Table 1.
model | AIC | R2 | p | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Protists | all functions | null | −41.8 | ||
host family | −49.0 | 0.27 | 0.001 | ||
host life type | −45.4 | 0.16 | 0.001 | ||
information storage and processing | null | −36.8 | |||
host life type | −39.0 | 0.11 | 0.001 | ||
host family | −38.4 | 0.09 | 0.001 | ||
Bacteria | all functions | null | −85.0 | ||
host family | −92.7 | 0.27 | 0.001 | ||
host life type | −90.1 | 0.20 | 0.001 | ||
metabolism | null | −92.4 | |||
host life type | −98.1 | 0.22 | 0.001 | ||
host family | −96.8 | 0.18 | 0.001 |
Effects were analyzed with Redundancy Analysis using the functional abundance table as response variable. Host family was the best explanatory variable for the combination of all protist functions, however life type explained more variance (R2) and produced a lower AIC for the category “information storage and processing” than host family. For all bacterial functions taken together, host family again explained a larger proportion of the variance, while life type was the best explanatory variable in the category “metabolism”