using two distance metrices in formula
Dear All, Perhaps, there is another way of approaching this problem: the Monmonier's maximum-difference barriers algorithm. Monmonier, M. (1973) Maximum-difference barriers: an alternative numerical regionalization method. Geographic Analysis, 3, 245?261. Manni, F., Guerard, E. and Heyer, E. (2004) Geographic patterns of (genetic, morphologic, linguistic) variation: how barriers can be detected by "Monmonier's algorithm". Human Biology, 76, 173?190 Nice documantation and a free software Barrier here: http://www.mnhn.fr/mnhn/ecoanthropologie/software/barrier.html The R implementation has been done by Thibaut Jombart in the adegenet package (function monmonier), that is slightly different in handling tessellation at the margin. Permutation test are discussed in the Manni paper as I recall and implemented in Barrier. This is especially useful for genetic distances (and NOT for biotic data, because of profoundly different dispersal mechanisms involved in shaping genetic vs. community structures). Yours, Peter P?ter S?lymos Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute Department of Biological Sciences CW 405, Biological Sciences Bldg University of Alberta Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2E9, Canada Phone: 780.492.8534 Fax: 780.492.7635 email <- paste("solymos", "ualberta.ca", sep = "@")
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Jari Oksanen <jari.oksanen at oulu.fi> wrote:
On 13/10/09 18:44 PM, "Jens Oldeland" <oldeland at gmx.de> wrote:
Hi again, our distance matrices are 1) genetic distance (Jaccard) and 2) 3D-Euclidean Distance and the question we want to solve is if there is an effect called "Isolation by Distance" (IBD) in our data (genetic and "real"-distances of snails on the island of crete) or not. There was a debate on the topic if the mantel test or the partial mantel test (isn?t this similar to MRM?) in several papers mainly in evolution-journals: Raufaste, N. and F. Rousset. 2001. Are partial Mantel tests adequate? Evolution 55:1703?1705 Castellano, S. and E. Balletto. 2002. Is the partial Mantel test inadequate? Evolution 56:1871?1873. Geffen, E., Anderson, M.J., & Wayne, R.K. (2004). Climate and habitat barriers to dispersal in the highly mobile grey wolf. Molecular Ecology, 13, 2481-2490 explain it nicely on page p.2483 (LHS) "The problem arises due to the lack of independence of individual distances in a distance matrix. Although a simple Mantel test overcomes this issue by the use of permutations, a permutational approach does not necessarily solve problems introduced by several uncontrolled nuisance parameters in the case of more than one regressor (i.e. partial tests). Thus, we do not use a Mantel approach here, but rather use the distance-based multivariate approach of McArdle & Anderson (2001). The important point is that, for dbRDA, the individual distances are not treated as a single univariate response variable, as in the Mantel test, but rather the individual sites are the units of observation for analysis, about which we have calculated distances using an entire set of genetic variables. The distance matrix is therefore treated as information regarding multivariate response.Taking this multivariate approach avoids the problems associated with the partial Mantel test."
Jens, There has been a very similar discussion in the Ecology recently between my good friends, Hanna Tuomisto & co vs. Pierre Legendre & co. However, the point here and above exactly was that you cannot use dissimilarities on the RHS (lack of independence), but you must use rectangular data in dbRDA. If you use distances on the RHS you won't have dbRDA but you get Mantel family methods (like MRM in ecodist). The problem, of course, is how to map distances onto Euclidean space (= rectangular data) *and* still study the effects of the distances instead of the effects of *location*. I don't know any really good solution here, but all proposed solutions have their problems. Pierre Legendre, Daniel Borcard and Hanna Tuomisto have all tried to convince me of their point of view, and while all their conflicting arguments make sense, they are not yet an optimal solution. Cheers, Jari Oksanen
so we thought it would be a good idea not to use mantel and friends since the problem of IBD seems to need a different approach here. best, Jens Sarah Goslee schrieb:
That doesn't make much sense to me. You'd need an entirely different method than capscale. Perhaps what you're looking for is more like multiple regression on distance matrices (implemented in MRM in ecodist)? ? ? ?Lichstein, J. 2007. Multiple regression on distance matrices: A ? ? ?multivariate spatial analysis tool. Plant Ecology 188: 117-131. ? ? ?Legendre, P.; Lapointe, F. and Casgrain, P. 1994. Modeling brain ? ? ?evolution from behavior: A permutational regression approach. ? ? ?Evolution 48: 1487-1499. Sarah On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Jens Oldeland <oldeland at gmx.de> wrote:
Dear Sarah dear Jari, many thanks for your explanations. However, it wasnt what I thought about, sorry I definitely have to be more specific about the problem. Okay I try be more precise: the problem was that for example ?capscale accepts ? "capscale(dist.matrix.1 ~ N + P + K *Ag, data=varechem)" but I need ?"capscale(dist.matrix.1 ~ dist.matrix.2, data=dist.matrix.2)" ?so the trick was not on how to create a distance matrix but how to use a second on in a formula. We are trying a similar analysis like the the "distlm" program by Marti Anderson does, however we had a problem with that and wanted to try the analysis in R. thanks already for all your comments ! best Jens
_______________________________________________ R-sig-ecology mailing list R-sig-ecology at r-project.org https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-ecology