Table 1.
Comparison of sex ratios between low and high exposure treatments throughout the three sampling periods (using contingency analysis, test statistic – χ2, d.f. = 1)
| Week 3 | Week 6 | Week 9 | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low | High | Test statistic | P | Low | High | Test statistic | P | Low | High | Test statistic | P | |
| Paracalliope fluviatilis | ||||||||||||
| Female:Male | 1:2 | 1:1 | 7.9 | 0.005 | 2:3 | 1:1 | 0.87 | 0.35 | 1:2 | 3:4 | 8.4 | 0.004 |
| Juvenile | 158 | 47 | 30 | 0.0003 | 292 | 79 | 13 | 0.005 | 559 | 138 | 26 | 0.0005 |
| Juvenile prop. | 34% | 24% | 34% | 31% | 32% | 33% | ||||||
| Paracorophium excavatum | ||||||||||||
| Female:Male | 4:3 | 1:1 | 0.72 | 0.70 | 4:3 | 1:1 | 2.1 | 0.35 | 1:1 | 1:1 | 5.9 | 0.07 |
| Juvenile | 0 | 0 | – | – | 0 | 0 | – | – | 0 | 8 | 1.0 | 0.34 |
| Juvenile prop. | – | – | – | – | – | 20% | ||||||
| Austridotea annectens | ||||||||||||
| Female:Male | 1:10 | 1:2 | 4.7 | 0.03 | 1:2 | 1:3 | 0.03 | 0.87 | 1:2 | 3:2 | 4.0 | 0.046 |
| Juvenile | 0 | 0 | – | – | 14 | 1 | 6.4 | 0.03 | 16 | 0 | 6 | 0.03 |
| Juvenile prop. | – | – | 36% | 3.6% | 38% | – | ||||||
| Austridotea lacustris | ||||||||||||
| Female:Male | 1:3 | 2:3 | 1.7 | 0.20 | 4:3 | 2:3 | 1.0 | 0.31 | 1:1 | 2:1 | 1.2 | 0.28 |
| Juvenile | 0 | 0 | – | – | 1 | 0 | 1.0 | 0.34 | 0 | 0 | – | – |
| Juvenile prop. | – | – | 4.5% | – | – | – | ||||||
Abundance of juveniles, or individuals with indeterminate sex due to immaturity (combined), were compared between treatments throughout sampling periods (using analysis of variance, test statistic and d.f. – F1,10). Proportion of juveniles in each treatment type. Significant differences are bolded.