Table 2.
Delta AICc values and likelihood resulting from model comparisons. (AICc = 0 indicates the model with the highest explanatory power. Lower delta AICc and higher likelihood indicate better explanatory power of a model. Likelihood was calculated for models with delta AICc of less than seven [32]. Best explaining models are highlighted in italics. Sample sizes are given in brackets behind fruit parameters. None, no treatment level pooled; sans, model without fixed effect.)
| fruit parameter | pooled levels |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| none | bee = wind | wind = self | bee = self | sans | |
| commercial value (n = 1892) | |||||
| AICc | 0 | 4.512 | 0.173 | 3.527 | 2.501 |
| likelihood | 0.403 | 0.042 | 0.370 | 0.069 | 0.115 |
| fruit weight (n = 1895) | |||||
| AICc | 0 | 4.162 | 3.507 | 4.872 | 3.137 |
| likelihood | 0.627 | 0.078 | 0.109 | 0.055 | 0.131 |
| shelf life (n = 1268) | |||||
| AICc | 0 | 0.347 | 1.791 | 7.218 | 5.273 |
| likelihood | 0.431 | 0.362 | 0.174 | — | 0.031 |
| red colour (n = 1279) | |||||
| AICc | 1.428 | 1.608 | 0 | 2.021 | 0.323 |
| likelihood | 0.155 | 0.142 | 0.317 | 0.115 | 0.270 |
| sugar–acid–ratio (n = 345) | |||||
| AICc | 2.128 | 3.244 | 0 | 1.247 | 1.147 |
| likelihood | 0.131 | 0.075 | 0.378 | 0.203 | 0.213 |
| pollination success (n = 356) | |||||
| AICc | 0 | 4.267 | 9.192 | 8.704 | 7.290 |
| likelihood | 0.894 | 0.106 | — | — | — |