You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
First of all, congrats for the package. The general ideia is simple and great, and I found this chi square maps particularly interesting, since I haven't seen that in a spatial form before.
I have simulated ecological corridors, for a given species, in two different land use scenarios. I am willing to compare where their simulated tracks differ using chi maps. The case is a little different from the vignette, since we do not have individuals, but simulated paths in different scenarios. Also, we don't have time (it is implicit), but I thought about considering each scenario as times far away from each other, so that they may be compared.
Do you think this is possible?
This is what I did:
Each simulated corridor is a shapefile. I have 1000 simulated corridors for each land use scenario.
First I resampled each of them as equally distance points along the paths, so that each corridor may be considered as sequences of points and the spatial point processes may be applied.
# Sample of code, after importing corridors
nn <- round(gLength(corridor) / 300)
pts <- spsample(corridor, n = nn, type = "regular")
# Here I added time in a random way, but I am not sure how should I have done that
t0 <- as.POSIXct(as.Date('2019-01-02 00:00', tz = 'UTC')) + 100*j # j is the index for corridor number
df <- data.frame(scenario = rep(1, nn), corr = rep(j, nn), t = t0 + 1:nn)
spdf <- SpatialPointsDataFrame(pts, df)
# This piece of code was included inside a loop over all corridors
I did not know how to include time, so I considered each location as 1s for the previous, and each corridor stating in different moments in time, to avoid overlap.
Now, I had a list with all 1000 corridors for a single land use scenario: spdf.l.landuse1.
What I did was to transform each corridor into a STIDF and then into a Track:
track.landuse1 <- list()
for(j in 1:length(spdf.l.landuse1)) {
print(j)
sti <- STIDF(sp = SpatialPoints(spdf.l.landuse1[[j]]@coords, proj4string = spdf.l.landuse1[[j]]@proj4string),
time = spdf.l.landuse1[[j]]$t, data = spdf.l.landuse1[[j]]@data[,1:2])
track.landuse1[[j]] <- Track(sti)
}
Finally, I transformed that into a Tracks object:
tracks.landuse1 <- Tracks(track.landuse1)
I could successfully plot that (below), and it is now consider as a series of 1000 tracks of the same object. However, I guess that it would be better to make a TracksCollection directly, considering each corridor as a Track of a different individual. This way, we could consider all tracks of a given lan use scenario as simultaneous movements of different individuals, and then compare them with the other land use scenario by choosing a very different moment in time for the second land use scenario.
However, I couldn't transform the tracks directly into a TracksCollection object.
Still, I tried to move on.
All the analyses I tried to perform then (movement smoothing and chi maps), presented the same error: Here is the code and the error:
# movement smoothing
b <- Track.idw(tracks.landuse1, timestamp = '20 days')
plot(b, main="", ribwid=0.04, ribsep=0.02, cex.axis=1.5)
# chi maps
ch <- chimaps(tracks.landuse1, timestamp = "20 mins", rank = 1)
# Error:
Error in if (!ivs[i] == 0 && !ivs[i] == nrow(X)) { :
missing value where TRUE/FALSE needed
Do you know what it may mean?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Dear bniebuhr,
Sorry for the late response. I am not sure if I truly understood how you generated time for your data, however, this error is to do with your time vector. Important note: In order to apply chimaps or Tarck.idw to your data, tracks MUST overlap in time. I guess your data does not satisfy this assumption.
Dear
trajectories
developers (and users),First of all, congrats for the package. The general ideia is simple and great, and I found this chi square maps particularly interesting, since I haven't seen that in a spatial form before.
I have simulated ecological corridors, for a given species, in two different land use scenarios. I am willing to compare where their simulated tracks differ using chi maps. The case is a little different from the vignette, since we do not have individuals, but simulated paths in different scenarios. Also, we don't have time (it is implicit), but I thought about considering each scenario as times far away from each other, so that they may be compared.
Do you think this is possible?
This is what I did:
Each simulated corridor is a shapefile. I have 1000 simulated corridors for each land use scenario.
First I resampled each of them as equally distance points along the paths, so that each corridor may be considered as sequences of points and the spatial point processes may be applied.
I did not know how to include time, so I considered each location as 1s for the previous, and each corridor stating in different moments in time, to avoid overlap.
Now, I had a list with all 1000 corridors for a single land use scenario:
spdf.l.landuse1
.What I did was to transform each corridor into a STIDF and then into a Track:
Finally, I transformed that into a Tracks object:
I could successfully plot that (below), and it is now consider as a series of 1000 tracks of the same object. However, I guess that it would be better to make a TracksCollection directly, considering each corridor as a Track of a different individual. This way, we could consider all tracks of a given lan use scenario as simultaneous movements of different individuals, and then compare them with the other land use scenario by choosing a very different moment in time for the second land use scenario.
However, I couldn't transform the tracks directly into a TracksCollection object.
Still, I tried to move on.
All the analyses I tried to perform then (movement smoothing and chi maps), presented the same error: Here is the code and the error:
Do you know what it may mean?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: