Testing the significance of canonical axes in redundancy analysis

1. Tests of significance of the individual canonical axes in redundancy analysis allow researchers to determine which of the axes represent variation that can be distinguished from random. Variation along the significant axes can be mapped, used to draw biplots or interpreted through subsequent analyses, whilst the nonsignificant axes may be dropped from further consideration. 2. Three methods have been implemented in computer programs to test the significance of the canonical axes; they are compared in this paper. The simultaneous test of all individual canonical axes, which is appealing because of its simplicity, produced incorrect (highly inflated) levels of type I error for the axes following those corresponding to true relationships in the data, so it is invalid. The ‘marginal’ testing method implemented in the ‘vegan’ R package and the ‘forward’ testing method implemented in the program CANOCO were found to have correct levels of type I error and comparable power. Permutation of the residuals achieved greater power than permutation of the raw data. 3. R functions found in a Supplement to this paper provide the first formal description of the ‘marginal’ and ‘forward’ testing methods

[1]  Daniel A. Griffith,et al.  A linear regression solution to the spatial autocorrelation problem , 2000, J. Geogr. Syst..

[2]  Pierre Legendre,et al.  An empirical comparison of permutation methods for tests of partial regression coefficients in a linear model , 1999 .

[3]  B. Manly.  Randomization, Bootstrap and Monte Carlo Methods in Biology , 2018 .

[4]  Y. Takane,et al.  Generalized Constrained Canonical Correlation Analysis , 2002 .

[5]  C.J.F. ter Braak,et al.  A Theory of Gradient Analysis , 2004 .

[6]  A. Hope.  A Simplified Monte Carlo Significance Test Procedure , 1968 .

[7]  Y. Takane,et al.  On a test of dimensionality in redundancy analysis , 2005 .

[8]  Mordecai Ezekiel,et al.  Methods of Correlation Analysis. , 1931 .

[9]  G. De’ath.  MULTIVARIATE REGRESSION TREES: A NEW TECHNIQUE FOR MODELING SPECIES–ENVIRONMENT RELATIONSHIPS , 2002 .

[10]  M. Tso.  Reduced‐Rank Regression and Canonical Analysis , 1981 .

[11]  Ter Braak,et al.  Canoco reference manual and CanoDraw for Windows user''s guide: software for canonical community ord , 2002 .

[12]  M. Nahler.  Type I Error , 2021, Encyclopedic Dictionary of Archaeology.

[13]  C. Braak.  Canonical Correspondence Analysis: A New Eigenvector Technique for Multivariate Direct Gradient Analysis , 1986 .

[14]  Glenn De'ath,et al.  Multivariate Regression Trees: A new technique for constrained classification analysis , 2002 .

[15]  David A. Freedman,et al.  A Nonstochastic Interpretation of Reported Significance Levels , 1983 .

[16]  Hanna Tuomisto,et al.  DISSECTING THE SPATIAL STRUCTURE OF ECOLOGICAL DATA AT MULTIPLE SCALES , 2004 .

[17]  C. Braak,et al.  Permutation Versus Bootstrap Significance Tests in Multiple Regression and Anova , 1992 .

[18]  M. Hill,et al.  Data analysis in community and landscape ecology , 1987 .

[19]  Calyampudi R. Rao.  The use and interpretation of principal component analysis in applied research , 1964 .

[20]  C.J.F. ter Braak,et al.  The analysis of vegetation-environment relationships by canonical correspondence analysis , 1987 .

[21]  E. Edgington,et al.  Randomization Tests (3rd ed.) , 1998 .

[22]  John K. Miller.  The Sampling Distribution and a Test for the Significance of the Bimultivariate Redundancy Statistic: A Monte Carlo Study. , 1975 .

[23]  Pierre Legendre,et al.  All-scale spatial analysis of ecological data by means of principal coordinates of neighbour matrices , 2002 .

[24]  P. Legendre,et al.  Modelling directional spatial processes in ecological data , 2008 .

[25]  Stéphane Dray,et al.  Spatial modelling: a comprehensive framework for principal coordinate analysis of neighbour matrices (PCNM) , 2006 .

[26]  C. Braak,et al.  The analysis of vegetation-environment relationships by canonical correspondence analysis , 1987, Vegetatio.

[27]  R. Roux,et al.  TESTING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SUCCESSIVE COMPONENTS IN REDUNDANCY ANALYSIS , 2002 .

[28]  R. Cléroux,et al.  Testing the significance of the successive components in redundancy analysis , 2002 .

[29]  C.J.F. ter Braak,et al.  Update notes: Canoco, version 3.10 , 1990 .

[30]  John K. Miller,et al.  Bimultivariate Redundancy: A Comprehensive Measure of Interbattery Relationship , 1971 .