JEQ Grow Your Career With ASA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published in J Environ Qual 25:578-583 (1996)
© 1996 American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Haarstad, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Haarstad, K.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Haarstad, K.

A Comparison of Distribution Tests and Relevant Point and Interval Estimators

Ketil Haarstad*

JORDFORSK, Centre for Soil and Environ. Res., 1432 Ås, Norway.

* Corresponding author (ketil.haarstad{at}jordforsk.nlh.no).

ABSTRACT

This is a study of samples from natural, terrestrial environments, with coefficients of variation ranging from 4 to 211%. To select estimators, physical and chemical sample distributions are separated into three categories: normal (N), lognormal (LN), and nonparametric (NP) distributions. The type of distribution is given by (i) the Lilliefors procedure of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test (KST), (ii) the Shapiro-Wilk test (SWT), or (iii) the Skewness test (ST). For 46 samples, 14 (30%) were NP, 14 (30%) were LN, and 18 (39%) were N, based on test (i). Test (ii) gave 14 (30%) NP, 19 (41%) LN, and 13 (28%) N. Only 29 of the 46 samples could be tested by Method (iii) due to the limit on minimum sample size of 25:11 (38%) were NP, 9 (31%) LN, and 9 N. The KST and SWT disagreed in 35% of the samples, whereas KST and ST disagreed in 24% of the samples. The SWT disagreed with ST results in 10% of the samples, when categorizing the distributions at a significance level of 5%. The ratio between the selected point estimator and the mean varied from 13 to 249%, with mean values of 73% for NP and 112% for LN. The ratio between the selected interval estimator and the range varied from 2 to 71%. It is not possible to characterize one of the distribution tests as superior to the others based on the results from this study.


Received for publication April 17, 1995.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Vadose Zone Journal
Soil Science Society of America Journal Journal of Plant Registrations The Plant Genome
Copyright © 1996 by the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America.