Re: R-sig-ecology Digest, Vol 98, Issue 7

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view

Re: R-sig-ecology Digest, Vol 98, Issue 7

I think the the choice of the model  should be based on the distribution
assumption of fitness as this a the response variable, but not the trait.
If i am,right trait variable is the explanatory variable.  If fitness is a
count data, you could  choose poisson family but you should be carful to
appreciate if there is overdispersion or not. In cas of overdispersion,
just go you can choose negative binomial...
Thank you

On 11 May 2016 at 11:00, <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Send R-sig-ecology mailing list submissions to
>         [hidden email]
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         [hidden email]
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         [hidden email]
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of R-sig-ecology digest..."
> Today's Topics:
>    1. linear model selection analysis (Harriet Jamieson)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 10 May 2016 14:33:57 +0100
> From: Harriet Jamieson <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: [R-sig-eco] linear model selection analysis
> Message-ID:
>         <
> [hidden email]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> Hello list,
> I am attempting a selection analysis sensu Lande and Arnold (1983), where
> the basic premise is to model relative fitness of individuals as a function
> of standardised trait values, where the relative fitness is relative to the
> mean (by dividing fitness values by the mean fitness value, so centred
> around 1) and the standardised trait values are calculated as z scores,
> i.e. = (trait - mean) / SD, so they are centred around zero. The idea is
> that, in its simplest form with a single trait of interest, the results of
> the model 'fitness ~ trait? should give a coefficient for ?trait? that is a
> selection gradient. My problem is that my ?trait? in this case is count
> data, and it doesn?t seem appropriate to transform Poisson data into the
> standardised trait variable as above. So my first question is whether this
> is an appropriate way to treat count data?
> I have considered three alternatives to work round this:
> 1. Plough ahead and transform the count data into the standardised trait
> scores and do the analysis.
> 2. Use the raw count data as the trait variable, unstandardised - this
> might be fine as a general linear model, but doesn?t give me sensible
> estimates for selection gradients on the traits.
> 3. I tried looking for published work where count data was used in a
> selection analysis - I?m sure I can?t be doing something that strange, but
> I could only find one other example, and here they did something different,
> where they actually turned the model around and modelled the trait as a
> function of fitness, so trait ~ fitness, where fitness was relativised but
> the trait was kept as count data and a Poisson distribution was specified.
> I suppose if anyone has any specific experience of selection analysis, this
> would be extremely helpful. More generally, however, I think I would like
> some thoughts on the following questions:
> 1. Is it appropriate to z score transform count data? Why/why not?
> 2. If the basic model Y ~ X gives a coefficient for X that is the gradient,
> then how is this interpretation of the coefficient affected if X is raw
> count data?
> 3. Does the example I found where the model was flipped round give the same
> information?
> I realise the problem is rather specific to a certain application of linear
> models, but I would be grateful for any insight anyone could offer on how
> these alternatives change the interpretation of the models.
> Thanks very much in advance,
> Harriet
>         [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> ------------------------------
> Subject: Digest Footer
> _______________________________________________
> R-sig-ecology mailing list
> [hidden email]
> ------------------------------
> End of R-sig-ecology Digest, Vol 98, Issue 7
> ********************************************



        [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

R-sig-ecology mailing list
[hidden email]