Reader Comments
Post a new comment on this article
Post Your Discussion Comment
Please follow our guidelines for comments and review our competing interests policy. Comments that do not conform to our guidelines will be promptly removed and the user account disabled. The following must be avoided:
- Remarks that could be interpreted as allegations of misconduct
- Unsupported assertions or statements
- Inflammatory or insulting language
Thank You!
Thank you for taking the time to flag this posting; we review flagged postings on a regular basis.
closeIssues with graphs...
Posted by Curiousgatto on 13 Nov 2013 at 18:33 GMT
In your figure 1 the NMDS of t-RFLP peak areas, several of us reading this for a class took issue with a couple of things. There is an error in your figure legend as it pertains to your figures, the supra- and sub- gingival are misidentified in the figure legend. Also, we could not distinguish a significant difference between these groups and were curious if these were meant to be 3D ordinations or some other display of the actual difference of the groups.
RE: Issues with graphs...
purnimakumar replied to Curiousgatto on 15 Nov 2013 at 00:12 GMT
We apologize for the error in the legend, we will rectify it.
With regard to the NMDS plot, the figures are 2D ordination plots of t-RFLP data and significance was based on the randomization test (Monte Carlo approach). The clustering was considered significant in the subgingival samples since the real data had lower stress than the randomized data in all dimensions considered.