Table 6. Community specific EC2.5 models.
Predictorsa | AN | GL | LB | MLb | RV | SB | SD | UP |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Logged freeway CALINE4 | 0.395 | - | ||||||
Logged total CALINE4 | 0.324 | - | 0.304 | 0.338 | 0.222 | |||
Elevation | - | -0.214 | ||||||
Population density (300m buffer) | - | 0.097 | ||||||
Distance to shoreline | - | |||||||
NDVI | - | -0.252 | ||||||
Freeway truck count | 0.120 | 0.204 | ||||||
Distance to intermodal facility | -0.048 | |||||||
Adjusted R2 | 0.67 | 0.73 | 0.61 | 0.79 | 0.82 | 0.44 | 0.50 | |
LOOCV R2 | 0.58 | 0.70 | 0.54 | - | 0.75 | 0.77 | 0.36 | 0.44 |
N | 18 | 22 | 17 | 13 | 21 | 18 | 16 | 23 |
Reported betas are scaled to two standard deviations of the deviated predictors across all eight communities as follows: 1.6 units for logged freeway CALINE4, 1.1 units for logged total CALINE4, 84.5 meters for elevation, 1574 individuals/km2 for population, 5260 meters for distance to shoreline, 0.1 for NDVI, 6250 trucks for freeway truck count, and 4300 meters for distance to intermodal facility.
A stable model could not be fit for Mira Loma (ML), which was likely attributable to the small number of samples available for this analysis.