Ecol Lett. 2025 Jan;28(1):e70023. doi: 10.1111/ele.70023.
ABSTRACT
Experiments have long been the gold standard for causal inference in Ecology. As Ecology tackles progressively larger problems, however, we are moving beyond the scales at which randomised controlled experiments are feasible. To answer causal questions at scale, we need to also use observational data -something Ecologists tend to view with great scepticism. The major challenge using observational data for causal inference is confounding variables: variables affecting both a causal variable and response of interest. Unmeasured confounders-known or unknown-lead to statistical bias, creating spurious correlations and masking true causal relationships. To combat this omitted variable bias, other disciplines have developed rigorous approaches for causal inference from observational data that flexibly control for broad suites of confounding variables. We show how ecologists can harness some of these methods-causal diagrams to identify confounders coupled with nested sampling and statistical designs-to reduce risks of omitted variable bias. Using an example of estimating warming effects on snails, we show how current methods in Ecology (e.g., mixed models) produce incorrect inferences due to omitted variable bias and how alternative methods can eliminate it, improving causal inferences with weaker assumptions. Our goal is to expand tools for causal inference using observational and imperfect experimental data in Ecology.
PMID:39836442 | DOI:10.1111/ele.70023
