Table 2.
Direct and total standardised effect sizes and proposed interpretations for both the attendance and in situ models.
| p Value | Direct effect (SE) | Total effect | Interpretation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attendance model | ||||
| Attendance (R2 = 0.689) | ||||
| Attendance∼total animals | <0.001 | 0.587 (0.041) | 0.587 | Attendance is positively correlated with total number of animals in an institution |
| Attendance∼10 km population | <0.001 | 0.444 (0.034) | 0.444 | Attendance is positively correlated with the local population size (10 km radius) surrounding an institution |
| Attendance∼body mass | <0.001 | 0.340 (0.030) | 0.062 | Attendance is positively correlated with mean species body mass for an institution |
| Attendance∼GDP | <0.001 | 0.163 (0.027) | 0.083 | Attendance is positively correlated with national GDP |
| Attendance∼dissimilarity | <0.001 | 0.125 (0.031) | 0.125 | Attendance is positively correlated with collection dissimilarity |
| Attendance∼mammal species richness | 0.021 | 0.102 (0.044) | 0.309 | Attendance has a small, but positive correlation with number of mammal species present in an institution |
| Attendance∼species richness | 0.004 | −0.184 (0.064) | 0.262 | Attendance is directly negatively correlated with institutional species richness |
| Total animals (R2 = 0.783) | ||||
| Total animals∼species richness | <0.001 | 0.759 (0.050) | 0.759 | The total number of animals in an institution is positively correlated with institutional species richness |
| Total animals∼institution area | <0.001 | 0.309 (0.045) | 0.382 | The total number of animals in an institution is positively correlated with institutional area |
| Total animals∼GDP | 0.047 | −0.136 (0.069) | −0.136 | The total number of animals in an institution is negatively correlated with national GDP |
| Total animals∼body mass | <0.001 | −0.157 (0.036) | −0.483 | The total number of animals in an institution is negatively correlated with the mean species body mass of an institution |
| Species richness (R2 = 0.678) | ||||
| Sp. richness∼mammal species richness | <0.001 | 0.790 (0.067) | 0.790 | Institutional species richness is strongly positively correlated with institutional mammal species richness |
| Sp. richness∼institution area | 0.017 | 0.096 (0.040) | 0.096 | Institutional species richness is positively correlated with institutional area |
| Sp. richness∼body mass | <0.001 | −0.429 (0.043) | −0.429 | Institutional species richness is negatively correlated with the mean species body mass of an institution |
| Dissimilarity (R2 = 0.257) | ||||
| Dissimilarity∼institution area | <0.001 | 0.277 (0.051) | 0.277 | Collection composition dissimilarity is positively correlated with institutional area |
| Dissimilarity∼body mass | <0.001 | −0.593 (0.077) | −0.593 | Collection composition dissimilarity is negatively correlated with the mean species body mass of an institution |
| In situ model | ||||
| In situ contributions (R2 = 0.496) | ||||
| In situ∼attendance | <0.001 | 0.583 (0.074) | 0.583 | Institutional in situ contributions are positively correlated with institutional attendance |
| In situ∼threatened species proportion | 0.004 | 0.189 (0.066) | 0.189 | Institutional in situ contributions are positively correlated with the proportion of threatened species in an institution |
| In situ∼institution area | 0.015 | 0.169 (0.069) | 0.320 | Institutional in situ contributions are positively correlated with institutional area |
Also provided are R2 values, standard errors and p values
Relationships are ranked according to direct effect size magnitude. Model results presented reflect abundance adjusted models. Only the in situ component of the in situ model is reported as all other pathways were analogous to the attendance model. All estimated p values and quantities generated were derived using SEM, as outlined in the Supplementary Code and Supplementary Data 1 and 2 provided