Abstract

Increasingly, often ecologist collects data with nonlinear trends, heterogeneous variances, temporal correlation, and hierarchical structure. Nonlinear mixed‐effects models offer a flexible approach to such data, but the estimation and interpretation of these models present challenges, partly associated with the lack of worked examples in the ecological literature.We illustrate the nonlinear mixed‐effects modeling approach using temporal dynamics of vegetation moisture with field data from northwestern Patagonia. This is a Mediterranean‐type climate region where modeling temporal changes in live fuel moisture content are conceptually relevant (ecological theory) and have practical implications (fire management). We used this approach to answer whether moisture dynamics varies among functional groups and aridity conditions, and compared it with other simpler statistical models. The modeling process is set out “step‐by‐step”: We start translating the ideas about the system dynamics to a statistical model, which is made increasingly complex in order to include different sources of variability and correlation structures. We provide guidelines and R scripts (including a new self‐starting function) that make data analyses reproducible. We also explain how to extract the parameter estimates from the R output.Our modeling approach suggests moisture dynamic to vary between grasses and shrubs, and between grasses facing different aridity conditions. Compared to more classical models, the nonlinear mixed‐effects model showed greater goodness of fit and met statistical assumptions. While the mixed‐effects approach accounts for spatial nesting, temporal dependence, and variance heterogeneity; the nonlinear function allowed to model the seasonal pattern.Parameters of the nonlinear mixed‐effects model reflected relevant ecological processes. From an applied perspective, the model could forecast the time when fuel moisture becomes critical to fire occurrence. Due to the lack of worked examples for nonlinear mixed‐effects models in the literature, our modeling approach could be useful to diverse ecologists dealing with complex data.

Highlights

  • Classic statistical approaches have assumptions that often are not met by ecological data, such as when variances change with predictors or responses are nonlinear (Bolker et al, 2013; Zuur, Ieno, Walker, Saveliev, & Smith, 2009)

  • We illustrate the nonlinear mixed‐effects modeling approach using temporal dy‐ namics of vegetation moisture with field data from northwestern Patagonia. This is a Mediterranean‐type climate region where modeling temporal changes in live fuel moisture content are conceptually relevant and have prac‐ tical implications. We used this approach to answer whether moisture dynamics varies among functional groups and aridity conditions, and compared it with other simpler statistical models

  • The modeling process is set out “step‐by‐step”: We start translating the ideas about the system dynamics to a statistical model, which is made increasingly complex in order to include differ‐ ent sources of variability and correlation structures

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Classic statistical approaches (e.g., linear regression or ANOVA) have assumptions that often are not met by ecological data, such as when variances change with predictors or responses are nonlinear (Bolker et al, 2013; Zuur, Ieno, Walker, Saveliev, & Smith, 2009). While nonlinear mixed‐effects models are not novel (Davidian & Giltinan, 2003), they still present several challenges to ecologists without formal training in statistics (Bolker et al, 2013) Some of these challenges arise from (a) the need to choose a suitable re‐ sponse function; there are many candidate functions and the variety can be overwhelming (Miguez et al, 2017); (b) patterns of correlation and variance usually occurs when experimental units (e.g., individu‐ als, plots) are measured more than once (Davidian & Giltinan, 2003); (c) parameter estimation has no analytical solution and iterative methods must be applied (Bates & Watts, 2007) often leading to ad‐ ditional hurdles (e.g., provide reasonable starting values and model convergence; Bolker et al, 2013). While the last one represents a technical challenge, on the firsts two lies part of the answer to when or why to apply this complex modeling approach (Figure 1)

Objectives
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call