of error for no-analog conditions is complex. Non-linear regre
ssion with factors shows the least predictable error response. We found tha
t currently developed no-analog indicators do not have a good correlation t
o estimation error. This means that better indicators, more closely linked
to the accuracy of estimates, need to be developed. (C) 1999 Elsevier Scien
ce B.V. All rights reserved.