. 2013 Dec 2;8(12):e81028. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0081028

Table 2. Apparent survival rate (φ) estimates (and standard errors) are based on data collected on two 100-ha plots in Ecuador, 2001–2012.

		2001 – 2012 data							2001 – 2006 data
Species	Model	I/R^a	ΔAIC_c ^b	w_i ^c	φ₁	SE	φ₂	SE	ΔAIC_c	w_i	φ₂	SE
Nonpasserines
Trochilidae
Phaethornis malaris	φ(2./.)p(.)	265/100	0.0	1.0	0.08	0.03	0.42	0.05	0.0	0.99	0.53	0.08
Bucconidae
Malacoptila fusca	φ(.)p(.)	57/22	0.0	0.67	0.61	0.08	0.61	0.08
Passerines
Furnariidae
Automolus infuscatus	φ(2./.)p(.)	190/158	0.0	0.74	0.34	0.07	0.54	0.04
	φ(.)p(.)								0.0	0.68	0.48	0.05
Glyphorynchus spirurus	φ(2./.)p(.)	892/916	0.0	0.99	0.41	0.03	0.62	0.02	0.0	0.90	0.59	0.03
Hyloctistes subulatus	φ(.)p(.)	72/35	0.0	0.71	0.57	0.06	0.57	0.06	0.0	0.64	0.59	0.14
Philydor erythrocercum	φ(.)p(.)	87/36	0.0	0.71	0.53	0.06	0.53	0.06	0.0	0.75	0.63	0.10
Sclerurus caudacutus	φ(.)p(.)	62/57	0.0	0.66	0.59	0.05	0.59	0.05	0.0	0.70	0.66	0.08
Xenops minutus	φ(2./.)p(.)	85/60	0.0	0.54	0.43	0.14	0.71	0.05
	φ(.)p(.)		0.33	0.46	0.68	0.04	0.68	0.04	0.0	0.51	0.52	0.12
Xiphorhynchus ocellatus	φ(.)p(.)	75/62	0.0	0.59	0.70	0.04	0.70	0.04	0.0	0.61	0.72	0.09
Thamnophilidae
Hylophylax naevius	φ(.)p(.)	244/101	0.0	0.59	0.69	0.03	0.69	0.03	0.0	0.71	0.73	0.07
Epinecrophylla fjeldsaai	φ(.)p(.)	94/42	0.0	0.56	0.55	0.06	0.55	0.06	0.0	0.75	0.53	0.14
Gymnopithys leucaspis	φ(2./.)p(.)	124/91	0.0	0.55	0.36	0.09	0.55	0.05
	φ(.)p(.)		0.43	0.45	0.51	0.04	0.51	0.04	0.0	0.72	0.56	0.06
Myrmeciza fortis	φ(.)p(.)	71/18	0.0	0.75	0.65	0.08	0.65	0.08
Myrmoborus myotherinus	φ(.)p(.)	195/71	0.0	0.72	0.60	0.04	0.60	0.04	0.0	0.48	0.59	0.08
Myrmotherula axillaris	φ(2./.)p(.)	121/28	0.0	0.85	0.15	0.10	0.69	0.08
Myrmotherula hauxwelli	φ(2./.)p(.)	171/90	0.0	0.53	0.90	0.19	0.62	0.04
	φ(.)p(.)		0.23	0.47	0.65	0.04	0.65	0.04	0.0	0.69	0.64	0.09
Myrmotherula longipennis	φ(.)p(.)	103/44	0.0	0.71	0.51	0.06	0.51	0.06	0.0	0.68	0.47	0.10
Pithys albifrons	φ(2./.)p(.)	278/214	0.0	0.94	0.24	0.05	0.47	0.04	0.69	0.22	0.43	0.06
	φ(2./.)p(t)								0.0	0.31	0.42	0.06
Thamnomanes ardesiacus	φ(.)p(.)	241/91	0.0	0.56	0.60	0.04	0.60	0.04	0.51	0.43	0.60	0.07
	φ(2./.)p(.)								0.0	0.55	0.67	0.08
Thamnomanes caesius	φ(.)p(.)	235/43	0.0	0.69	0.46	0.06	0.46	0.06	0.0	0.72	0.57	0.13
Willisornis poecilinotus	φ(.)p(.)	309/224	0.0	0.73	0.56	0.03	0.56	0.03	0.0	0.66	0.55	0.04
Conopophagidae
Conopophaga peruviana	φ(.)p(.)	104/28	0.0	0.61	0.57	0.07	0.57	0.07
Formicariidae
Formicarius colma	φ(.)p(.)	65/38	0.0	0.72	0.44	0.06	0.44	0.06	0.0	0.76	0.55	0.09
Tyrannidae
Corythopis torquatus	φ(.)p(.)	61/20	0	0.69	0.64	0.08	0.64	0.08
Mionectes oleagineus	φ(.)p(.)	169/58	0.0	0.65	0.45	0.05	0.45	0.05	1.62	0.23	0.32	0.09
	φ(.)p(t)								0.0	0.52	0.32	0.09
Myiobius barbatus	φ(2./.)p(.)	74/41	0.0	0.69	0.34	0.13	0.71	0.06
	φ(.)p(.)		1.56	0.31	0.65	0.05	0.65	0.05	0.0	0.68	0.68	0.09
Platyrinchus coronatus	φ(.)p(.)	78/62	0.0	0.71	0.61	0.05	0.61	0.05	0.0	0.74	0.57	0.10
Pipridae
Chiroxiphia pareola	φ(2./.)p(.)	90/63	0.0	0.84	0.37	0.12	0.76	0.05
	φ(.)p(.)								0.0	0.74	0.55	0.09
Lepidothrix coronata	φ(2./.)p(.)	445/222	0.0	0.65	0.44	0.07	0.61	0.03
	φ(.)p(.)		1.27	0.35	0.58	0.02	0.58	0.02	0.0	0.70	0.58	0.04
Pipra filicauda	φ(2./.)p(.)	226/153	0.0	0.64	0.45	0.09	0.69	0.03
	φ(.)p(.)		1.93	0.24	0.66	0.03	0.66	0.03	0.0^d	0.69	0.60	0.06
Dixiphia pipra	φ(2./.)p(.)	173/76	0.0	0.52	0.41	0.11	0.63	0.05
	φ(.)p(.)		0.18	0.48	0.60	0.04	0.60	0.04	0.0	0.73	0.52	0.09
Vireonidae
Hylophilus ochraceiceps	φ(.)p(.)	53/25	0.0	0.75	0.68	0.07	0.68	0.07
Troglodytidae
Henicorhina leucosticta	φ(.)p(.)	66/31	0.0	0.70	0.80	0.06	0.80	0.06	0.0	0.73	0.80	0.15
Microcerculus marginatus	φ(.)p(.)	47/39	0.0	0.56	0.51	0.07	0.51	0.07	0.0	0.72	0.50	0.11
Turdidae
Turdus albicollis	φ(.)p(.)	97/72	0.0	0.69	0.66	0.04	0.66	0.04	0.0	0.69	0.57	0.08
Cardinalidae
Habia rubica	φ(.)p(.)	52/29	0.0	0.74	0.64	0.07	0.64	0.07	0.0	0.76	0.65	0.12
Cyanocompsa cyanoides	φ(.)p(.)	59/38	0.0	0.56	0.43	0.06	0.43	0.06	0.0	0.71	0.50	0.12

Results are based on the first six years of data (2001–2006; see [8]) and for the full 12 years. Competitive models (ΔAIC_c<2.0) are ordered by AICc rankings for the full 12-year results; corresponding results from the reduced data set of 2006 follow that ranking (estimates for some species were not calculated for the reduced data set). Estimates are shown for both the first (φ₁) and subsequent capture periods [φ₂, i.e., TSM models, e.g. φ(2./.)p(.)] for the full data set (2001–2012) but only φ₂ for the reduced set (2001–2006 data).

I/R - number of individuals captured/number of recaptures (excluding individuals only captured during the final sample) over the 12-year period.

ΔAIC_c - differences in AIC_c.

w_i - relative strength (weight) of evidence for selected models.

Model included p(t) rather than p(.).