+ Site Statistics
References:
52,654,530
Abstracts:
29,560,856
PMIDs:
28,072,755
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

# On spatial prediction of soil properties in the presence of a spatial trend: the empirical best linear unbiased predictor (E-BLUP) with REML

On spatial prediction of soil properties in the presence of a spatial trend: the empirical best linear unbiased predictor (E-BLUP) with REML

European Journal of Soil Science 57(6): 787-799

Geostatistical estimates of a soil property by kriging are equivalent to the best linear unbiased predictions (BLUPs). Universal kriging is BLUP with a fixed-effect model that is some linear function of spatial coordinates, or more generally a linear function of some other secondary predictor variable when it is called kriging with external drift. A problem in universal kriging is to find a spatial variance model for the random variation, since empirical variograms estimated from the data by method-of-moments will be affected by both the random variation and that variation represented by the fixed effects.The geostatistical model of spatial variation is a special case of the linear mixed model where our data are modelled as the additive combination of fixed effects (e.g. the unknown mean, coefficients of a trend model), random effects (the spatially dependent random variation in the geostatistical context) and independent random error (nugget variation in geostatistics). Statisticians use residual maximum likelihood (REML) to estimate variance parameters, i.e. to obtain the variogram in a geostatistical context. REML estimates are consistent (they converge in probability to the parameters that are estimated) with less bias than both maximum likelihood estimates and method-of-moment estimates obtained from residuals of a fitted trend. If the estimate of the random effects variance model is inserted into the BLUP we have the empirical BLUP or E-BLUP. Despite representing the state of the art for prediction from a linear mixed model in statistics, the REML-E-BLUP has not been widely used in soil science, and in most studies reported in the soils literature the variogram is estimated with methods that are seriously biased if the fixed-effect structure is more complex than just an unknown constant mean (ordinary kriging). In this paper we describe the REML-E-BLUP and illustrate the method with some data on soil water content that exhibit a pronounced spatial trend.

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: \$19.90)

Accession: 012876490

DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2389.2005.00768.x

Related references

Variance component estimation and prediction of breeding values by the restricted maximum likelihood (REML) and best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) methods in Pinus. Boletim de Pesquisa Florestal ( 32/33): 23-42, 1996

Prediction of oil palm (Elaeis guineensis, Jacq.) agronomic performances using the best linear unbiased predictor (BLUP). Theoretical and Applied Genetics 102(5): 787-792, 2001

Spatial prediction of soil organic matter in the presence of different external trends with REML-EBLUP. Geoderma 148.2, 2008

Multivariate spatial prediction in the presence of non-linear trend and covariance non-stationarity. Environmetrics 7(2): 145-165, 1996

An alternative derivation method of mixed model equations from best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) and restricted BLUP of breeding values not using maximum likelihood. Animal Science Journal, 2018

BLUP (Best Linear Unbiased Prediction) and beyond. Advances in statistical methods for genetic improvement of livestock: 239-276, 1990

Prediction of hybrid performance in rice: comparisons among best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) procedure, midparent value, and molecular marker distance. International Rice Research Notes 25(3): 12-13, 2000

Best Linear Unbiased Prediction (BLUP) and the design of breeding programs. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Animal Production 15: 513-516, 1984

Relationship between BLUP (Best Linear Unbiased Prediction) and Bayesian estimators. Annales de Genetique et de Selection Animale 9(1): 27-32, 1976

Relationship between BLUP (best linear unbiased prediction) and the Bayesian method. Annales de genetique et de selection animale: (1) 27-32, 1977

The best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) as a method for genetic evaluation in pigs. Instytut Zootechniki Biuletyn Informacyjny 31(5-6): 5-13, 1993

Graphical representation of Best Linear Unbiased Prediction (BLUP) with different amounts of information available. Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie 101(5): 321-329, 1984

Best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) of breeding values in Pinus improvement. Boletim de Pesquisa Florestal ( 32/33): 3-22, 1996

Estimating the breeding value of farm livestock using Best Linear Unbiased Prediction (BLUP). Ondokuzmayis Universitesi, Ziraat Fakultesi Dergisi 15(1): 84-87, 2000

Ranking parents by best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) breeding values in oil palm. Euphytica 76(1/2): 13-21, 1994