Skip to main content
. 2018 Jun 27;285(1881):20181020. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2018.1020

Table 2.

Summary of quantitative analyses. ((a) Summary of coefficients and significance values for linear regressions performed. Quantile regression estimates the conditional median of the response variable, unlike ordinary least squares (OLS) that estimates the approximate conditional mean. Robust regression fittings (objective functions used were Huber and Tukey bisquare) are performed by iterated, re-weighted least-squares analyses. The formulae proposed use the average of the coefficients given by the different regression models (see the electronic supplementary material). (b) Component models (delta AICc < 2) that best predict δ13C diet–bioapatite enrichment Inline graphic in herbivorous mammals given current data. Body mass alone is the best predictor of enrichment. Other, more complex models that simultaneously assess more potential influences, do not significantly improve prediction of the enrichment in the AICc analyses. Abbreviations: d.f., degrees of freedom; logLik, maximum log-likelihood; AICc, Akaike information criterion corrected for small sample sizes; delta, difference in AICc between the current and the best model; weight, prior weights used in model fitting.)

(a) linear regressions intercept slope R2 p-value
all taxa included
OLS model fit 2.4 0.034 0.62 0.0002
OLS model fit excluding outliers 2.39 0.04 0.83 5.35×10−6
quantile regression fit 2.37 0.041
robust regression (Huber estimator) 2.4 0.036
robust regression (Tukey bisquare estimator) 2.4 0.035
average 2.39 0.037
hindgut fermenters
OLS model fit 2.42 0.032 0.74 0.003
OLS model fit excluding outliers 2.4 0.036 0.89 0.001
quantile regression fit 2.48 0.022
robust regression (Huber estimator) 2.43 0.03
robust regression (Tukey bisquare estimator) 2.51 0.019
average 2.45 0.028
foregut fermenters
OLS and robust model values 2.34 0.05 0.78 0.008
quantile regression fit 2.24 0.07
robust regression (Huber estimator) 2.34 0.05
robust regression (Tukey bisquare estimator) 2.34 0.05
average 2.34 0.06
(b) component models d.f. logLik AICc delta AICc weight
body mass alone 3 12.71 −17.02 0.00 0.52
body mass + average rectal temperature 4 14.03 −15.62 1.41 0.26
body mass + basal metabolic rate 4 13.91 −15.38 1.64 0.23