Table 2.
Comparing the importance of environmental and human impact covariates.
| Estimate | Standard error | z-value | p-value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total vertebrates (ANOVA: F2,18 = 5817.1, p < 0.01) | Environmental—human impact | 0.58 | 0.05 | 11.64 | <0.01 |
| Total species richness—human impact | 4.93 | 0.05 | 98.69 | <0.01 | |
| Total species richness—environmental | 4.35 | 0.05 | 87.05 | <0.01 | |
| Amphibians (ANOVA: F2,18 = 1673, p < 0.01) | Environmental—human impact | 0.29 | 0.03 | 10.45 | <0.01 |
| Total species richness —human impact | 1.52 | 0.03 | 54.50 | <0.01 | |
| Total species richness—environmental | 1.23 | 0.03 | 44.04 | <0.01 | |
| Reptiles (ANOVA: F2,18 = 2756.4, p < 0.01) | Environmental—human impact | 0.38 | 0.04 | 9.42 | <0.01 |
| Total species richness—human impact | 2.73 | 0.04 | 68.49 | <0.01 | |
| Total species richness—environmental | 2.36 | 0.04 | 59.07 | <0.01 | |
| Birds (ANOVA: F2,18 = 7346.1, p < 0.01) | Environmental—human impact | 0.18 | 0.03 | 5.67 | <0.01 |
| Total species richness—human impact | 3.46 | 0.03 | 107.69 | <0.01 | |
| Total species richness—environmental | 3.28 | 0.03 | 102.03 | <0.01 | |
| Mammals (ANOVA: F2,18 = 4602.9, p < 0.01) | Environmental—human impact | 0.99 | 0.06 | 15.96 | <0.01 |
| Total species richness—human impact | 5.60 | 0.06 | 89.92 | <0.01 | |
| Total species richness—environmental | 4.61 | 0.06 | 73.96 | <0.01 |
Repeated measures ANOVAs, and post-hoc analyses, comparing the mean measures of relative importance of environmental and human impact covariates and total species richness in explaining global threatened vertebrate species richness. Source data are provided as a Source Data File.