Table 5.

Results of negative binomial GLMMs examining the effect of individuals’ betweenness centrality in their social grooming and huddling networks, and their interactions with sex and dominance rank, on the outcome of E. coli betweenness in their transmission networks (Aim 3)

Model	Outcome variable	Predictors	β	SE	P	Ppermuted	df
Null	E. coli betweenness	(Intercept)	4.89	0.16	<0.01**		96
B1	E. coli betweenness	(Intercept)	4.72	0.24	<0.01**		95
		Groom betweenness	0.78	0.93	0.40	0.27
B2	E. coli betweenness	(Intercept)	4.79	0.25	<0.01**		95
		Huddle betweenness	0.40	0.82	0.63	0.49
B3	E. coli betweenness	(Intercept)	4.67	0.31	<0.01**		93
		Groom betweenness	0.77	1.18	0.51	0.39
		Sex	0.15	0.51	0.77	0.70
		Groom betweenness:Sex	0.03	1.92	0.99	0.97
B4	E. coli betweenness	(Intercept)	4.57	0.34	<0.01**		93
		Huddle betweenness	1.10	1.20	0.36	0.23
		Sex	0.46	0.53	0.39	0.31
		Huddle betweenness:Sex	−1.27	1.65	0.44	0.43
B5	E. coli betweenness	(Intercept)	4.79	0.47	<0.01**		93
		Groom betweenness	0.97	2.36	0.68	0.62
		Rank	−0.18	0.95	0.85	0.79
		Groom betweenness:Rank	−0.22	3.85	0.96	0.89
B6	E. coli betweenness	(Intercept)	4.88	0.46	<0.01**		93
		Huddle betweenness	0.14	1.70	0.93	0.83
		Rank	−0.21	0.90	0.82	0.76
		Huddle Betweenness:Rank	0.58	2.98	0.85	0.86
B7	E. coli betweenness	(Intercept)	5.30	0.40	<0.01**		93
		Groom betweenness	−3.56	1.91	0.06	0.06
		Huddle betweenness	−2.66	1.58	0.09	0.10
		Groom betweenness: Huddle betweenness	15.26	6.43	0.02*	0.01*

Models in bold indicate those where the permuted P values, obtained by comparing the observed β coefficient with a distribution of 1000 coefficients generated by randomly swapping the nodes of the transmission network, reached significance (P_permuted < 0.05).

^*P < 0.05;

^**P < 0.01.