Hello everybody!
I didn't imagine that my questions will lead to such a debate among researchers :) . It helps me to get ready for future reviewers' comments.  ;)
Just a question still opened about NMDS (Gavin?):
Is it important to reach a convergent solution? since the "best" solution ordinate species always in similar way? Because as I said even with stricter criteria the analysis don't reach a convergent solution.

Best regards,

Aurélie

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aurélie Rey-Boissezon
Ph-D Student
University of Geneva
Section of Earth and Environmental Sciences - Institute F.-A. Forel
Aquatic Ecology Group
Uni Rondeau
Site de Battelle - Bâtiment D
7, route de Drize - 1227 Carouge
Geneva
Switzerland
Tel. 0041 (0) 22379 04 88

Aurelie.Boissezon@unige.ch
http://leba.unige.ch/team/aboissezon.html
________________________________
De : fgillet3@gmail.com [fgillet3@gmail.com] de la part de François Gillet [francois.gillet@univ-fcomte.fr]
Date d'envoi : samedi 20 avril 2013 10:59
À : Gavin Simpson
Cc: Aurélie Boissezon; r-sig-ecology@r-project.org
Objet : Re: [R-sig-eco] RE : CCA vs NMDS and ordisurf


2013/4/19 Gavin Simpson <gavin.simpson@ucl.ac.uk<mailto:gavin.simpson@ucl.ac.uk>>
I really don't see why this has to be an either/or situation.

I fully agree: direct and indirect gradient analyses are complementary! Sorry for not having stressed that in my short answers...

François


	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

