I don't hear a distinction between response variable(s) and potential explanatory variable(s). The standard linear regression and parametric ANOVA assumes that the response variable is a linear function of parameters to be estimated plus normally distributed noise. I usually judge this by making normal probability plots (qqnorm) of my response variables.

Where are the 0's that concern you? Are they in the response variable(s) or the potential explanatory variable(s)? If the latter, it's not a problem. If the former, it is.

hope this helps. spencer graves

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Sirs and Madams.

My question is more statistical than related with the use of R software and I hope it will not seems so silly and elemental. I'm analyzing a set of data of some soil organism collected in diferent landscapes, soils taxa, and depths. The sample was performed thinking in a factorial structure with four factors: Specie, Landscape, Soil and Depth. Because not all the species appear in each sample there are so many zeros in the matrix data.

Checking the normal distribution I'm not sure If I must check it in the original sample data (without zeros) or in the big matrix with zeros. In the first case there is a normal distribution (W = 0,85) but in the second it is not (W = 0,45). In which data must I check distribution?, Can I proceed to perform a Parametric ANOVA?.

Thanks

______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
https://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help

______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list https://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help

Reply via email to