Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 12, 2026

Development of an Individual-Tree Basal Area Increment Model using a Linear Mixed-Effects Approach
Published on: July 3, 2020
Parametric bootstrap for testing model fitting of threshold and grouped data models: an application to the analysis
J Tarrés1, M Fina, J Piedrafita
1Grup de Recerca en Remugants, Departament de Ciència Animals i dels Aliments, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain. joaquim.tarres@uab.cat
Abstract:
The aim of this study was to compare the goodness of fit of the threshold models with homoscedasticity or heteroscedasticity and the grouped data model for the analysis of calving ease in beef cattle by using a parametric bootstrap procedure. Field data included 8,205 records of the Bruna dels Pirineus beef cattle breed in the Pyrenean mountain areas of Catalonia (Spain). The actual distribution was 81.81% of calvings without assistance, 11.02% slightly assisted by the farmer, 5.12% strongly assisted by the farmer, 0.89% assisted by the veterinarian, and 1.16% cesarean, but these percentages were very different in the different herds. This can be explained partially by the different subjective way of scoring of each farmer. Primiparous cows had a greater (P < 0.001) difficulty calving than cows with 5 or more parities (11.74 vs. 4.49% of calvings strongly assisted by the farmer or the veterinarian and 2.8 vs. 0.65% cesarean). Male calves caused greater (P < 0.001) calving difficulty than females (7.71% of male calvings strongly assisted by the farmer or the veterinarian vs. 4.25% of females and 1.83% cesarean in males vs. 0.47% in females). The month and year of calving also had a strong influence on calving ease. These data were analyzed using 3 different models: the threshold models with homoscedasticity or heteroscedasticity and the grouped data model. The bootstrap comparison among models suggested that the threshold models, even allowing for heteroscedasticity, did not fit the herd effects well. In contrast, fitting deficiencies were not observed for the grouped data model in any factor. The variance of direct effect of the calf was estimated using the 3 models, and the heritability estimate ranged from 0.165 for the grouped data model to 0.185 for the hereroscedastic threshold model. This heritability was moderate, but it would justify the inclusion of direct effects of the calf on calving ease in the breeding objective. Overall, results highlighted the flexibility of the grouped data model for the analysis of discrete traits, like calving ease of beef calves.
Related Concept Videos
Bootstrapping
Statistical Methods to Analyze Parametric Data: Student t-Test and Goodness-of-Fit Test
The Student's t-test is a statistical test that examines if there is a statistically significant difference between the means of two groups. This test is instrumental when dealing with data...
Parametric Survival Analysis: Weibull and Exponential Methods
Weibull Distribution
The Weibull distribution is a flexible model used in parametric survival analysis. It can handle both increasing and decreasing hazard rates, depending on its shape parameter...
Statistical Inference Techniques in Hypothesis Testing: Parametric Versus Nonparametric Data
Parametric statistics, as the name suggests, assumes that data follow a specific distribution, often a normal distribution. This assumption enables robust hypothesis testing and estimation. Parametric methods, like the Student's t-test or Goodness-of-fit test, are frequently employed in biostatistics due to their robustness. For instance, comparing...
Distributions to Estimate Population Parameter
Statistical Methods to Analyze Parametric Data: ANOVA
One-way ANOVA is applied when a single independent variable or factor is scrutinized. It compares the...