Table 2.
Two multivariate analysis of variances on the effect of chemical cues and parasitism on larval behavior and position
| Effect | df | MS | F | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A. Response variables: locomotion and feeding behaviors | ||||
| Chemical cues | 1 | 0.019 | 1.68 | .19 |
| Parasitism status | 1 | 0.081 | 7.16 | .0039 |
| Cues:parasitism | 1 | 0.012 | 1.09 | .31 |
| Residuals | 34 | 0.011 | ||
| B. Response variables: position in microcosm | ||||
| Chemical cues | 1 | 0.001 | 0.068 | .87 |
| Parasitism status | 1 | 0.32 | 35.18 | .0001 |
| Cues:parasitism | 1 | 0.009 | 0.39 | .56 |
| Residuals | 35 | 0.0089 | ||
Chemical cues indicate whether predatory cues were present or absent, while parasitism status refers to larvae infected with Ascogregarina barretti or uninfected. Here we show degrees of freedom (df), mean squares (MS), F statistics (F), and p‐values (p) for each effect test in the model, and we have bolded model terms that are significant at the .05 level.