Skip to main content
Log in

Abstract

This article introduces a hierarchical model for compositional analysis. Our approach models both source and mixture data simultaneously, and accounts for several different types of variation: these include measurement error on both the mixture and source data; variability in the sample from the source distributions; and variability in the mixing proportions themselves, generally of main interest. The method is an improvement on some existing methods in that estimates of mixing proportions (including their interval estimates) are sure to lie in the range [0, 1]; in addition, it is shown that our model can help in situations where identification of appropriate source data is difficult, especially when we extend our model to include a covariate. We first study the likelihood surface of a base model for a simple example, and then include prior distributions to create a Bayesian model that allows analysis of more complex situations via Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling from the likelihood. Application of the model is illustrated with two examples using real data: one concerning chemical markers in plants, and another on water chemistry.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aebischer, N. J., Robertson, P. A., and Kenward, R. E. (1993), “Compositional Analysis of Habitat Use from Animal Radio-Tracking Data,” Ecology, 74, 1313–1325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aitchison, J. (1982), The “Statistical Analysis of Compositional Data” (with discussion), Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Ser. B, 44, 139–177.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • — (1986), The Statistical Analysis of Compositional Data, London: Chapman and Hall.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Barndorff-Nielsen, O. E., and Cox, D. R. (1989), Asymptotic Techniques for Use in Statistics, London: Chapman and Hall.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Best, N. G., Cowles, M. K., and Vines, S. K. (1997), CODA: Convergence Diagnosis and Output Analysis Software for Gibbs Sampling Output, Version 0.4, Cambridge, UK: MRC Biostatistics Unit, Institute of Public Health.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billheimer, D. (2001), “Compositional Receptor Modelling,” Environmetrics, 12, 451–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billheimer, D., Guttorp, P., and Fagan, W. F. (2001), “Statistical Interpretation of Species Composition,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 96, 1205–1214.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, M. J., Dunn, S. M., and Soulsby, C. (2002), “A Bayesian Model for Compositional Data Analysis,” in Proceedings of Compstat 2002, eds. W. Härdle and B. Rönz, Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag, pp. 105–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elston, D. A., Illius, A. W., and Gordon, I. A. (1996), “Assessment of Preference Among a Range of Options Using Log Ratio Analysis,” Ecology, 77, 2538–2548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Genereux, D. (1998), “Quantifying Uncertainty in Tracer-Based Hydrograph Separations,” Water Resources Research, 34, 915–919.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopke, P. K. (2003), “Recent Developments in Receptor Modeling,” Journal of Chemometrics, 17, 255–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krzanowski, W. J. (1988), Principles of Multivariate Analysis, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Lunn, D. J., Thomas, A., Best, N., and Spiegelhalter, D. J. (2000), “WinBUGS—A Bayesian Modelling Framework: Concepts, Structure and Extensibility,” Statistics and Computing, 10, 325–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayes, R. W., Lamb, C. S., and Colgrove, P. M. (1986), “The Use of Dosed and Herbage n-Alkanes as Markers for the Determination of Herbage Intake,” Journal of Agricultural Science, 107, 161–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newman, J. A., Thomson, W. A., Penning, P. D., and Mayes, R. W. (1995), “Least-Squares Estimation of Diet Composition from n-Alkanes in Herbage Faeces Using Matrix Mathematics,” Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 46, 793–805.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, E. S., Oh, M. S., and Guttorp, P. (2002), “Multivariate Receptor Models and Model Uncertainty,” Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, 60, 49–67.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Park, E. S., Spiegelman, C. H., and Henry, R. C. (2002), “Bilinear Estimation of Pollution Source Profiles and Amounts by using Multivariate Receptor Models,” Environmentrics, 13, 775–798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renner, R. M. (1993), “The Resolution of a Compositional Data Set into Mixtures of Fixed Source Compositions,” Applied Statistics, 42, 615–631.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Soulsby, C., Petry, J., Brewer, M. J., Dunn, S. M., Ott, B., and Malcolm, I. A. (2003), “Identifying and Assessing Uncertainty in Hydrological Pathways: A Novel Approach to End Member Mixing in a Scottish Agricultural Catchment,” Journal of Hydrology, 274, 109–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spiegelhalter, D. J., Best, N. G., Carlin, B. P., and van der Linde, A. (2002), “Bayesian Measures of Model Complexity and Fit,” (with discussion), Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Ser. B, 64, 583–639.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark J. Brewer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brewer, M.J., Filipe, J.A.N., Elston, D.A. et al. A hierarchical model for compositional data analysis. JABES 10, 19–34 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1198/108571105X28200

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1198/108571105X28200

Key Words

Navigation