Skip to main content
. 2017 Dec 12;7:17445. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-17601-w

Table 1.

Comparison of alternative models (using AICc) for earthworms (richness...spp. m−2, density...ind. m−2, biomass...g m−2) and litter decomposition (S value…stabilisation index, k…decomposition rate) in vineyards.

Fixed effect Random effect Earthworms, total Anecic Earthworms Endogeic Earthworms Litter decompostion
Richness Density Biomass Richness Density Richness Density S value k value
No Yes 314.0 510.0 477.0 163.6 230.4 263.0 445.8 −134.1 126.0
Management intensity Yes 311.6 510.8 476.2 162.9 230.0 260.5 446.5 −132.3 127.8
Soil quality Yes 312.4 510.1 476.3 163.0 229.4 261.3 445.8 −133.0 126.7
Managem. intens. × Plant biomass No 304.2 713.2 489.6 161.9 278.6 243.7 569.5 −142.0 117.7
Soil quality + Plant biomass No 297.2 669.1 474.7 155.8 241.0 244.5 571.6 −139.6 116.4
Soil quality × Plant biomass No 299.4 671.0 477.0 153.3 235.9 245.9 573.7 −137.7 117.0
Plant biomass Yes 300.3 496.0 451.4 160.5 227.9 251.5 433.1 −157.3 112.0
Managem. intens. + Plant biomass Yes 297.6 497.4 450.6 159.8 227.7 249.2 434.4 −155.5 114.0
Managem. intens. × Plant biomass Yes 298.1 498.6 452.9 161.7 229.9 246.0 435.0 −155.5 115.3
Soil quality + Plant biomass Yes 293.7 493.0 447.0 156.7 223.1 246.4 430.5 −155.7 112.9
Soil quality × Plant biomass Yes 295.9 495.1 449.3 155.5 223.6 247.9 432.7 −153.6 114.6
Mean patch size (MPS) Yes 315.4 509.2 475.9 164.9 231.4 264.2 444.8 −132.0 128.2
Managem. intens. + MPS Yes 313.1 510.1 475.0 164.1 230.8 261.8 445.5 −130.2 130.0
Managem. intens. × MPS Yes 312.9 510.1 476.5 159.4 227.4 263.5 446.4 −128.2 131.7
Soil quality + MPS Yes 313.2 507.9 472.3 163.9 229.7 261.8 443.1 −130.8 128.8
Soil quality × MPS Yes 313.9 509.4 474.4 166.0 231.8 261.4 444.8 −131.5 130.9
R2 adjusted 0.29 0.31
R2marginal 0.27 0.30 0.26 0.33 0.22 0.08 0.06
R2conditional 0.41 0.79 0.55 0.60 0.75 0.26 0.19

The best models (lowest AICc and ∆AICc ≤ 2) are indicated in boldface type. R2 refers to the best models. For clarity, only the most parsimonious (i.e., lowest AICc) of all possible models are presented. Random effect indicates whether the individual vineyard was included or not.