Getting Started with DImodels

The DImodels package is designed to make fitting Diversity-Interactions models easier. Diversity-Interactions (DI) models (Kirwan et al 2009) are a set of tools for analysing and interpreting data from experiments that explore the effects of species diversity (from a pool of S species) on community-level responses. Data suitable for DI models will include (at least) for each experimental unit: a response recorded at a point in time, and a set of proportions of S species \(p_1\), \(p_2\), …, \(p_S\) from a point in time prior to the recording of the response. The proportions sum to 1 for each experimental unit.

DImodels installation and load

The DImodels package is installed from CRAN and loaded in the typical way.

install.packages("DImodels")
library("DImodels")

Accessing an introduction to Diversity-Introductions models

It is recommended that users unfamiliar with Diversity-Interactions (DI) models read the introduction to DImodels, before using the package. Run the following code to access the documentation.

?DImodels

Datasets included in the DImodels package

There are seven example datasets included in the DImodels package: Bell, sim1, sim2, sim3, sim4, sim5, Switzerland. Details about each of these datasets is available in their associated help files, run this code, for example:

?sim3

In this vignette, we will describe the sim3 dataset and show a worked analysis of it.

The sim3 dataset

The sim3 dataset was simulated from a functional group (FG) Diversity-Interactions model. There were nine species in the pool, and it was assumed that species 1 to 5 come from functional group 1, species 6 and 7 from functional group 2 and species 8 and 9 from functional group 3, where species in the same functional group are assumed to have similar traits. The following equation was used to simulate the data.

\[ y = \sum_{i=1}^{9}\beta_ip_i + \omega_{11}\sum_{\substack{i,j = 1 \ ik = 1,2) and \(\epsilon\) was assumed IID N(0, \(\sigma^2\)). The parameter values are in the following table.

Parameter Value         Parameter Value
\(\beta_1\) 10 \(\omega_{11}\) 2
\(\beta_2\) 9 \(\omega_{22}\) 3
\(\beta_3\) 8 \(\omega_{33}\) 1
\(\beta_4\) 7 \(\omega_{12}\) 4
\(\beta_5\) 11 \(\omega_{13}\) 9
\(\beta_6\) 6 \(\omega_{23}\) 3
\(\beta_7\) 5 \(\gamma_1\) 3
\(\beta_8\) 8 \(\gamma_2\) 0
\(\beta_9\) 9 \(\sigma\) 1.2

Here, the non-linear parameter \(\theta\) that can be included as a power on each \(p_ip_j\) component of each interaction variable (Connolly et al 2013) was set equal to one and thus does not appear in the equation above.

The 206 rows of proportions contained in the dataset design_a (supplied in the package) were used to simulate the sim3 dataset. Here is the first few rows from design_a:

community richness p1 p2 p3 p4 p5 p6 p7 p8 p9
1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

Where community is an identifier for unique sets of proportions and richness is the number of species in the community.

The proportions in design_a were replicated over two treatment levels, giving a total of 412 rows in the simulated dataset. The sim3 data can be loaded and viewed in the usual way.

data("sim3")
knitr::kable(head(sim3, 10))
community richness treatment p1 p2 p3 p4 p5 p6 p7 p8 p9 response
1 1 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10.265
1 1 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7.740
1 1 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12.173
1 1 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8.497
2 1 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 10.763
2 1 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 8.989
2 1 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 10.161
2 1 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 7.193
3 1 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 10.171
3 1 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 6.053

Exploring the data

There are several graphical displays that will help to explore the data and it may also be useful to generate summary statistics.

hist(sim3$response, xlab = "Response", main = "")

plot of chunk unnamed-chunk-6

# Similar graphs can also be generated for the other species proportions.
plot(sim3$p1, sim3$response, xlab = "Proportion of species 1", ylab = "Response")

plot of chunk unnamed-chunk-6

summary(sim3$response)
#>    Min. 1st Qu.  Median    Mean 3rd Qu.    Max. 
#>   4.134   9.327  10.961  10.994  12.604  17.323

Implementing an automated DI model fitting process using autoDI

The function autoDI in DImodels provides a way to do an automated exploratory analysis to compare a range of DI models. It works through a set of automated steps (Steps 1 to 4) and will select the 'best' model from the range of models that have been explored and test for lack of fit in that model. The selection process is not exhaustive, but provides a useful starting point in analysis using DI models.

auto1 <- autoDI(y = "response", prop = 4:12, treat = "treatment", 
                FG = c("FG1","FG1","FG1","FG1","FG1","FG2","FG2","FG3","FG3"), data = sim3, 
                selection = "Ftest")
#> Warning in DI_data_prepare(y = y, block = block, density = density, prop = prop, : One or more rows have species proportions that sum to approximately 1, but not exactly 1. This is typically a rounding issue, and has been corrected internally prior to analysis.
#> 
#> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#> 
#> Step 1: Investigating the diversity effect
#> Selection using F tests
#>            Description                                                 
#> DI Model 1 Structural 'STR' DImodel with treatment                     
#> DI Model 2 Species identity 'ID' DImodel with treatment                
#> DI Model 3 Average interactions 'AV' DImodel with treatment            
#> DI Model 4 Functional group effects 'FG' DImodel with treatment        
#> DI Model 5 Separate pairwise interactions 'FULL' DImodel with treatment
#> 
#>            DI_model       treat estimate_theta Resid. Df Resid. SSq Resid. MSq
#> DI Model 1      STR 'treatment'          FALSE       410  1496.1645     3.6492
#> DI Model 2       ID 'treatment'          FALSE       402   841.2740     2.0927
#> DI Model 3       AV 'treatment'          FALSE       401   694.3095     1.7314
#> DI Model 4       FG 'treatment'          FALSE       396   559.7110     1.4134
#> DI Model 5     FULL 'treatment'          FALSE       366   522.9727     1.4289
#>            Df      SSq        F  Pr(>F)
#> DI Model 1                             
#> DI Model 2  8 654.8905  57.2903 <0.0001
#> DI Model 3  1 146.9645 102.8524 <0.0001
#> DI Model 4  5 134.5985  18.8396 <0.0001
#> DI Model 5 30  36.7383    0.857   0.686
#> 
#> Selected model: Functional group effects 'FG' DImodel with treatment
#> Formula:
#> response  =  p1 + p2 + p3 + p4 + p5 + p6 + p7 + p8 + p9 + FG_bfg_FG1_FG2 + FG_bfg_FG1_FG3 + FG_bfg_FG2_FG3 + FG_wfg_FG1 + FG_wfg_FG2 + FG_wfg_FG3 + treatmentA
#> 
#> 
#> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#> 
#> Step 2: Investigating the treatment effect
#> Selection using F tests
#>            Description                                         
#> DI Model 1 Functional group effects 'FG' DImodel               
#> DI Model 2 Functional group effects 'FG' DImodel with treatment
#> 
#>            DI_model       treat estimate_theta Resid. Df Resid. SSq Resid. MSq
#> DI Model 1       FG        none          FALSE       397   1550.682     3.9060
#> DI Model 2       FG 'treatment'          FALSE       396    559.711     1.4134
#>            Df      SSq      F  Pr(>F)
#> DI Model 1                           
#> DI Model 2  1 990.9711 701.12 <0.0001
#> 
#> Selected model: Functional group effects 'FG' DImodel with treatment
#> Formula:
#> response  =  p1 + p2 + p3 + p4 + p5 + p6 + p7 + p8 + p9 + FG_bfg_FG1_FG2 + FG_bfg_FG1_FG3 + FG_bfg_FG2_FG3 + FG_wfg_FG1 + FG_wfg_FG2 + FG_wfg_FG3 + treatmentA
#> 
#> 
#> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#> 
#> Step 3: Investigating whether theta is equal to 1 or not
#> 
#> Theta estimate: 0.968140012342718
#> Selection using F tests
#>            Description                                                           
#> DI Model 1 Functional group effects 'FG' DImodel with treatment                  
#> DI Model 2 Functional group effects 'FG' DImodel with treatment, estimating theta
#> 
#>            DI_model       treat estimate_theta Resid. Df Resid. SSq Resid. MSq
#> DI Model 1       FG 'treatment'          FALSE       396   559.7110     1.4134
#> DI Model 2       FG 'treatment'           TRUE       395   558.9274     1.4150
#>            Df    SSq      F Pr(>F)
#> DI Model 1                        
#> DI Model 2  1 0.7836 0.5538 0.4572
#> 
#> Selected model: Functional group effects 'FG' DImodel with treatment
#> 
#> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#> 
#> Step 4: Comparing the final selected model with the reference (community) model
#> 'community' is a factor with100levels, one for each unique set of proportions.
#> 
#>                model Resid. Df Resid. SSq Resid. MSq Df      SSq     F Pr(>F)
#> DI Model 1  Selected       396   559.7110     1.4134                         
#> DI Model 2 Reference       311   445.9889     1.4340 85 113.7222 0.933 0.6423
#> 
#> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#> autoDI is limited in terms of model selection. Exercise caution when choosing your final model.
#> 
#> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The output of autoDI, works through the following process:

  1. Step 1 compared five DI models using F tests. The models each had a different form of species interactions and treatment was always included. The functional group model (FG) was the selected model. This assumes that pairs of species interact according to functional group membership.
  2. Step 2 provided a test for the treatment and indicated that the treatment, included as an additive factor, was significant and needed in the model (p < 0.0001).
  3. Step 3 uses profile likelihood to estimate the non-linear parameter \(\theta\) and tests whether or not it differs from one. (Each model in Step 1 was fitted assuming theta equalled one.) Theta was estimated to be 0.96814 and was not significantly different from one (p = 0.4572).
  4. Step 4 provides a lack of fit test, here there was no indication of lack of fit in the model selected in Step 3 (p = 0.6423).

Further details on each of these steps are available in the autoDI help file. Run the following code to access the documentation.

?autoDI

All parameter estimates from the selected model can be viewed using summary.

summary(auto1)
#> 
#> Call:
#> glm(formula = new_fmla, family = family, data = new_data)
#> 
#> Deviance Residuals: 
#>     Min       1Q   Median       3Q      Max  
#> -3.8425  -0.8141   0.0509   0.8048   3.5657  
#> 
#> Coefficients:
#>                Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)    
#> p1               9.7497     0.3666  26.595  < 2e-16 ***
#> p2               8.5380     0.3672  23.253  < 2e-16 ***
#> p3               8.2329     0.3666  22.459  < 2e-16 ***
#> p4               6.3644     0.3665  17.368  < 2e-16 ***
#> p5              10.8468     0.3669  29.561  < 2e-16 ***
#> p6               5.9621     0.4515  13.205  < 2e-16 ***
#> p7               5.4252     0.4516  12.015  < 2e-16 ***
#> p8               7.3204     0.4515  16.213  < 2e-16 ***
#> p9               8.2154     0.4515  18.196  < 2e-16 ***
#> FG_bfg_FG1_FG2   3.4395     0.8635   3.983 8.09e-05 ***
#> FG_bfg_FG1_FG3  11.5915     0.8654  13.395  < 2e-16 ***
#> FG_bfg_FG2_FG3   2.8711     1.2627   2.274  0.02351 *  
#> FG_wfg_FG1       2.8486     0.9131   3.120  0.00194 ** 
#> FG_wfg_FG2       0.6793     2.3553   0.288  0.77319    
#> FG_wfg_FG3       2.4168     2.3286   1.038  0.29997    
#> treatmentA       3.1018     0.1171  26.479  < 2e-16 ***
#> ---
#> Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
#> 
#> (Dispersion parameter for gaussian family taken to be 1.413412)
#> 
#>     Null deviance: 52280.33  on 412  degrees of freedom
#> Residual deviance:   559.71  on 396  degrees of freedom
#> AIC: 1329.4
#> 
#> Number of Fisher Scoring iterations: 2

If the final model selected by autoDI includes a value of theta other than 1, then a 95% confidence interval for \(\theta\) can be generated using the theta_CI function:

theta_CI(auto1$selected_model_obj, conf = .95)

Here, this code would not run, since the final model selected by autoDI does not include theta estimated.

Fitting individual models using the DI function

For some users, the selection process in autoDI will be sufficient, however, most users will fit additional models using DI. For example, while the treatment is included in autoDI as an additive factor, interactions between treatment and other model terms are not considered. Here, we will first fit the model selected by autoDI using DI and then illustrate the capabilities of DI to fit specialised models.

Fitting the final model selected by autoDI using DI

## 
m1 <- DI(y = "response", prop = 4:12, 
         FG = c("FG1","FG1","FG1","FG1","FG1","FG2","FG2","FG3","FG3"), treat = "treatment", 
         DImodel = "FG", data = sim3)
#> Warning in DI_data_prepare(y = y, block = block, density = density, prop = prop, : One or more rows have species proportions that sum to approximately 1, but not exactly 1. This is typically a rounding issue, and has been corrected internally prior to analysis.
#> Fitted model: Functional group effects 'FG' DImodel
summary(m1)
#> 
#> Call:
#> glm(formula = new_fmla, family = family, data = new_data)
#> 
#> Deviance Residuals: 
#>     Min       1Q   Median       3Q      Max  
#> -3.8425  -0.8141   0.0509   0.8048   3.5657  
#> 
#> Coefficients:
#>                Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)    
#> p1               9.7497     0.3666  26.595  < 2e-16 ***
#> p2               8.5380     0.3672  23.253  < 2e-16 ***
#> p3               8.2329     0.3666  22.459  < 2e-16 ***
#> p4               6.3644     0.3665  17.368  < 2e-16 ***
#> p5              10.8468     0.3669  29.561  < 2e-16 ***
#> p6               5.9621     0.4515  13.205  < 2e-16 ***
#> p7               5.4252     0.4516  12.015  < 2e-16 ***
#> p8               7.3204     0.4515  16.213  < 2e-16 ***
#> p9               8.2154     0.4515  18.196  < 2e-16 ***
#> FG_bfg_FG1_FG2   3.4395     0.8635   3.983 8.09e-05 ***
#> FG_bfg_FG1_FG3  11.5915     0.8654  13.395  < 2e-16 ***
#> FG_bfg_FG2_FG3   2.8711     1.2627   2.274  0.02351 *  
#> FG_wfg_FG1       2.8486     0.9131   3.120  0.00194 ** 
#> FG_wfg_FG2       0.6793     2.3553   0.288  0.77319    
#> FG_wfg_FG3       2.4168     2.3286   1.038  0.29997    
#> treatmentA       3.1018     0.1171  26.479  < 2e-16 ***
#> ---
#> Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
#> 
#> (Dispersion parameter for gaussian family taken to be 1.413412)
#> 
#>     Null deviance: 52280.33  on 412  degrees of freedom
#> Residual deviance:   559.71  on 396  degrees of freedom
#> AIC: 1329.4
#> 
#> Number of Fisher Scoring iterations: 2

Fitting customised models using the DI function

There are two ways to fit customised models using DI; the first is by using the option DImodel = in the DI function and adding the argument extra_formula = to it, and the second is to use the custom_formula argument in the DI function. If species interaction variables (e.g., the FG interactions or the average pairwise interaction) are included in either extra_formula or custom_formula, they must first be created and included in the dataset. The function DI_data_prepare can be used to compute several types of species interaction variables.

Including treatment by species identity term interactions using extra_formula

m2 <- DI(y = "response", prop = 4:12, 
         FG = c("FG1","FG1","FG1","FG1","FG1","FG2","FG2","FG3","FG3"), treat = "treatment", 
         DImodel = "FG", extra_formula = ~ (p1 + p2 + p3 + p4):treatment,
         data = sim3)
#> Warning in DI_data_prepare(y = y, block = block, density = density, prop = prop, : One or more rows have species proportions that sum to approximately 1, but not exactly 1. This is typically a rounding issue, and has been corrected internally prior to analysis.
#> Fitted model: Functional group effects 'FG' DImodel
summary(m2)
#> 
#> Call:
#> glm(formula = new_fmla, family = family, data = new_data)
#> 
#> Deviance Residuals: 
#>     Min       1Q   Median       3Q      Max  
#> -3.6892  -0.7859   0.0436   0.7781   3.6227  
#> 
#> Coefficients:
#>                  Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)    
#> p1               9.391824   0.540485  17.377  < 2e-16 ***
#> p2               8.492825   0.540879  15.702  < 2e-16 ***
#> p3               8.406038   0.540471  15.553  < 2e-16 ***
#> p4               6.015296   0.540391  11.131  < 2e-16 ***
#> p5              10.802270   0.378776  28.519  < 2e-16 ***
#> p6               5.917565   0.461482  12.823  < 2e-16 ***
#> p7               5.380703   0.461535  11.658  < 2e-16 ***
#> p8               7.275881   0.461506  15.766  < 2e-16 ***
#> p9               8.170907   0.461471  17.706  < 2e-16 ***
#> FG_bfg_FG1_FG2   3.439508   0.865279   3.975 8.38e-05 ***
#> FG_bfg_FG1_FG3  11.591458   0.867140  13.367  < 2e-16 ***
#> FG_bfg_FG2_FG3   2.871063   1.265295   2.269  0.02381 *  
#> FG_wfg_FG1       2.848612   0.915008   3.113  0.00199 ** 
#> FG_wfg_FG2       0.679285   2.360195   0.288  0.77365    
#> FG_wfg_FG3       2.416774   2.333420   1.036  0.30097    
#> treatmentA       3.190868   0.216493  14.739  < 2e-16 ***
#> `p1:treatmentB`  0.626667   0.668369   0.938  0.34902    
#> `p2:treatmentB`  0.001213   0.668369   0.002  0.99855    
#> `p3:treatmentB` -0.435322   0.668369  -0.651  0.51522    
#> `p4:treatmentB`  0.609180   0.668369   0.911  0.36262    
#> ---
#> Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
#> 
#> (Dispersion parameter for gaussian family taken to be 1.419257)
#> 
#>     Null deviance: 52280.33  on 412  degrees of freedom
#> Residual deviance:   556.35  on 392  degrees of freedom
#> AIC: 1335
#> 
#> Number of Fisher Scoring iterations: 2

Including treatment by species interaction terms using extra_formula

First, we create the FG pairwise interactions, the DI_data_FG function.

  newlist <- DI_data_FG(prop = 4:12, FG = c("FG1","FG1","FG1","FG1","FG1","FG2","FG2","FG3","FG3"), 
                        data = sim3)
  sim3a <- data.frame(sim3, newlist$FG)

Then we fit the model using extra_formula.

  m3 <- DI(y = "response", prop = 4:12, 
           FG = c("FG1","FG1","FG1","FG1","FG1","FG2","FG2","FG3","FG3"),
           treat = "treatment", DImodel = "FG", 
           extra_formula = ~ (bfg_FG1_FG2 + bfg_FG1_FG3 + bfg_FG2_FG3 + wfg_FG1 + wfg_FG2 
           + wfg_FG3):treatment, data = sim3a)
#> Warning in DI_data_prepare(y = y, block = block, density = density, prop = prop, : One or more rows have species proportions that sum to approximately 1, but not exactly 1. This is typically a rounding issue, and has been corrected internally prior to analysis.
#> Fitted model: Functional group effects 'FG' DImodel
  summary(m3)
#> 
#> Call:
#> glm(formula = new_fmla, family = family, data = new_data)
#> 
#> Deviance Residuals: 
#>     Min       1Q   Median       3Q      Max  
#> -3.8251  -0.8208   0.0554   0.7982   3.4218  
#> 
#> Coefficients:
#>                          Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)    
#> p1                        9.68668    0.40000  24.217  < 2e-16 ***
#> p2                        8.47495    0.40053  21.159  < 2e-16 ***
#> p3                        8.16990    0.39998  20.426  < 2e-16 ***
#> p4                        6.30140    0.39987  15.759  < 2e-16 ***
#> p5                       10.78379    0.40031  26.938  < 2e-16 ***
#> p6                        5.89908    0.47958  12.301  < 2e-16 ***
#> p7                        5.36222    0.47963  11.180  < 2e-16 ***
#> p8                        7.25740    0.47960  15.132  < 2e-16 ***
#> p9                        8.15243    0.47957  17.000  < 2e-16 ***
#> FG_bfg_FG1_FG2            4.00191    1.12383   3.561 0.000415 ***
#> FG_bfg_FG1_FG3           11.77389    1.12973  10.422  < 2e-16 ***
#> FG_bfg_FG2_FG3            3.83681    1.64287   2.335 0.020027 *  
#> FG_wfg_FG1                2.81860    1.16226   2.425 0.015757 *  
#> FG_wfg_FG2               -1.58378    3.11717  -0.508 0.611682    
#> FG_wfg_FG3                1.32358    3.07561   0.430 0.667181    
#> treatmentA                3.22783    0.33480   9.641  < 2e-16 ***
#> `treatmentA:bfg_FG1_FG2` -1.12480    1.43053  -0.786 0.432178    
#> `treatmentA:bfg_FG1_FG3` -0.36487    1.44450  -0.253 0.800717    
#> `treatmentA:bfg_FG2_FG3` -1.93150    2.09024  -0.924 0.356029    
#> `treatmentA:wfg_FG1`      0.06003    1.42911   0.042 0.966517    
#> `treatmentA:wfg_FG2`      4.52613    4.06260   1.114 0.265924    
#> `treatmentA:wfg_FG3`      2.18638    3.99748   0.547 0.584733    
#> ---
#> Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
#> 
#> (Dispersion parameter for gaussian family taken to be 1.42436)
#> 
#>     Null deviance: 52280.3  on 412  degrees of freedom
#> Residual deviance:   555.5  on 390  degrees of freedom
#> AIC: 1338.3
#> 
#> Number of Fisher Scoring iterations: 2

Fitting only a subset of the FG interaction terms using custom_formula

First, we create a dummy variable for level A of the treatment (this is required for the glm engine that is used within DI and because there is no intercept in the model).

sim3a$treatmentA <- as.numeric(sim3a$treatment=="A")

Then we fit the model using custom_formula.

m3 <- DI(y = "response", custom_formula = response ~ 0 + p1 + p2 + p3 + p4 + p5 + p6 + p7 + p8 + p9 
         + treatmentA + bfg_FG1_FG2 + bfg_FG1_FG3 + bfg_FG2_FG3, data = sim3a)
#> Fitted model: Custom DI model
  summary(m3)
#> 
#> Call:
#> glm(formula = custom_formula, family = family, data = data)
#> 
#> Deviance Residuals: 
#>     Min       1Q   Median       3Q      Max  
#> -4.0272  -0.7831   0.0404   0.7570   3.7016  
#> 
#> Coefficients:
#>             Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)    
#> p1           10.3417     0.3138  32.957  < 2e-16 ***
#> p2            9.1766     0.3103  29.573  < 2e-16 ***
#> p3            8.8268     0.3134  28.164  < 2e-16 ***
#> p4            6.9742     0.3122  22.341  < 2e-16 ***
#> p5           11.4422     0.3141  36.426  < 2e-16 ***
#> p6            5.9177     0.3994  14.815  < 2e-16 ***
#> p7            5.3967     0.3999  13.496  < 2e-16 ***
#> p8            7.4468     0.3983  18.695  < 2e-16 ***
#> p9            8.3449     0.3984  20.945  < 2e-16 ***
#> treatmentA    3.1018     0.1184  26.198  < 2e-16 ***
#> bfg_FG1_FG2   2.9359     0.8042   3.651 0.000296 ***
#> bfg_FG1_FG3  10.8896     0.8343  13.053  < 2e-16 ***
#> bfg_FG2_FG3   2.9410     1.2233   2.404 0.016667 *  
#> ---
#> Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
#> 
#> (Dispersion parameter for gaussian family taken to be 1.443887)
#> 
#>     Null deviance: 52280.33  on 412  degrees of freedom
#> Residual deviance:   576.11  on 399  degrees of freedom
#> AIC: 1335.3
#> 
#> Number of Fisher Scoring iterations: 2

References

Connolly J, T Bell, T Bolger, C Brophy, T Carnus, JA Finn, L Kirwan, F Isbell, J Levine, A Lüscher, V Picasso, C Roscher, MT Sebastia, M Suter and A Weigelt (2013) An improved model to predict the effects of changing biodiversity levels on ecosystem function. Journal of Ecology, 101, 344-355.

Kirwan L, J Connolly, JA Finn, C Brophy, A Lüscher, D Nyfeler and MT Sebastia (2009) Diversity-interaction modelling - estimating contributions of species identities and interactions to ecosystem function. Ecology, 90, 2032-2038.