ASREML output vs SAS output

I'm running ANOVA for RCB with 1 factor fixed and replicate as random. Except for the residual variance, what are the reasons for the differences in the output?

Here are the codes/model I used and corresponding output:

ASREML MODEL: Weight ~ Clone !r Rep
ASREML OUTPUT:
          - - - Results from analysis of Weight - - -
          Approximate stratum variance decomposition
 Stratum Degrees-Freedom Variance Component Coefficients
 Rep 1.00 46241.7 10.0 1.0
 Residual Variance 19.00 5379.58 0.0 1.0

 Source Model terms Gamma Component Comp/SE % C
 Rep 1 1 0.759547 4086.04 0.62 0 P
 Variance 40 20 1.00000 5379.58 3.08 0 P

                                   Wald F statistics
     Source of Variation NumDF DenDF F_inc Prob
   1 Clone 20 18.7 3.16 0.008

SAS CODE:
proc mixed data=data1 method=reml;
        class rep clone;
        model weight=clone;
        random rep;
SAS OUTPUT:
                                      The Mixed Procedure
                                     Covariance Parameter
                                           Estimates
                                     Cov Parm Estimate
                                     Rep 2043.02
                                     Residual 5379.58

                                 Type 3 Tests of Fixed Effects
                                       Num Den
                         Effect DF DF F Value Pr > F
                         Clone 19 19 1.19 0.3526

-------------------- m2f --------------------

Sent using Mail2Forum (http://www.mail2forum.com).

Read this topic online here:
http://www.vsni.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?p=849#849

-------------------- m2f --------------------
Received on Sat Sep 18 2009 - 01:59:59 EST