Assessing accuracy and precision for field and laboratory data: a perspective in ecosystem restoration

Abstract

Unlike most laboratory studies, rigorous quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures may be lacking in ecosystem restoration (“ecorestoration”) projects, despite legislative mandates in the United States. This is due, in part, to ecorestoration specialists making the false assumption that some types of data (e.g. discrete variables such as species identification and abundance classes) are not subject to evaluations of data quality. Moreover, emergent behavior manifested by complex, adapting, and nonlinear organizations responsible for monitoring the success of ecorestoration projects tend to unconsciously minimize disorder, QA/QC being an activity perceived as creating disorder. We discuss similarities and differences in assessing precision and accuracy for field and laboratory data. Although the concepts for assessing precision and accuracy of ecorestoration field data are conceptually the same as laboratory data, the manner in which these data quality attributes are assessed is different. From a sample analysis perspective, a field crew is comparable to a laboratory instrument that requires regular “recalibration,” with results obtained by experts at the same plot treated as laboratory calibration standards. Unlike laboratory standards and reference materials, the “true” value for many field variables is commonly unknown. In the laboratory, specific QA/QC samples assess error for each aspect of the measurement process, whereas field revisits assess precision and accuracy of the entire data collection process following initial calibration. Rigorous QA/QC data in an ecorestoration project are essential for evaluating the success of a project, and they provide the only objective “legacy” of the dataset for potential legal challenges and future uses.

Nuclear and mitochondrial ribosomal ratio as an index of animal growth rate

“…However, changes in environmental conditions, such as temperature (Logan et al ; McCarthy et al ), nutrition (Urabe et al ), salinity (Boeuf and Payan ), and daylight cycle (Martínez‐Jerónimo ), could reduce the animal's growth rate. Therefore, differences in growth rates are expected based on spatial and temporal variation in environmental conditions (Stapanian et al ). However, an in situ estimation of growth rate from field samples is very difficult because it requires continuous observation of the specific individual or population (Shinn ; Wenner et al ; Audesirk ).…”

“…in environmental conditions (Stapanian et al 2016). However, an in situ estimation of growth rate from field samples is very difficult because it requires continuous observation of the specific individual or population (Shinn 1966;Wenner et al 1974;Audesirk 1979).…”

Announcement—guidance document for acquiring reliable data in ecological restoration projects

“…Chapman ; ANSI‐ASQ ). Furthermore, rigorous QA/QC data provide the only objective “legacy” of the dataset for potential legal challenges and for future uses (Stapanian et al and references therein). In particular, sample design and methodology, data quality, and qualifications of sampling crews are often the first aspects of an ecological restoration program that are examined by legal teams in litigation.…”

“…Suding ) to ensure the reliability of the data and to reduce uncertainty. Rigorous QA/QC procedures may be lacking for field data in ecological restoration projects, unlike most laboratory studies (reviewed by Stapanian et al ). Although the concepts for assessing data quality attributes (e.g.…”

“…precision and accuracy) of field data are conceptually the same as laboratory data, the manner in which they are assessed is different. Conceptually, a field crew is comparable to a laboratory instrument that requires regular “recalibration,” with results obtained by experts at the same plot treated as laboratory calibration standards (Stapanian et al ). Precision and accuracy can be quantified for each aspect of the measurement process in a laboratory study.…”