A common practice in community ecology studies based on multivariate techniques such as CCA, RDA, dbRDA, etc. is to try to define a parsimonious model using procedures based on p-values and R squared (e.g. forward, backward, stepwise selection).

In my experience, the parsimonious model generally "loses" most of the variable contained in the full model although retaining a similar explanatory power compared to the full model (almost the same R2). Although this seems statistically meaningful, when plotting the triplot of the full model one is able to understand much more of the ecological "story" compared with the parsimonious. For example, the gradients in the site and species are much more clear and so the relationship between species, sites and constraints.

I think this is mostly philosophy, but someone has any consideration on it?

NB: I am referring to models in which collinearity between variables is absent.

More Giacomo Assandri's questions See All
Similar questions and discussions