--
Message: 8
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 23:22:34 +0200
From: Aitor Gast?n aitor.gas...@upm.es
To: r-sig-ecology@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [R-sig-eco] logistic regression and spatial
autocorrelation
Message-ID: 76265B51921941D6ACF52B30985497BB@botanica1
Content-Type
--
From: Nicholas Lewin-Koh ni...@hailmail.net
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2011 7:01 PM
To: r-sig-ecology@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [R-sig-eco] logistic regression and spatial autocorrelation
Hi,
to weigh in on this:
@Aitor, Harrell's rules of thumb
Hi Tim
You haven't really explained where your group variable in the glmm has come
from. Moving from glm to glmm you've changed two things, adding the grouping
and the autocorrelation as well.
You have to be very careful when using the autocorrelation function. As it
stands the model will
Thank you for the replies.
To clarify, the points are generally ordered by geogrpahic distance and
increasing elevation (they are a converted GPS track- spaced evenly
every 200 m), though there are some ups and downs in elevation. The
order of points become more difficult at high elevation.
-ecology@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [R-sig-eco] logistic regression and spatial autocorrelation
Thank you for the replies.
To clarify, the points are generally ordered by geogrpahic distance and
increasing elevation (they are a converted GPS track- spaced evenly
every 200 m), though
Tim pointed put that he has only 132 samples out of 2800 with a species present
and I am curious what people think about how well we can model that with
logistic regression.
-Chris
On Aug 25, 2011, at 10:36 AM, Pedro Lima Pequeno pacol...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Tim,
there are several ways
--
From: cpar...@pdx.edu
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 8:08 PM
To: Pedro Lima Pequeno pacol...@gmail.com
Cc: r-sig-ecology@r-project.org; Tim Seipel t.sei...@env.ethz.ch
Subject: Re: [R-sig-eco] logistic regression and spatial autocorrelation
Tim pointed put that he
