Table 2.

Relationship between floral resource availability and bee community characteristics.

Relationship between floral resource availability and bee community characteristics
	Floral abundance				Floral area				Floral richness				Other predictors
	Resid. dev.	z	ß	∆AIC	Resid. dev.	z	ß	∆AIC	Resid. dev.	z	ß	∆AIC
All bees
Total abundance	830.296	5.54***	0.31	0.0	846.796	3.09***	0.21	16.5	837.696	4.54***	0.32	7.4	Period
Female abundance	785.397	5.89***	0.34	0.0	802.697	3.46***	0.23	17.3	794.697	4.62***	0.32	9.3	—
Male abundance	547.895	3.16***	0.31	0.0	555.195	1.51	0.17	7.3	553.595	1.96	0.22	5.6	%ISC + Period
Richness	597.697	4.97***	0.18	5.2	610.297	3.08**	0.13	17.8	592.497	5.57***	0.23	0.0	—
Ground-nesting bees
Total abundance	793.096	5.10***	0.32	0.0	807.096	2.88**	0.21	15.0	799.596	4.11***	0.34	6.5	Period
Female abundance	745.896	5.15***	0.33	0.0	759.196	3.06**	0.22	14.3	751.796	4.21***	0.32	5.9	%ISC
Male abundance	474.095	2.91**	0.35	0.0	479.595	1.64	0.21	5.5	477.495	2.21*	0.30	3.4	%ISC + Period
Cavity-nesting bees
Total abundance	504.083	2.91**	0.23	0.0	510.083	1.32	0.11	6.0	504.683	2.72**	0.23	0.6	%ISC
Female abundance	461.783	2.73**	0.24	0.0	467.283	1.17	0.11	5.5	463.083	2.40*	0.22	1.3	%ISC
Male abundance	312.583	1.32	0.17	0.3	314.183	0.34	0.05	1.9	312.283	1.44	0.19	0.0	%ISC

Comparison of model output for GLMMs with study site as a random effect and an observation-level random effect included to account for overdispersion. “Other predictors” refers to additional predictors beyond the floral resource metric included in the best model. Boldface indicates output from the best model. %ISC: percent of the landscape covered by impervious surfaces within 2 km of the study site. Significance levels: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.