A lot of questions, some responses below...
2013/4/19 Aurélie Boissezon <aurelie.boisse...@unige.ch>
> The main purpose is to understand how disturbance gradient affect the
> composition of the macrophyte community, in particular the distribution of
> Charophytes ("V3" mission in Anderson et al 2011).
>
Basically, to address this kind of question, you need constrained
ordination.
> I want to ignore double zero because there is no reason to consider that
> double zeros indicate similarity.--> avoid euclidean-distance based method
> such as PCA and RDA
>
Again: with appropriate transformations, such as Hellinger, double zeros
are not taken into account in RDA!
> The succession of a high number of species generated numerous zero in my
> species dataset (long environmental gradient). --> one more argument
> against RDA
> Finally vegetation was well sampled so rarest species were truly rare in
> the water body. Nevertheless I am not particularly interest by those rare
> species so I deleted them before multivariate analysis.
>
Bad idea. RDA on Hellinger-transformed cover data is not that much
sensitive to rare (unfrequent) species, contrary to CCA. My advice is to
keep all species in your dataset.
>
> For all these reasons, I firstly I tried CCA ordination. But I did not
> tried dbRDA. Should I on the basis of my practical limits? Would it be
> really best than CCA ? I guess I have to try following Pierre's method. The
> main positive point for dbRDA is that I can use any dissimilarity matrix
> (if I understand well), hellinger or bray curtis for example.
>
dbRDA on Bray-Curtis dissimilarity matrix is an acceptable alternative to
RDA on Hellinger-transformed data. CCA is based on a double standardization
of sites and species and is known to give high weight to rare species: if
you are not primarily interested by the indication of these species, forget
CCA.
>
> Why not explore unconstrained ordination methods and went further with
> NMDS ("V2" mission in Anderson et al 2011)?
>
Just because your purpose is to explain community structure by
environmental variables (a regression-oriented question). Direct gradient
analysis (especially with RDA and adjusted R-square) is in this case more
powerful than indirect gradient analysis (from NMDS or any other
unconstrained ordination).
> I understood that I was wrong when using Bray-Curtis distance on
> hellinger transformed data before NMDS, I have to choose. But that I am
> right when superimposing vector or gam surface on NMDS ordinations.
>
That's right, but you can fit a GAM model on RDA results as well!
Cheers,
François
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prof. *François Gillet*
Université de Franche-Comté - CNRS
UMR 6249 Chrono-environnement
UFR Sciences et Techniques
16, Route de Gray
F-25030 Besançon cedex
France
http://chrono-environnement.univ-fcomte.fr/
http://chrono-environnement.univ-fcomte.fr/spip.php?article530
Phone: +33 (0)3 81 66 62 81
iPhone: +33 (0)7 88 37 07 76
Location: La Bouloie, Bât. Propédeutique, *-114L*
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Editor of* Plant Ecology and Evolution*
http://www.plecevo.eu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*
***
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
_______________________________________________
R-sig-ecology mailing list
R-sig-ecology@r-project.org
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-ecology
