Submitted:
10 August 2023
Posted:
11 August 2023
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Review of literature
3. Data Description
4. Methods
4.1. Variance Inflation factor
4.2. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) Test for Sampling Adequacy
4.3. Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity
4.4. Principal Component Analysis (PCA)
4.5. Scree plot
4.6. Factor Analysis
4.7. Canonical Correlation
5. Results and Discussion
5.1. Variance inflation factor
5.2. Principal Component Analysis
5.3. Factor Analysis
5.4. Canonical Correlation
6. Conclusion
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Wilks, D. S. Statistical Methods in the Atmospheric Sciences, New York. International Geophysics Series 2006.
- Sena, M. M.; Frighetto, R. T. S.; Valarini, P. J.; Tokeshi, H.; Poppi, R. J. Discrimination of Management Effects on Soil Parameters by Using Principal Component Analysis: A Multivariate Analysis Case Study. Soil Tillage Res. 2002, 67 (2), 171–181. [CrossRef]
- Salehi, A.; Amiri, G. Z. Study of Physical and Chemical Soil Properties Variations Using Principal Component Analysis Method in the Forest, North of Iran. Caspian J. Env. Sci 2005, 3 (2), 131–137.
- Brejda, J. J. Factor Analysis of Nutrient Distribution Patterns under Shrub Live-Oak in Two Contrasting Soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1998, 62 (3), 805–809. [CrossRef]
- Jha, M. N.; Gupta, M. K.; Pandey, R. A. J. I. V. Factor Analysis of Soil Nutrient Distribution Pattern under Different Plantations. Indian Forester 2000, 126, 1270–1278.
- Yang, Y.; Mekki, D. M.; Lv, S. J.; Yu, J. H.; Wang, L. Y.; Wang, J. Y.; Dai. Canonical Correlation Analysis of Body Weight, Body Measurement and Carcass Characteristics of Jinghai Yellow Chicken. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances 2006.
- Dahal, H. Factor Analysis for Soil Test Data: A Methodological Approach in Environment Friendly Soil Fertility Management. J. Agric. Environ. 2007, 8 (0), 8–19. [CrossRef]
- Jain, P. M.; Shandliya, V. K. A Survey Paper on Comparative Study between Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA). International Journal of Management, IT, and Engineering 2013, 3 (6), 415–424.
- Saikhom, R.; Sahoo, A. K.; Taraphder, S.; Pan, S.; Sarkar, U.; Ghosh, P. R.; Baidya. Principal Component Analysis of Morphological Traits of Haringhata Black Chickens in an Organized Farm. Exploratory Animal and Medical Research 2018, 8 (1), 64–68.
- Zhang, Z.; Castelló, A. Principal Components Analysis in Clinical Studies. Ann. Transl. Med. 2017, 5 (17), 351. [CrossRef]
- Amao, S. R. Application of Principal Component Analysis on the Body Morphometric of Nigerian Indigenous Chickens Reared Intensively under Southern Guinea Savanna Condition of Nigeria. Journal of Environmental Issues and Agriculture in Developing Countries 2018, 10 (1), 1–12.
- Khokhar, A. N.; Rajarathinam, A. Canonical correlation modeling for egg production traits and body weight, egg weight and age at sexual maturity. Int. J. Agricult. Stat. Sci. 2018, 14 (1), 405-408.
- Manikandan, B.; Rajarathinam, A. Canonical Relationship between Different Commodities Stock Price Index in India. Int. J. Agricult. Stat. Sci 2019, 15 (2), 829–833.
- Onoyima, C. C.; Okibe, F. G. Multivariate Analysis of the Physico-Chemical Properties of Soils in Selected Locations of the Floodplain of River Kaduna in Niger State, Nigeria. Glob. J. Pure Appl. Sci. 2021, 27 (3), 279–288. [CrossRef]
- Goldstein, R. Conditioning Diagnostics: Collinearity and Weak Data in Regression. Technometrics 1993, 35 (1), 85–86. [CrossRef]
- Shrestha, N. Detecting Multicollinearity in Regression Analysis. Am. J. Appl. Math. Stat. 2020, 8 (2), 39–42. [CrossRef]
- Young, D. S. Handbook of Regression Methods; Chapman & Hall/CRC: Philadelphia, PA, 2018.
- Kaiser, H. F. A Second Generation Little Jiffy. Psychometrika 1970, 35 (4), 401–415. [CrossRef]
- Kaiser, H. F.; Rice, J. Little Jiffy, Mark Iv. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 1974, 34 (1), 111–117. [CrossRef]
- Bartlett, M. S. The Effect of Standardization on a χ 2 Approximation in Factor Analysis. Biometrika 1951, 38 (3/4), 337. [CrossRef]
- Hotelling, H. Analysis of a Complex of Statistical Variables into Principal Components. J. Educ. Psychol. 1933, 24 (6), 417–441. [CrossRef]
- Dunteman, G. H. Principal Components Analysis; SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, 1989.
- Johnson, R. A.; Wichern, D. W. Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis. Biometrics 1998, 54 (3), 1203. [CrossRef]
- Everitt, B.; Landau, S.; Leese, M. Cluster Analysis. A; Hodder Arnold Publication. Willey: London, 2001.
- Cattell, R. B. The Scree Test for the Number of Factors. Multivariate Behav. Res. 1966, 1 (2), 245–276. [CrossRef]
- Afifi, A.; May, S.; Clark, V. A. Practical Multivariate Analysis; Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2011.
- Hair, J. F.; Black, W. C.; Babin, B. J.; Anderson, R. E.; Tatham, R. L. Multivariate Data Analysis: Upper Saddle River, Multivariate Data Analysis. ) Upper Saddle River 1998, 5 (3), 207–219.







| S. No | Response variable |
Regressors | R2 (%) | Adj. R2 (%) | VIF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | N | P, K, pH, EC, S, Cu, Fe, Mn, Zn, B | 0.27 | 0.26 | 1.37 |
| 2 | P | N, K, pH, EC, S, Cu, Fe, Mn, Zn, B | 0.51 | 0.50 | 2.02 |
| 3 | K | N, P, pH, EC, S, Cu, Fe, Mn, Zn, B | 0.61 | 0.60 | 2.56 |
| 4 | pH | N, P, K, EC, S, Cu, Fe, Mn, Zn, B | 0.41 | 0.40 | 1.69 |
| 5 | EC | N, P, K, pH, S, Cu, Fe, Mn, Zn, B | 0.50 | 0.49 | 1.98 |
| 6 | S | N, P, K, pH, EC, Cu, Fe, Mn, Zn, B | 0.07 | 0.06 | 1.07 |
| 7 | Cu | N, P, K, pH, EC, S, Fe, Mn, Zn, B | 0.38 | 0.37 | 1.60 |
| 8 | Fe | N, P, K, pH, EC, S, Cu, Mn, Zn, B | 0.44 | 0.43 | 1.78 |
| 9 | Mn | N, P, K, pH, EC, S, Cu, Fe, Zn, B | 0.54 | 0.53 | 2.17 |
| 10 | Zn | N, P, K, pH, EC, S, Cu, Fe, Mn, B | 0.34 | 0.34 | 1.51 |
| 11 | B | N, P, K, pH, EC, S, Cu, Fe, Mn, Zn | 0.48 | 0.47 | 1.96 |
| KMO and Bartlett's Test | ||
|---|---|---|
| Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. | 0.64 | |
| Bartlett's Test of Sphericity | Approx. Chi-Square | 2067.48 |
| df | 55 | |
| Sig. | 0.00 | |
| Soil Parameters | PC1 | PC2 | PC3 | PC4 | PC5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | -0.04 | 0.82 | 0.13 | -0.09 | -0.10 |
| P | 0.88 | -0.11 | -0.06 | 0.12 | -0.08 |
| K | 0.70 | 0.24 | 0.54 | 0.10 | -0.04 |
| pH | 0.14 | 0.72 | 0.02 | 0.38 | 0.07 |
| EC | 0.24 | -0.54 | 0.67 | -0.05 | 0.02 |
| S | -0.03 | -0.06 | 0.04 | -0.01 | 0.97 |
| Cu | -0.59 | -0.12 | 0.34 | 0.34 | -0.30 |
| Fe | -0.10 | 0.36 | -0.24 | 0.78 | -0.08 |
| Mn | -0.75 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.44 | 0.01 |
| Zn | 0.06 | 0.09 | -0.36 | -0.76 | -0.03 |
| B | 0.22 | -0.30 | -0.82 | -0.10 | -0.05 |
| Eigenvalues | 2.27 | 2.04 | 1.18 | 1.10 | 1.02 |
| % of variance | 24.22 | 18.52 | 16.10 | 9.97 | 9.27 |
| Cumulative % of the variance | 24.22 | 42.74 | 58.83 | 68.804 | 78.072 |
| Soil parameters | FA1 | FA2 | FA3 | FA4 | FA5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | -0.08 | -0.01 | 0.31 | 0.39 | -0.32 |
| P | -0.05 | 0.62 | -0.29 | 0.30 | 0.29 |
| K | -0.03 | 0.83 | 0.26 | 0.23 | -0.03 |
| ph | -0.01 | 0.03 | 0.44 | 0.56 | -0.08 |
| EC | 0.07 | 0.58 | 0.08 | -0.62 | 0.20 |
| S | 1.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Cu | -0.15 | -0.29 | 0.47 | -0.33 | 0.13 |
| Fe | -0.10 | -0.28 | 0.47 | 0.46 | 0.39 |
| Mn | -0.01 | -0.60 | 0.50 | -0.18 | 0.16 |
| Zn | -0.01 | -0.04 | -0.55 | 0.07 | -0.37 |
| B | -0.04 | -0.21 | -0.73 | 0.23 | 0.31 |
| Eigenvalues | 2.27 | 2.04 | 1.18 | 1.10 | 1.10 |
| % of variance | 24.22 | 18.52 | 16.10 | 9.97 | 9.27 |
| Cumulative % of the variance | 24.22 | 42.74 | 58.83 | 68.80 | 78.07 |
| Test Name | Value | Approx. F | Hypoth. DF | Error DF | Sig. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pillai’s | 1.16 | 30.88 | 30 | 3065 | 0.00 |
| Hotellings | 1.88 | 38.12 | 30 | 3037 | 0.00 |
| Wilks | 0.23 | 35.83 | 30 | 2438 | 0.00 |
| S. No | Canonical Correlation | Squared Canonical Correlation | Pct. | Eigenvalues | Wilks L. | Prob. Pr>F |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.66 | 0.43 | 40.59 | 0.76 | 0.23 | 0.00 |
| 2 | 0.63 | 0.40 | 35.76 | 0.67 | 0.41 | 0.00 |
| 3 | 0.54 | 0.29 | 21.78 | 0.41 | 0.68 | 0.00 |
| 4 | 0.18 | 0.03 | 1.78 | 0.34 | 0.97 | 0.00 |
| 5 | 0.04 | 0.00 | 0.09 | 0.00 | 0.98 | 0.61 |
| Can Var. | Covariates | Dependent variables | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pct. Var. Dep. | Cum. Pct. Dep. | Pct. Var. Cov. | Cum. Pct. Cov. | Pct. Var. Dep. | Cum. Pct. Dep. | Pct. Var. Cov. | Cum. Pct. Cov. | |
| 1 | 7.18 | 7.18 | 16.58 | 16.58 | 31.05 | 31.05 | 13.45 | 12.45 |
| 2 | 0.09 | 16.27 | 22.59 | 39.17 | 16.49 | 47.54 | 6.63 | 20.09 |
| 3 | 4.32 | 20.59 | 14.86 | 54.03 | 30.19 | 77.73 | 8.78 | 28.87 |
| 4 | 0.52 | 21.12 | 16.08 | 70.11 | 13.14 | 90.86 | 0.43 | 29.30 |
| 5 | 0.03 | 21.15 | 17.44 | 87.55 | 9.14 | 100.00 | 0.15 | 29.31 |
| Y set variables | Canonical variate 1 | X set variables | Canonical variate 1 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Canonical weights | Canonical loadings | Canonical weights | Canonical loadings | ||
| S | 0.90 | 0.13 | N | 0.10 | 0.03 |
| Cu | 0.53 | 0.34 | P | 0.84 | 0.53 |
| Fe | 0.17 | -0.27 | K | 0.87 | 0.70 |
| Mn | 0.83 | 0.93 | pH | 0.30 | 0.70 |
| Zn | 0.91 | 0.33 | EC | 0.20 | 0.19 |
| B | 0.04 | 0.23 | |||
| PV (%) | 12 | PV (%) | 17 | ||
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).