Even if those models may fit the data better, they may not necessarily help Rafael determine whether or not the parameter estimates of interest are different across regimes (though perhaps BMS might be informative).
Rafael, maybe you could try fixing the ancestral regimes to match most likely states for each node from your SIMMAP summary? I wonder if that might decrease your ‘uncertainty’ in parameter estimates. I don’t have a great answer for your main question though, which is a good one. Jake > On Apr 4, 2018, at 8:59 PM, William Gearty <wgea...@stanford.edu> wrote: > > Hi Rafael, > > Have you tried running the BM1, BMS, or OU1 models? If so, how do the AICc > values for those compare to those of the OUM model? If not, you should make > sure you run those. > If you find that the these models fit your data better, this could indicate > that there isn't a large different across regimes and an OUM model isn't > necessarily suitable. > > Best, > Will > > On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Rafael S Marcondes <raf.marcon...@gmail.com >> wrote: > >> Dear all, >> >> I'm writing (again!) to ask for help interpreting standard errors of >> parameter estimates in OUwie models. >> >> I'm using OUwie to examine how the evolution of bird plumage color varies >> across habitat types (my selective regimes) in a tree of 229 tips. I was >> hoping to be able to make inferences based on OUMV and OUMVA models, but I >> was getting nonsensical theta estimates from those. So I've basically given >> up on them for now. >> >> But even looking at theta estimates from OUM models, I'm getting really >> large standard errors, often overlapping the estimates from other selective >> regimes. So I was wondering what that means exactly. How are these erros >> calculated? How much do high errors it limit the biological inferences I >> can make? I'm more interested in the relative thetas across regimes than on >> the exact values (testing the prediction that birds in darker habitats tend >> to adapt to darker plumages than birds in more illuminated habitats). >> >> I have attached a table averaging parameter estimates and errors from >> models fitted across a posterior distribution of 100 simmaps for four >> traits; and one exemplar fitted model from one trait in one of those >> simmaps. >> >> Thanks a lot for any help, >> >> >> *--* >> *Rafael Sobral Marcondes* >> PhD Candidate (Systematics, Ecology and Evolution/Ornithology) >> >> Museum of Natural Science <http://sites01.lsu.edu/wp/mns/> >> Louisiana State University >> 119 Foster Hall >> Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA >> >> Twitter: @brown_birds <https://twitter.com/brown_birds> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> R-sig-phylo mailing list - R-sig-phylo@r-project.org >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-phylo >> Searchable archive at http://www.mail-archive.com/r- >> sig-ph...@r-project.org/ >> >> > > > -- > William Gearty > PhD Candidate, Paleobiology > Department of Geological Sciences > Stanford School of Earth, Energy & Environmental Sciences > williamgearty.com > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] > > _______________________________________________ > R-sig-phylo mailing list - R-sig-phylo@r-project.org > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-phylo > Searchable archive at http://www.mail-archive.com/r-sig-phylo@r-project.org/ _______________________________________________ R-sig-phylo mailing list - R-sig-phylo@r-project.org https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-phylo Searchable archive at http://www.mail-archive.com/r-sig-phylo@r-project.org/
