Ejemplo: Transformaciones

Una investigación se llevo acabo con el objetivo de determinar el nivel óptimo de compost que
maximice la cantidad de flores de cedro . Para tal efecto, 5 niveles de compost (0, 20, 40, 60 y 80
tn/ha) fueron aplicados aleatoriamente en distintas plantas muy semejantes de acuerdo al diseño
completamente aleatorio. Luego, en cada una de las plantas durante 2 meses despues de iniciado la
floración, se contó el número de flores desarrolladas. Los resultados fueron:

Nivel de Compost
0 20 40 60 80
6 1.7918 22 3.0910 50 3.9120 46 3.8286 58 4.0604
15 2.7081 33 3.4965 61 4.1109 105 4.6540 36 3.5835
9 2.1972 36 3.5835 37 3.6109 67 4.2047 114 4.7362
10 2.3026 18 2.8904 69 4.2341 44 3.7842 34 3.5264
26 3.2581 45 3.8067 33 3.4965 79 4.3694
38 3.6376 43 3.7612 116 4.7536
28 3.3322
8.9996 23.2893 23.4358 24.7216 20.2760 100.7223
4 7 6 6 5 362.3206

Tests for Normality

Shapiro-Wilk W 0.898724 Pr < W 0.0107

Stem Leaf # Boxplot

11 4 2 0
10 5 1 |
9 |
8 |
7 9 1 |
6 179 3 +-----+
5 08 2 | |
4 3456 4 | + |
3 3346678 7 *-----*
2 268 3 +-----+
1 058 3 |
0 69 2 |
----+----+----+----+
Multiply Stem.Leaf by 10**+1

Dependent Variable: flor

Sum of
Source DF Squares Mean Square F Value Pr > F
comp 4 12105.86667 3026.46667 6.06 0.0018
Error 23 11490.56190 499.58965
Corrected Total 27 23596.42857

Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F

lin 1 10409.46104 10409.46104 20.84 0.0001
cua 1 917.92209 917.92209 1.84 0.1884

Bartlett's Test for Homogeneity of flor Variance

Source DF Chi-Square Pr > ChiSq
comp 4 20.7993 0.0003
 comp Flor LSMEAN
0 10.0000000
20 28.7142857
40 50.8333333
60 68.5000000
80 64.2000000

Standard
Parameter Estimate Error t Value Pr > |t|
Intercept 7.600816327 5.39417694 1.41 0.2942
comp 1.462085034 0.31949125 4.58 0.0446
comp*comp -0.009014456 0.00382961 -2.35 0.1428

Datos transformados por logarítmo

Tests for Normality

Shapiro-Wilk W 0.952171 Pr < W 0.2245

Stem Leaf # Boxplot

4 778 3 |
4 11224 5 +-----+
3 555666688889 12 *--+--*
3 133 3 +-----+
2 79 2 |
2 23 2 |
1 8 1 0
----+----+----+----+

Dependent Variable: flor

Sum of
Source DF Squares Mean Square F Value Pr > F
comp 4 11.03407203 2.75851801 18.23 <.0001
Error 23 3.47982626 0.15129679
Corrected Total 27 14.51389829

Contrast DF Contrast SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F

lin 1 9.19326294 9.19326294 60.76 <.0001
cua 1 2.52771545 2.52771545 16.71 0.0005

Bartlett's Test for Homogeneity of flor Variance

Source DF Chi-Square Pr > ChiSq

comp 4 4.4117 0.3532

comp Flor LSMEAN

0 2.24990484
20 3.32704685
40 3.90596398
60 4.12026363
80 4.05519375

Standard
Parameter Estimate Error t Value Pr > |t|
Intercept 2.272481220 0.04621664 49.17 0.0004
comp 0.059862420 0.00273736 21.87 0.0021
comp*comp -0.000473043 0.00003281 -14.42 0.0048
SAS

options ls=76 ps=56;

data transf;
input comp nfl;
nfll=log(nfl);
datalines;
0 6
0 15
:
80 79
;
proc univariate data=transf normal plot;
var nfl;
run;

proc glm data=transf;

class comp;
model nfl=comp/ss3;
means comp/hovtest=batlett;
contrast ‘lin’ comp -2 -1 0 1 2;
contrast ‘cua’ comp 2 -1 -2 -1 2;
lsmeans comp/out=aaa;
run;

proc glm data=aaa;

model lsmean=comp comp*comp/ss3;
run;