. 2018 Jun 11;6:e4944. doi: 10.7717/peerj.4944

Table 4. Regression analysis showing the linear relationship between femoral length (FL) and histomorphometric parameters of Bathyergus suillus.

	Regression analysis (Independent models for each sex)
	Males					Females					Slope comparison
	R²	Y-Intercept	Slope	CI.min	CI.max	R²	Y-Intercept	Slope	CI.min	CI.max	t-test	p
Cs.Wi vs. FL	0.79	0.5135	0.1053	0.0796	0.1298	0.82	−0.4639	0.1328	0.1044	0.1574	1.4120	0.1660
C.Ar vs. FL	0.89	−8.2947	0.5158	0.4218	0.6108	0.84	−11.1470	0.5984	0.4685	0.7041	1.0720	0.2910
Ct.Ar vs. FL	0.92	−11.1170	0.5224	0.4522	0.6008	0.85	−14.4350	0.6024	0.4894	0.6971	1.1120	0.2730
Me.Ar vs. FL	0.00	2.6300	−0.0036	−0.0523	0.0416	0.01	3.3719	−0.0091	−0.0549	0.0380	−0.1400	0.8890
Es.Pm vs. FL	0.01	5.3291	0.0134	−0.0375	0.0615	0.00	6.6220	0.0022	−0.0486	0.0519	−0.2530	0.8010
RCA vs. FL	0.57	0.4859	0.0074	0.0043	0.0107	0.64	0.1444	0.0145	0.0102	0.0189	2.3360	0.0250
BC vs. FL	0.56	0.4801	0.0075	0.0043	0.0109	0.64	0.1390	0.0145	0.0106	0.0191	2.2990	0.0270
CDI vs. FL	0.49	0.2247	0.0081	0.0047	0.0123	0.61	−0.0479	0.0134	0.0098	0.0173	1.6690	0.1040
R/t vs. FL	0.53	2.9221	−0.0263	−0.0408	−0.0140	0.65	4.9300	−0.0689	−0.0948	−0.0468	−3.0900	0.0040
S vs. FL	0.00	0.0221	−0.0000507	−0.0005	0.0004	0.02	0.0184	0.0002	−0.0005	0.0009	0.6360	0.5290
P vs. FL	0.49	0.7750	−0.0081	0.0123	−0.0044	0.61	1.0479	−0.0135	−0.0174	−0.0096	−1.6710	0.1030
n.Rc vs. FL	0.08	18.3200	−0.2500	−0.5095	0.4425	0.01	1.4332	0.0526	−0.2954	0.3692	1.1440	0.2620
Tt.Rc.Ar vs. FL	0.07	0.1983	−0.0028	−0.0078	0.0057	0.04	−0.0604	0.0052	−0.0066	0.0174	1.1200	0.2720
Ct.Po vs. FL	0.13	0.0232	−0.0003	−0.0008	0.0004	0.12	0.0736	−0.0013	−0.0034	0.0011	−1.0950	0.2830

Notes:

Confidence intervals (CI) are showed for male and female regression slopes. Significant differences in slope values between sexes are indicated in bold. See Table 3 for Abbreviations.