Multiple regression on distance matrices: a multivariate spatial analysis tool
- First Online:
I explore the use of multiple regression on distance matrices (MRM), an extension of partial Mantel analysis, in spatial analysis of ecological data. MRM involves a multiple regression of a response matrix on any number of explanatory matrices, where each matrix contains distances or similarities (in terms of ecological, spatial, or other attributes) between all pair-wise combinations of n objects (sample units); tests of statistical significance are performed by permutation. The method is flexible in terms of the types of data that may be analyzed (counts, presence–absence, continuous, categorical) and the shapes of response curves. MRM offers several advantages over traditional partial Mantel analysis: (1) separating environmental distances into distinct distance matrices allows inferences to be made at the level of individual variables; (2) nonparametric or nonlinear multiple regression methods may be employed; and (3) spatial autocorrelation may be quantified and tested at different spatial scales using a series of lag matrices, each representing a geographic distance class. The MRM lag matrices model may be parameterized to yield very similar inferences regarding spatial autocorrelation as the Mantel correlogram. Unlike the correlogram, however, the lag matrices model may also include environmental distance matrices, so that spatial patterns in species abundance distances (community similarity) may be quantified while controlling for the environmental similarity between sites. Examples of spatial analyses with MRM are presented.
KeywordsCommunity similarity Distance matrix Mantel correlogram Multivariate analysis Partial Mantel test Spatial autocorrelation
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Everham E. M. and Brokaw N.V.L. (1996). Forest damage and recovery from catastrophic wind. Bot. Rev. 62:113–185Google Scholar
- Fortin M.-J. and Payette S. (2002). How to test the significance of the relation between spatially autocorrelated data at the landscape scale: a case study using fire and forest maps. Ecoscience 9:213–218Google Scholar
- Insightful Corporation (2002). SPLUS version 6.1. Insightful Corporation, SeattleGoogle Scholar
- Johnson E.A. (1992). Fire and Vegetation Dynamics: Studies from the North American Boreal Forest. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Legendre P. and Legendre L. (1998). Numerical Ecology, 2nd English edition. Elsevier Science, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
- Lichstein J.W., Simons T.R., Shriner S.A., and Franzreb K.E. (2002). Spatial autocorrelation and autoregressive models in ecology. Ecol. Monogr. 72:445–463Google Scholar
- Rawlings J.O., Pantula S.G. and Dickey D.A. (1998). Applied Regression Analysis: A Research Tool. 2nd ed. Springer-Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Sokal R.R. (1986). Spatial data analysis and historical processes. In: Diday E., Escoufier Y., Lebart L., Pages J., Schektman Y. and Tomassone R. (eds), Data Analysis and Informatics, IV. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, pp. 29–43Google Scholar
- Sokal R.R. and Oden N.L. (1978). Spatial autocorrelation in biology 2. Some biological implications and four applications of evolutionary and ecological interest. Biol. J. Linnean Soc. 10:229–249Google Scholar
- Urban D., Goslee S., Pierce K. and Lookingbill T. (2002). Extending community ecology to landscapes. Ecoscience 9:200–212Google Scholar