I'm sorry I can't be of more help. I know how frustrating it can be to struggle for days with a problem like this. spencer graves
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear friends,
I have asked last few days about cross-random effects using PQL, but I have not receive any answer because might my question was not clear.
My question was about analysing the salamander mating data using PQL. This data contain cross-random effects for (male) and for (female). By opining MASS and lme library. I wrote this code
sala.glmm <- glmmPQL(fixed=y~WSf*WSM, random=list(experiment=pdBlocked(list(pdIdent(~randf-1),pdIdent(~randm-1)))), family=binomial, data=sala.data).
Where data neame=sala.glmm which contain y is response wsf is fixed effect wsm is fixed effects randf is random effect random is random effect
The data contain three experiments at the same time. The previous cod is work but it does not give me accurate result especially for the random effects.
For experiment I wrote this code
experiment <- factor(c(rep(1,120),rep(2,120),rep(3,120))) because I have three experiments at the same time, but if I change the experiment to e.g
experiment <- factor(c(rep(1,360)))
is still give answer but is not the right answer. So, I am accusing my specification of the experiment (group). If you have any suggestion pleas let me know.
E-mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Here I am going to gve mre details about the data.
the
The data are:details about the data is:
McCullagh and Nelder (1989,sec.14.5)polished ansides
interesting set of data on the success of matting
between male and female salamanders drawn from two
populations, the rough butts (RB) and the white
(WS), that had been geographically isolated fromeach
other. In the first of three experiments, conductedas
during the summer of 1986, 10 RB females and 10 WS
females were mated with three RB males and three WS
males, for a total of six mating each over 24 days.
Each of 10 RB males and 10 WS males likewise served
mates for three females of each type. These same 40conducted
salamanders were used in a repeat experiment
in the fall that involved no repetitions of thefour
earlier mal-female pairs. A third experiment, also
conducted in the fall, used a new set of 40 animals.
Each experiment involved 30 mating of each of the
gender-population combinations. Simple inspection ofthese
the data revealed that three of the crosses had
success rates of about 70%, whereas the mating of WS
females with RB MALES WAS SUCCESSFUL ONLY 25% OF the
time. Evaluating the statistical significance of
variancesdifferences was complicated by the fact that the 360 binary responses were not independent.
The model is used here is the mating probabilities
are assumed to be the same for each of the three
experiments. The random effects are assumed to be
independent in each experiment. The male and
Female effects are assumed to have different
but the variances are assumed To be the same across the three experiments.
Best Regared
______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
https://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide! http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list https://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide! http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
