Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 23, 2026

Quantification of Fungal Colonization, Sporogenesis, and Production of Mycotoxins Using Kernel Bioassays
Published on: April 23, 2012
Statistical Power in Plant Pathology Research
David H Gent1, Paul D Esker1, Alissa B Kriss1
1First author: U.S. Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service, Forage Seed and Cereal Research Unit, and Oregon State University, Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, Corvallis 97331; second author: Department of Plant Pathology and Environmental Microbiology, Penn State University, University Park 16802; and third author: Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, Greensboro, NC 27409.
Abstract:
In null hypothesis testing, failure to reject a null hypothesis may have two potential interpretations. One interpretation is that the treatments being evaluated do not have a significant effect, and a correct conclusion was reached in the analysis. Alternatively, a treatment effect may have existed but the conclusion of the study was that there was none. This is termed a Type II error, which is most likely to occur when studies lack sufficient statistical power to detect a treatment effect. In basic terms, the power of a study is the ability to identify a true effect through a statistical test. The power of a statistical test is 1 - (the probability of Type II errors), and depends on the size of treatment effect (termed the effect size), variance, sample size, and significance criterion (the probability of a Type I error, α). Low statistical power is prevalent in scientific literature in general, including plant pathology. However, power is rarely reported, creating uncertainty in the interpretation of nonsignificant results and potentially underestimating small, yet biologically significant relationships. The appropriate level of power for a study depends on the impact of Type I versus Type II errors and no single level of power is acceptable for all purposes. Nonetheless, by convention 0.8 is often considered an acceptable threshold and studies with power less than 0.5 generally should not be conducted if the results are to be conclusive. The emphasis on power analysis should be in the planning stages of an experiment. Commonly employed strategies to increase power include increasing sample sizes, selecting a less stringent threshold probability for Type I errors, increasing the hypothesized or detectable effect size, including as few treatment groups as possible, reducing measurement variability, and including relevant covariates in analyses. Power analysis will lead to more efficient use of resources and more precisely structured hypotheses, and may even indicate some studies should not be undertaken. However, the conclusions of adequately powered studies are less prone to erroneous conclusions and inflated estimates of treatment effectiveness, especially when effect sizes are small.
More Related Videos
11:35Establishment of a Chilli Thrips (Scirtothrips dorsalis Hood) Rearing System for Virulence Screening of Entomopathogenic Fungi
Published on: July 18, 2025
06:09An Easy and Flexible Inoculation Method for Accurately Assessing Powdery Mildew-Infection Phenotypes of Arabidopsis and Other Plants
Published on: March 9, 2021
Related Concept Videos
Cochran's Q Test
Chi-square Analysis
The chi-square test was developed by Pearson in 1990.
The first step of performing a Chi-square analysis is to establish a null hypothesis, which assumes that there is no real...
Statistical Significance
Hypothesis: Accept or Fail to Reject?
There are two ways to indicate that the null hypothesis is not rejected. 'Accept' the null...
Gene Flow