mixed effects in ordination (?)
This doesn't sound like an ordination problem: it's more similar to a standard mixed model regression. There are several ways to approach this, for example Ben Bolker has some (old) notes here: <https://rpubs.com/bbolker/3336> I'd suggest you start by running the analyses on each trait individually, as that way you can make sure you have the model sorted correctly. The step up to the multivariate model just needs some work understanding what the relevant R package wants. HTH Bob
On 12/01/17 14:12, Martin Weiser wrote:
Dear friends, Could you please help me with analysis? I am afraid that it involves crossed random effects in the mixed-effect constrained ordination setting, so to say. Goal: Show an effect of the species trait (single one) and treatment (four levels, quantitative scale) on parameters. Trait x treatment interaction is possible. If possible, show changes through time. Data: Individuals of 7 species, subjected to 4 treatment levels (fully factorial) - from 6 to 12 individuals in each combination. Each individual scored 4 times (same times: 1st wk, 2nd wk, 3rd wk, 4th wk). Several (10) parameters scored every time on each individual. What I did: In order to avoid multiple testing (the parameters are likely to be correlated to each other), I decided to use multivariate analysis (RDA). I am by far much more accustomed to vegan than ade4, so excuse me if I use some "veganisms". Predictors: time, trait, treatment (possibly with interactions), conditioned on individual identity to avoid treating records from the same plant as independent. Variance partitioning. Here comes the problem: how to set permutations in order to be able to report p_vals (some people just are not happy without them)? Since individuals of the same species share the same trait value, maybe the right way is to: shift observations within individual (if time is among predictors for the particular model) and permute trait value among species. Is it so? Is this treatment of the pseudoreplication at the species level (i.e. only in the significance testing, not in the ordination per se) ok? I also tried to use different approach: I averaged all params individual-wise (getting rid of temporal pseudoreplication, but also time effects), and subsequently I averaged the result within treatment x species levels. I assume that I can go for simple free permutations this way? Pity is that this way, I cannot see development in time. And another way: I averaged params for species x treatment x time groups, ignoring interdependence of records from the same individual, hoping that the effect of an individual "dissolves" in the average. Is that meaningful? If yes, what is the appropriate permutation structure in this case? But maybe I miss something and there are better ways how to deal with this problem? Any suggestions (ok: not any, just those made in an attempt to help :-) ) are appreciated. With the best regards, Martin Weiser
_______________________________________________ R-sig-ecology mailing list R-sig-ecology at r-project.org https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-ecology
Bob O'Hara NEW EMAIL: bob.ohara at ntnu.no NOTE NEW ADDRESS!!! Institutt for matematiske fag NTNU 7491 Trondheim Norway Mobile: +49 1515 888 5440 Journal of Negative Results - EEB: www.jnr-eeb.org