Skip to content
Prev 173796 / 398503 Next

dispcrepancy between aov F test and tukey contrasts results with mixed effects model

Thanks Peter for the advice and quick response.  I just want to clarify
what you suggest.  I should average values within a site then do a one-way
anova to test for differnces between sites based on the 2 to 3 new samples
per stand type -- and not use random effects for site?  Or, because I've
reduced the data I've 'corrected' the problem with the glht multiple
comparisons and can use the p-values from that summary if I include site
as a random effect?   Thanks again for your advice.
with a mixed effects model I was hoping someone could clarify.  I am
comparing the abundance of a species across three willow stand types.
Since I have 2 or 3 sites within a habitat I have included site as a
random effect in the lme model.  My confusion is that the F test given by
tukey contrasts using the multcomp package shows that one pair of
habits
discrepancy?
below.  Thank you.
wrong but it is not easy to do it right (whatever "right" is in these
cases). If I understand correctly, what you have is that "stand" is
strictly coarser than "site", presumably the stands representing each 2,
2, and 3 sites, with a varying number of replications within each site.
Since the between-site variation is considered random, you end up with a
comparison of stands based on essentially only 7 pieces of information.
(The latter statement requires some qualification, but let's not go there
to day.)
tempted to reduce the analysis to a simple 1-way ANOVA of the site averages.
Linear Hypotheses:
35327918
Lisa Baril
Masters Candidate
Department of Ecology
Montana State University - Bozeman
406.994.2670