Circular data are common in biological studies. The most fundamental question that can be asked of a sample of circular data is whether it suggests that the underlying population is uniformly distributed around the circle, or whether it is concentrated around at least one preferred direction (e.g. a migratory goal or activity phase). We compared the statistical power of five commonly used tests (the Rayleigh test, the V-test, Watson’s test, Kuiper’s test and Rao’s spacing test) across a range of different unimodal scenarios. The V-test showed higher power for symmetrical distributions, Rao’s spacing performed worst for all explored unimodal distributions tested and the remaining three tests showed very similar performance. However, the V-test only applies if the hypothesis is restricted to one (pre-specified) direction of interest. In all other unimodal cases, we recommend using the Rayleigh test. Much less explored is the multimodal case with data concentrated around several directions. We performed power simulations for a variety of multimodal situations, testing the performance of the widely used Rayleigh, Rao’s, Watson, and Kuiper’s tests as well as the more recent Bogdan and Hermans-Rasson tests. Our analyses of alternative statistical methods show that the commonly used tests lack statistical power in many of multimodal cases. Transformation of the raw data (e.g. doubling the angles) can overcome some of the issues, but only in the case of perfect f-fold symmetry. However, the Hermans-Rasson method, which is not yet implemented in any software package, outcompetes the alternative tests (often by substantial margins) in most of the multimodal situations explored. We recommend the wider uptake of the powerful but hitherto neglected Hermans-Rasson method. In summary, we provide guidance for biologists helping them to make decisions when testing circular data for single or multiple departures from uniformity.

Circular data are gathered in diverse fields of science where measured traits are cyclical in nature: such as compass directions or times of day. The most common statistical question asked of a sample of circular data is whether the data seems to be drawn from a uniform distribution or one that is concentrated around one or more preferred directions. The overwhelmingly most-popular test of the null hypothesis of uniformity is the Rayleigh test, even though this test is known to have very low power in some circumstances. Here we present simulation studies evaluating the performance of tests developed as alternatives to the Rayleigh test. The results of our simulations demonstrate that a single test, the Hermans and Rasson test is almost as powerful as the Rayleigh test in unimodal situations (when the Rayleigh test does well) but substantially outperforms the Rayleigh test in multimodal situations. We recommend researchers switch to routine use of the new Hermans and Rasson test. We also demonstrate that all available tests have low power to detect departures from uniformity involving more than two concentrated regions: we recommend that where researchers suspect such complex departures that they collect substantially-sized samples and apply another recent test due to Pycke that was designed specifically for such complex cases. We provide clear textual descriptions of how to implement each of these recommended tests and encode them in R functions that we provide.

ClCRY4 has the biophysical and molecular attributes necessary to function as a light-dependent magnetosensor.

Many biological variables are recorded on a circular scale and therefore need different statistical treatment. A common question that is asked of such circular data involves comparison between two groups: Are the populations from which the two samples are drawn differently distributed around the circle? We compared 18 tests for such situations (by simulation) in terms of both abilities to control Type-I error rate near the nominal value, and statistical power. We found that only eight tests offered good control of Type-I error in all our simulated situations. Of these eight, we were able to identify the Watson’s U² test and a MANOVA approach, based on trigonometric functions of the data, as offering the best power in the overwhelming majority of our test circumstances. There was often little to choose between these tests in terms of power, and no situation where either of the remaining six tests offered substantially better power than either of these. Hence, we recommend the routine use of either Watson’s U² test or MANOVA approach when comparing two samples of circular data.