Skip to main content
. 2015 Jul 6;10(7):e0132538. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0132538

Table 2. The optimality criteria of the 16 analytical (weighting and clustering) and consensus approaches employed.

Weighting Unweighted Inverse Bell Integration Consensus CoE Consensus Sub-CoE
Coefficient J K2 S PAE J K2 S PAE J K2 S PAE J K2 S PAE
# Characters* 4,300 4,300 4,300 4,300 15,987 15,987 15,987 15,987 16,954 16,954 16,954 16,954 17,029 17,029 17,029 17,029
# CoE endemics 463 472 299 448 490 491 395 483 496 522 404 472 466 476 418 463 1,551 1,141
# CoE taxa 4,144 4,169 3,909 4,112 4,199 4,218 4,156 4,193 4,212 4,244 4,200 4,179 4,187 4,217 4,173 4,177 4,347 4,089
# CoEs 47 57 53 38 57 67 63 57 63 66 67 59 59 68 63 60 66 57
# of cells in CoEs 177 197 156 162 208 241 229 203 223 256 251 201 201 237 237 199 397 112

“# Characters” = number of characters generated by a weighting technique for the site by taxon matrices; # CoE endemics = numbers of taxa endemic to the CoEs; # CoE taxa = the total number of taxa represented in the CoEs; # CoEs = the total number of CoEs retrieved; # of cells in CoEs = the total number of cells assigned to CoEs, i.e. CoE area) for the individual weighting techniques and similarity measures. J = Jaccard, K2 = Kulczinsky2, S = Simpson.