multidimensional scaling mds g. quinn, m. burgman & j. carey 2003
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Multidimensional scalingMDS
G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003
![Page 2: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Aim
• Graphical representation of dissimilarities between objects in as few dimensions (axes) as possible
![Page 3: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
• Graphical representation is termed an “ordination” in ecology
• Axes of graph represent new variables which are summaries of original variables
![Page 4: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Approximate distances by air (km) between Australian Capital cities
CAN SYD MELB BRIS ADEL PER HOB DAR
CAN 0 . . . . . . .
SYD 246 0 . . . . . .
MELB 506 727 0 . . . . .
BRIS 1021 775 1393 0 . . . .
ADEL 976 1185 651 1961 0 . . .
PER 3126 3339 2804 4114 2152 0 . .
HOB 1120 1075 613 1852 1264 3417 0 .
DAR 3409 3163 3355 2886 2727 2951 4186 0
![Page 5: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
-2 -1 0 1 2Dimension 1
-2
-1
0
1
2
Dim
ensi
on 2
Stress = 0.014
![Page 6: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
-2 -1 0 1 2Dimension 1
-2
-1
0
1
2
Dim
ensi
on 2
x -
1
Darwin
Perth
AdelaideHobart
Melbourne
Canberra
Sydney
Brisbane
![Page 7: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
http://www.boardtheworld.com/resorts/country.php?cc=AU
Darwin
Perth
Adelaide
Hobart
Melbourne
Canberra
Sydney
Brisbane
![Page 8: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Haynes & Quinn (unpublished)
• Four sites along Morwell River– site 1 upstream from planned sewage
outfall– sites 2, 3 and 4 downstream– site 3 below fish farm
• Abundance of all species of invertebrates recorded from 3 stations at each site
![Page 9: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
• 12 objects (sampling units):– 4 sites by 3 stations at each site
• 94 variables (species)
Do invertebrate communities (or assemblages) differ between stations and sites?– Is Site 1 different from rest?
![Page 10: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Multidimensional scaling
1. Set up a raw data matrix
Species 1 2 3 4 5 etc.
Site/sampleS11 54 0 0 5 0S12 37 1 0 4 0S13 68 2 0 2 0S21 60 0 0 0 1S22 47 0 0 2 0S23 60 0 0 0 0etc.
![Page 11: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
2. Calculate a dissimilarity (Bray-Curtis) matrix
S11 S12 S13 S21 S22 S23 etc.
S11 .000
S12 .203 .000
S13 .666 .652 .000
S21 .216 .331 .759 .000
S22 .328 .410 .796 .191 .000
S23 .336 .432 .796 .183 .054 .000
etc.
![Page 12: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
3. Decide on number of dimensions (axes) for the ordination:– suspected number of underlying ecological
gradients– match distances between objects on plot
and dissimilarities between objects as closely as possible
– more dimensions means better match– usually between 2 and 4 dimensions
![Page 13: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
4. Arrange objects (eg. sampling units) initially on ordination plot in chosen number of dimensions– starting configuration– usually generated randomly
![Page 14: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Starting configuration
-2 -1 0 1 2-2
-1
0
1
2
Axis I
Axis II
Site 1 Site 3Site 2 Site 4
![Page 15: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
5. Compare distances between objects on ordination plot and Bray-Curtis dissimilarities between objects– strength of relationship measured by
Kruskal’s stress value– measures “badness of fit” so lower values
indicate better match– plot is called Shepard plot
![Page 16: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Starting configuration
-2 -1 0 1 2-2
-1
0
1
2
Axis I
Axis II
Site 1
Site 3
Site 2
Site 4
0 0.5 10
1
2
3
Dissimilarity
Distance
Shepard plotStress = 0.394
![Page 17: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
6. Move objects on ordination plot iteratively by method of steepest descent– each step improves match between
dissimilarities and distances between objects on ordination plot
– lowers stress value
![Page 18: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
0 0.5 10
1
2
3
Dissimilarity
Distance
-2 -1 0 1 2-2
-1
0
1
2
Axis I
Axis II
After 20 iterations
Stress = 0.119
![Page 19: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
7. Final configuration
• further moving of objects on ordination plot cannot improve match between dissimilarities and distances
• stress as low as possible
![Page 20: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
0 0.5 10
1
2
3
Dissimilarity
Distance
-2 -1 0 1 2-2
-1
0
1
2
Axis II
Axis I
Final configuration - 50 iterations
Stress = 0.069
![Page 21: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Iteration Stress1 0.3942 0.3683 0.3574 0.351... ...20 0.119... ...49 0.06950 0.069
Stress of final configuration is 0.069
Iteration history
![Page 22: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
How low should stress be?
Clarke (1993) suggests:
• > 0.20 is basically random
• < 0.15 is good
• < 0.10 is ideal– configuration is close to actual
dissimilarities
![Page 23: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
How many dimensions?
• Increasing no. of dimensions above 4 usually offers little reduction in stress
• 2 or 3 dimensions usually adequate to get good fit (ie. low stress)
• 2 dimensions straightforward to plot
![Page 24: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Types of MDS
• Based on how stress is measured
• Relationship between distance and dissimilarity Dissimilarity
Dis
tanc
e
![Page 25: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Metric MDS
• stress measured from relationship between actual dissimilarities and distances
• but relationship often non-linear
• inefficient?
![Page 26: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Non-metric MDS
• stress measured from relationship between ranks of dissimilarities and ranks of distances
• similar to Spearman rank correlation• better for ecological data
![Page 27: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Anderson et al. (1994)
• Effects of substratum type on recruitment of intertidal estuarine fouling assemblage
• Six replicate panels of 4 substrata placed in estuary for 1 month at 2 times of the year
• 14 species in total recorded
![Page 28: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
• MDS to examine relationship between panel– do substrata appear different in spp
composition?• Bray-Curtis dissimilarity• Non-metric MDS
![Page 29: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
concretealuminium
plywoodfibreglass
Stress = 0.126 Stress = 0.116
January October
![Page 30: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Comparing groups in MDS
Haynes & Quinn data
• 4 groups (sites) - must be a priori groups• 3 replicate stations per site (n = 3)
• Are sites significantly different in species composition?
• Is there an ANOVA-like equivalent for MDS?
![Page 31: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Analysis of similarities - ANOSIM
• Uses (dis)similarity matrix• Because dissimilarities are not normally distributed,
uses ranks of pairwise dissimilarities• Because dissimilarities are not independent of each
other, uses randomisation test rather than usual significance testing procedure
• Generates own test statistic (called R) by randomisation of rank dissimilarities
• Available through PRIMER package– Not SYSTAT nor SPSS
![Page 32: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Null hypothesis
Average of rank dissimilarities between objects within groups = average of rank dissimilarities between objects between groups
rB = rW
No difference in species composition between groups
![Page 33: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Within group dissimilaritiesBetween group dissimilarities
![Page 34: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Test statistic
R average of rank dissimilarities between objects between groups - average of rank dissimilarities between objects within groups
R = (rB - rW) / (M / 2) where M = n(n-1)/2
• R between -1 and +1.• Use randomization test to generate probability
distribution of R when H0 is true.
![Page 35: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Haynes & Quinn ANOSIM
• R = 0.583, P = 0.002 so reject Ho.• Significant differences between sites
• Followed by pairwise ANOSIM comparisons• Adjusted significance levels
![Page 36: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
ANOSIM
• Available also for 2 level nested and factorial designs.
• Primer package.
• Limited to total of 125 objects (e.g. SU’s).
• If 2 groups, n must be > 4 for randomization procedure.
• Alternative is to use ANOVA on NMDS axis scores - ANOSIM is better.
![Page 37: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Which variables (species) most important?
• For MDS-type analyses, three methods:– correlate individual variables (species
abundances) with axis scores– SIMPER (similarity percentages) to determine
which species contribute most to Bray-Curtis dissimilarity
– CA and/or CANOCO to simultaneously ordinate objects and species - biplots
![Page 38: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
SIMPER (similarity percentages)
|yij - yik|Bray-Curtis dissimilarity =yij + yik)
Note is summing over each species, 1 to p.
The contribution of species i is: |yij - yik|
i =yij + yik)
![Page 39: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Which species discriminate groups of objects?
• Calculate average i over all pairs of objects between groups– larger values indicate species contribute more to group
differences
• Calculate standard deviation of i – smaller values indicate species contribution is consistent
across all pairs of objects
• Calculate ratio of i / SD(i)– larger values indicate good discriminating species between 2
groups
![Page 40: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Linking biota MDS to environmental variables
• Are differences between SU’s in species abundances related to differences in environmental variables?
• Correlate MDS axis scores with environmental variables
• BIO-ENV procedure - correlates dissimilarities from biota with dissimilarities from environmental variables
![Page 41: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
BIO-ENV procedure
Samples
Speciesabundances
Envvariables
Euclidean
Bray-Curtis
Subsets ofvariables
Rank correlation- Spearman- Weighted Spearman
Dissimilarity matrix
![Page 42: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
BIO-ENV correlations
• Exploratory rather than hypothesis testing procedure.
• Tries to find best combination of environmental variables, ie. combination most correlated with biotic dissimilarities.
• A priori chosen correlations can be tested with RELATE procedure - randomization test of correlation.
![Page 43: Multidimensional scaling MDS G. Quinn, M. Burgman & J. Carey 2003](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649ef45503460f94c07bda/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Vector fitting
• Uses final NMDS configuration rather than dissimilarity matrix - dependent on dimension number.
• Calculates vector (direction) through configuration of samples along which sample scores have max. correlation with environmental variable (one at a time).
• Significance testing (Ho: no correlation) done with randomization (Monte-Carlo) test.
• Available in DECODA and PATN.