Preliminary "mgcv" result

Dear friends,

I managed to add some other predictors: anions, cumulative monthly rain, and lagged-1 monthly rain.

The following table shows the updated result.
Based on the table, I made a conceptual model about the water flow and the interaction between predictors in the system. As I've mentioned before, the surficial processes have stronger control to water chemistry than lithology. Hopefully the following sketch can give more spatial sense of the area. The strongest process detected by mgcv is NO3 enrichment in the river water as it gains water from groundwater flow. The other process is dilution  effect by river water as shown by decreasing pattern for elements like Cl, SO4, and Mn towards river.

New results

GAM	Predictant	Predictors	Significance	Family	Residuals	AIC	Deviance	GCV	Rsq	Pattern	TrendRiver
10	logEC	te(x,y), elv, lithology, cumRain, lagRain	Y, Y, N, N, Y	gamma	good	3794.627	16.200	0.448	0.140	clear	decreasing
11	logCO3	te(x,y), elv, lithology, cumRain, lagRain	Y, Y, N, N, N	gaussian	poor	886.045	25.800	1.171	0.229	clear	decreasing
12	logHCO3	te(x,y), elv, lithology, cumRain, lagRain	N, Y, N, N, Y	gaussian	good	778.806	40.300	0.819	0.362	not clear
13	logCO2	te(x,y), elv, lithology, cumRain, lagRain	Y, Y, N, Y, N	gaussian	poor	1035.771	14.200	1.950	0.111	clear	decreasing
14	logCl	te(x,y), elv, lithology, cumRain, lagRain	Y, Y, N, N, Y	gaussian	good	814.054	31.000	0.922	0.267	not clear
15	logSO4	te(x,y), elv, lithology, cumRain, lagRain	Y, Y, N, N, N	gaussian	good	1129.933	32.700	2.686	0.296	clear	decreasing
16	logNO2	te(x,y), elv, lithology, cumRain, lagRain	Y, Y, N, N, Y	gaussian	good	778.314	62.200	0.819	0.589	clear	decreasing
17	logNO3	te(x,y), elv, lithology, cumRain, lagRain	Y, N, N, Y, N	gaussian	good	1168.619	42.500	3.062	0.399	clear	increasing
18	logFe	te(x,y), elv, lithology, cumRain, lagRain	Y, N, N, N, N	gaussian	good	649.973	12.300	0.528	0.083	clear	decreasing
19	logCa	te(x,y), elv, lithology, cumRain, lagRain	N, Y, N, N, Y	gaussian	good	785.075	30.300	0.833	0.281	not clear
20	logMg	te(x,y), elv, lithology, cumRain, lagRain	Y, Y, N, N, Y	gaussian	good	730.692	41.600	0.696	0.371	not clear
21	logMn	te(x,y), elv, lithology, cumRain, lagRain	Y, Y, N, N, N	gaussian	poor	-72.300	79.100	0.046	0.774	clear	decreasing
22	logNa	te(x,y), elv, lithology, cumRain, lagRain	Y, Y, N, N, Y	gaussian	good	641.144	39.500	0.514	0.353	clear	decreasing
23	logK	te(x,y), elv, lithology, cumRain, lagRain	N, N, N, N, N	gaussian	good	592.524	18.400	0.434	0.166	not clear

----
Previous post

This post would be the continuation of the previous serial posts on GAM using mgcv package. As I have posted before, I am looking for predictors that explain the interaction between groundwater and river water in Cikapundung watershed (Bandung, West Java, Indonesia).

The following table is the preliminary result. I'll make further explanation.

GAM	Predictant	Predictors	Significance	Family	Residuals	AIC	Deviance (%)	Notes	Trend
10	EC	(x,y), elv, lithology	yes, yes, no	gamma	good	3805.445	10.6	clear pattern, decreasing trend towards river	E-W
11	logCO3	(x,y), elv, lithology	yes, yes, no	gaussian	poor	889.724	24.5	clear pattern, decreasing trend towards river	E-W
13	logCO2	(x,y), elv, lithology	yes, yes, no	gaussian	poor	1046.908	11.8	clear pattern, decreasing trend towards river	NE-SW
15	logSO4	(x,y), elv, lithology	yes, yes, no	gaussian	poor	1132.996	32.9	clear pattern, decreasing trend towards river	NW-SE
17	NO3	(x,y), elv, lithology	yes, no, no	gaussian	poor	1388.982	8.38	clear pattern, decreasing trend towards river	NW-SE
20	logMg	(x,y), elv, lithology	no, yes, no	gaussian	poor	780.82	26.4	clear pattern, decreasing trend towards river	E-W
21	Mn	(x,y), elv, lithology	yes, yes, no	gaussian	poor	-971.85	74.4	clear pattern, decreasing trend towards river	N-S, NE-SW
16	logNO2	(x,y), elv, lithology	yes, no, no	gaussian	poor	1183.261	43.3	clear pattern, increasing trend towards river	NE, SE
18	Fe	(x,y), elv, lithology	no, no, no	gaussian	poor	-70.72	2.44	clear pattern, increasing trend towards river	NW-SE
22	logNa	(x,y), elv, lithology	yes, yes, no	gamma	good	649.918	33.3	clear pattern, increasing trend towards river	E-W
12	logHCO3	(x,y), elv, lithology	no, yes, no	gaussian	good	847.1502	22.8	no clear pattern
14	logCl	(x,y), elv, lithology	yes, yes, no	gaussian	good	828.088	27.4	no clear pattern
19	logCa	(x,y), elv, lithology	no, yes, no	gaussian	poor	838	17.6	no clear pattern
23	logK	(x,y), elv, lithology	no, yes, no	gaussian	good	594.923	18.3	no clear pattern