Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Learning Objective
Introduction
Frequently researchers are confronted with a situation where samples from several
populations are obtained, for example yields of three different varieties of rice, and it is of
interest to test the null hypothesis that the population means are all the same. The
technique used to make these tests is called the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). If the
treatments, rice varieties in this case, all had exactly the same population means and
variances then one would expect plots receiving different varieties to show the same
variability as plots receiving the same varieties. This variability being due to numerous
non-specific causes such as variable land, seed and cultivation practices. On the other
hand if the varieties had different population means, but the same population variances,
then one would expect the variability between plots with different varieties to be greater
than that for plots with the same variety. Hence the idea of ANOVA is to compare
variability of plots receiving different treatments to that of plots receiving the same
treatments.
• the populations all have same variances (populations are homoscedastic) but possibly
different means
• treatment effects are additive, i.e., means differ by additive amounts and not by
Multiplicative factors.
A completely randomized design (CRD) is one where the t treatments are assigned
completely at random so that each of r experimental unit has the same chance of receiving
any one treatment. For the CRD, any difference amongst the experimental units receiving
the same treatment is considered as experimental error. In CRD the total variability in the
data, as measured by the total sum of squares (SS) is partitioned into:
The analysis of variance table associated with a completely randomized design follows:
SV dF SS MS Fc
Treatment t-1 TrSS TrMS = TrSS / (t - 1) TrMS / EMS
Error t (r - 1) ESS EMS = ESS / t (n - 1)
Total tr - 1 TSS
where TrMS is the estimate of the variability among treatments; while EMS is the
estimate of the inherent variability within treatments.
A measure of the precision of treatment means is given by the standard error of a mean,
SEM or the standard error of the difference between two means SED as
Example 1
Suppose an experiment has been set up with four replicates of three varieties and had
assessed 12 plots to obtain the following yields:
To construct the ANOVA Table for this data set, the following computations are made:
SV dF SS MS F-value
Treatment (Varieties) 2 1.04 0.520 4.18ns
Error 9 1.12 0.124
Total 11 2.16
c.v. = 8.0 %
The null hypothesis is that there is no difference between the mean yields of varieties A,
B, and C. Note that the treatment variation is greater than the error variation. The
question here is: How likely is it to see a value large or larger than the observed treatment
MS if the null hypothesis is true. The answer is obtained by conducting an F-test.
F = 0.520/0.124 = 4.18 with 2 and 9 dF. This is not larger than the 5% critical value of
the F-distribution (4.26) with 2 and 9 dF, so the null hypothesis cannot be rejected.
The Analysis of Variance is also useful when the populations are classified according to
more than one factor, such as different blocks of land and different varieties in the case of
a Randomized Complete Block (RCB) Design. There are three sources of variation in an
RCB design: treatment, replication (or block), and experimental error. Notice that this is
one more than that for a CRD, because of the addition of replication, which corresponds
to the variability among blocks. Hence, for an experiment layed-out in RCB design with t
treatments and r replications, the outline of the ANOVA table follows:
Example 2
SV dF SS MS F-value
Replication 3 0.587 0.196
Variety (V) 2 1.040 0.520 5.84*
Error 6 0.533 0.089
c.v. = 6.8 %
1
Some researchers test the Blocks MS for significance as well as the Treatment MS, but there is little point
in this as we already expect the Blocks MS to be greater than the residual if we have blocked the plots in the
correct manner.
The major feature of the Latin Square (LS) Design is its capacity to simultaneously
handle two known sources of variation among experimental units. It treats the sources as
two independent blocking criteria, instead of only one as in the RCB design. As such the
Analysis of Variance associated with LS Design has four sources of variation; two more
than that for the CRD and one more than that for the RCB Design. The sources of
variation are: row, column, treatment and experimental error. Thus for an experimental
data resulting from an LS Design with r rows, c columns and t treatments, the outline of
the ANOVA table follows:
SV dF SS MS Fc
Row t-1 RSS RMS = RSS / (t - 1) RMS / EMS2
Column t-1 CSS CMS = CSS / (t - 1) CMS / EMS2
Treatment t-1 TrSS TrMS = TrSS / (t - 1) TrMS / EMS
Error (t -1) (t - 2) ESS EMS = ESS /(t - 1) (t - 2)
Total t2 - 1 TSS
2
Often times the significance of the Row and Column factors are not tested.
ANOVA table for grain yield (t/ha) involving 4 sprayer rates in 4 replications.
SV dF SS MS Fc
Row 3 1.8930 0.6310 5.06*
Column 3 0.7418 0.2473 1.98ns
Treatment 3 2.5571 0.8524 6.83**
Error 6 0.7433 0.1247
Total 15 5.9352
c.v. = 7.8%
Frequently data are classified according to more than two factors, as in the case of a
factorial treatment arrangements. For example, an experiment involving two factors,
each at two levels, such as two varieties (V1 and V2) and two nitrogen rates (N1 and N2),
is referred to as a 2x2 factorial experiment. Its treatments consist of the following four
possible combinations of the two levels of the two factors.
Treatment Combination
Treatment Number Variety Nitrogen Rate (kg./ha)
1 V1 N1
2 V1 N2
3 V2 N1
4 V2 N2
Note that the term factorial describes a specific way in which the treatments are formed
and does not, in any way, refer to the experimental design used. That is one may arrange
these in the field by using any one of the basic designs like the completely randomized
design (CRD), the randomized complete block design (RCBD) or the Latin Square (LS).
Two factors are said to have an interaction if the effect of one factor varies with the level
of the other factor. In similar manner, three factors are said to have interaction if the
interaction between any two varies over the levels of the third. Higher order interactions
are analogously defined. The following table presents two hypothetical sets of 2x2
factorial data: one with, and another without, interaction between two factors.
A 2x2 Factorial Hypothetical Rice Yield Data with No Interaction Between Variety and
Nitrogen Rates.
Variety N1 (0 kg / ha) N2 (60 kg / ha) Average
V1 1.00 3.00 2.00
V2 2.00 4.00 3.00
Average 1.50 3.50
A 2x2 Factorial Hypothetical Rice Yield Data with Interaction Between Variety and
Nitrogen Rates.
Variety N1 (0 kg / ha) N2 (60 kg / ha) Average
V1 1.00 1.00 1.00
V2 2.00 4.00 3.00
Average 1.50 2.50
4 (a) V2 4 (c) V2
3 V1 3
2 2
1 1 V1
N1 N2 N1 N2
4 (b) V2 4 (d)
3 3 V1
2 V1 2
1 1 V2
N1 N2 N1 N2
This set of graphs represent different magnitudes of interaction between varieties (V1 and
V2) and nitrogen rates (N1 and N2) with (a) showing no interaction, (b) and (c) showing
intermediate interactions, and (d) showing high interaction.
SV dF SS MS F-value
Block r-1 RSS RMS RMS/EMS
Factor (A) a-1 ASS AMS AMS/EMS
Factor (B) b-1 BSS BMS BMS/EMS
AxB (a-1)(b-1) AxBSS AxBMS AxBMS/EMS
Error (r-1)(ab-1) ESS EMS
Total rab-1
ANOVA Table for grain yield (t/ha) involving 3 varieties, 8 fertilizer treatments and 4
replications.
SV dF SS MS F-value
Replication 3 0.60873 0.20291 1.4ns
Variety (V) 2 14.39724 7.19862 50.8**
Fertilizer (F) 7 214.86423 30.69489 216.4**
VxF 14 3.66954 0.26211 1.9*
Error 69 9.78696 0.14184
c.v. = 6.0%
SED = 0.19
SEM = 0.27
The result indicates that the main effects of variety and fertilizer are significant at the 1%
level of significance. The results also show a significant interaction between variety and
fertilizer, indicating that the varietal difference was significantly affected by fertilizer
level applied and that the fertilizer effect differed significantly with the varieties tested.
Split-Plot Design
The split-plot design is specifically suited for a 2-factor experiment that has more
treatments than can be accommodated by a complete block design. In a split-plot design
one of the factors is assigned to the main plot. The assigned factor is called Main-Plot
Factor. The main plot is divided into subplots to which the second factor, called the Sub-
Plot Factor, is assigned. Thus, each main plot becomes a block for the subplot
treatments.
The Analysis of Variance of a split-plot design is divided into main plot analysis and the
sub-plot analysis. By denoting A and B as the main plot and sub-plot factors,
respectively, the outline of the ANOVA table for a split-plot design is as follows:
ANOVA Table for grain yield (kg/plot) involving 4 N-rates (mainplot), 6 varieties (sub-
plot) and 4 replications.
SV dF SS MS F-value
Block 3 2.3473 0.7824 1.08ns
N-rate (N) 3 7.6385 2.5462 3.50ns
Error (a) 9 6.5390 0.7266
The strip-plot design is specifically suited for a 2-factor in which the desired precision for
measuring interaction effect between the two factors is higher than that for measuring the
main effect of either one of the two factors. This is done with the use of three plot sizes:
1. Vertical-strip plot for the first factor
2. Horizontal-strip plot for the second factor
3. Intersection plot for the interaction between the two factors
The Analysis of Variance of a strip-plot design is divided into three parts: the horizontal-
factor analysis, the vertical-factor analysis, and the interaction analysis. By denoting A
and B as the horizontal and vertical factors, respectively, the outline of the ANOVA table
for a strip-plot design is as follows:
SV dF SS MS F-value
Replication r-1 RSS RMS
Horizontal Factor (A) a-1 ASS AMS AMS/EaMS
Error (a) (r-1)(a-1) EaSS EaMS
ANOVA Table for grain yield (t/ha) involving 6 water regimes (horizontal factors) and 3
N-management (vertical factor) and 4 replications.
SV dF SS MS F-value
Block 3 3.2176 1.0725 11.61**
Water Regime (W) 5 4.4989 0.8998 9.74**
Error (a) 15 3.3861 0.2257
178 Example
References:
Cochran, W.G., and Cox, G.M. (1957). Experimental Designs, Second Edition. John
Wiley, New York, New York.
Gomez, K.A., and Gomez, A.A. (1984). Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research.
John Wiley, New York, New York.
Searle, S.R. (1987). Linear Models for Unbalanced Data. John Wiley, New York, New
York.
Snedecor, G.W., and Cochran, W.G. (1989). Statistical Methods, Eighth Edition. Iowa
State University, Ames, Iowa.