Table 3.
Model 2014 | k | AICc | ∆AICc | weight | Variables | Estimate | 2.50% | 97.50% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
predation risk + conspecific density | 3 | 107.56 | 0.00 | 0.67 | predation risk | −3.70 | −5.47 | −1.94 | ** |
predation risk + conspecific density + substrate | 5 | 108.94 | 1.38 | 0.33 | conspecific density | 2.69 | 1.56 | 3.81 | ** |
conspecific density + substrate | 4 | 128.75 | 21.19 | 0.00 | substrate (pylon) | 15.22 | − 2533.35 | 2563.80 | |
conspecific density | 2 | 133.87 | 26.31 | 0.00 | substrate (tree) | 16.21 | − 2532.36 | 2564.79 | |
predation risk + substrate | 4 | 173.90 | 66.34 | 0.00 | |||||
predation risk | 2 | 180.08 | 72.52 | 0.00 | |||||
substrate | 3 | 183.32 | 75.76 | 0.00 | |||||
1 | 202.61 | 95.04 | 0.00 | ||||||
Model 2015 | k | AICc | ∆AICc | weight | Variables | Estimate | 2.50% | 97.50% | |
conspecific density + substrate | 4 | 101.07 | 0.00 | 0.36 | conspecific density | 2.02 | 1.19 | 2.84 | ** |
conspecific density | 2 | 101.39 | 0.32 | 0.31 | substrate (pylon) | 18.40 | −13,219.31 | 13,256.10 | |
predation risk + conspecific density | 3 | 102.34 | 1.26 | 0.19 | substrate (tree) | 1.63 | −13,742.57 | 13,745.84 | |
predation risk + conspecific density + substrate | 5 | 102.87 | 1.80 | 0.15 | predation risk | −0.75 | −2.75 | 1.25 | |
predation risk + substrate | 4 | 149.78 | 48.71 | 0.00 | |||||
substrate | 3 | 159.11 | 58.04 | 0.00 | |||||
predation risk | 2 | 164.26 | 63.18 | 0.00 | |||||
1 | 193.96 | 92.88 | 0.00 |
2014: R2 = 0.39
2015: R2 = 0.40