Table 2.
Generalized dissimilarity modeling results for morphological characters
| West of Andes | East of Andes | |
|---|---|---|
| Tarsus length | *60.7(1,6,8)/0/60.7/34.3 | *70.5(4,5,6,9,14)/10.9/70.5/13.8 |
| Wing length | *91.7(6,7,13,14)/6.1/ 91.7/34.3 | 22.0/–/–/57.1 |
| Tail length | *82.4(1,3,7,9,13)/6.1/81.5/24.6 | 48.2/–/–/48.7 |
| Bill width | 59.2/–/–/61.7 | 23.7/–/–/42.7 |
| Bill depth | *92.5(1,5,8,9,11,12)/22.7/91.5/11.4 | *27.2(1,5,8,9,16,17)/10.4/23.1/2.4 |
| Bill length | *63.9(4,5,6,8,14)/0/63.9/0 | 18.9/–/–/51.0 |
| All traits combined | *73.4(5,8,10,11)/0/73.4/11.0 | *42.0(1,5,7,9,11,16,18)/14.3/41.9/8.9 |
| Size (PC1; 32.1% of total variation) | *81.3(3,7,10)/0/81.3/18.0 | 9.4/–/–/51.4 |
| Shape (PC2; 25.3% of total variation) | *93.2(1,3,5,6,7,9,13,14,15)/17.3/92.6/14.1 | 19.3/–/–/42.8 |
Shown are the percentages of total variance explained by models for the regions west and east of the Andes. For cases in which the full model (using both geographic distance and environment) explained more of the total variation than random models (indicated by ‘*’), the variables selected by the model are shown in parentheses (see Table 1 for coding of environmental variables), and figures are also shown for models in which only geographic distance or only environmental variables were entered (full model/using distance/using environment/using random environmental variables). See Fig. S4 for the relative importance of each variable in the models.