Table 3.
MRPP results showing differences in bacterial communities between Cx. pipiens and Cx. restuans from each study site. Only 5 of 9 study sites are presented because the remaining sites had either few or no Cx. pipiens samples to facilitate meaningful comparisons
| Location | N(Cp vs Cr) | Ad (Cp vs. Cr) | T | A3 | P 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agriculture 1 | 11 vs. 3 | 0.31 vs. 0.95 | -5.47 | 0.22 | 0.001 |
| Agriculture 2 | 3 vs. 7 | 0.61 vs. 0.97 | -5.78 | 0.24 | 0.001 |
| Agriculture 3 | 5 vs. 5 | 0.13 vs. 0.69 | -5.62 | 0.44 | 0.002 |
| Busey woods | 2 vs. 15 | 0.09 vs. 0.78 | -5.25 | 0.44 | 0.003 |
| South farms | 17 vs. 12 | 0.38 vs. 0.74 | -13.55 | 0.26 | 0.000002 |
| Weaver Park | 10 vs. 5 | 0.07 vs. 0.53 | -8.90 | 0.57 | 0.00007 |
N number of Cx. pipiens (Cp) and Cx. restuans (Cr) samples
Ad average within group distances for the mosquito species
T test statistic describing separation between groups
A chance-corrected within group agreement as log10