Table 1.

Effects of property management on questing tick abundance

Variable	Std. error	df	t-value	P
Forest habitat	0.701	194.61	4.171	<0.0001***
Lawn habitat	0.62	130.728	0.346	0.73
Shrub/garden habitat	0.633	144.084	0.362	0.718
Outside cat present	0.713	357.989	0.158	0.874
Wood pile present	0.51	357.998	−0.894	0.372
Trash present	0.521	327.604	2.678	0.008**
Stone wall present	0.618	318.401	2.237	0.026*
Barrier present	2.244	352.022	0.132	0.895
Bird feeder present	0.521	292.162	−0.094	0.926
Fencing present	0.802	334.047	−0.913	0.362
No. of forest flagging intervals	0.065	243.325	−1.644	0.102
Fraction of flagging intervals with barberry	5.612	344.418	0.57	0.569

Summary of results from linear mixed model including fixed effects of property management variables, habitat, and forest area (as measured by the number of forest flagging intervals), and random effects of neighborhood and property address. Fencing is considered present if at least 75% of the property is fenced, and absent if less than 75% of the property is fenced. Trash and stone walls were each associated with increased tick abundance. Forest samples had increased tick abundance. Asterisks indicate significance: * (P < 0.05), ** (P < 0.01), *** (P < 0.001).