I am a PhD student, dealing with European weed vegetation and I'm using your iNext R package, which is great, together with the manuals!
At one analysis I got an error, saying:
Warning message:
In Fun(x, q) :
Insufficient data to provide reliable estimators and associated s.e.
The function was: curve<iNEXT(dataset, q=0, datatype="incidence_freq", size=NULL, endpoint=NULL, knots=40, se=TRUE, conf=0.95, nboot=50)
In this specific case, sample sizes were 5600, 3500, and 3600, respectively, and species numbers from 130-230. There are many zeros in the frequencies.
There was no error reported when using "estimateD" function, and the confidence intervals are not big (which would indicate bad reliability).
Are there any limitations to the ratio between species numbers and sample sizes (because it worked without the reported error with higher species number)?
I would really like to ask for help in this situation. Any additional information you would need, I'm glad to provide.
I am a PhD student, dealing with European weed vegetation and I'm using your iNext R package, which is great, together with the manuals!
At one analysis I got an error, saying:
Warning message: In Fun(x, q) : Insufficient data to provide reliable estimators and associated s.e.
The function was: curve<iNEXT(dataset, q=0, datatype="incidence_freq", size=NULL, endpoint=NULL, knots=40, se=TRUE, conf=0.95, nboot=50) In this specific case, sample sizes were 5600, 3500, and 3600, respectively, and species numbers from 130-230. There are many zeros in the frequencies. There was no error reported when using "estimateD" function, and the confidence intervals are not big (which would indicate bad reliability).
Are there any limitations to the ratio between species numbers and sample sizes (because it worked without the reported error with higher species number)?
I would really like to ask for help in this situation. Any additional information you would need, I'm glad to provide.
Best regards