Table 1.
Results of the generalized LMM analysis (response variable: total ROM displays, Poisson distribution)
| Fixed effects | Coeff | SE | 2.5% CI | 97.5% CI | χ 2 | df | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | −5.372 | 1.186 | −7.695 | −3.048 | — | — | — |
| Log|PAI| | 0.879 | 0.355 | 0.183 | 1.576 | 6.131 | 1 | 0.013 |
| TotHB | 0.017 | 0.370 | −0.742 | 0.707 | 0.002 | 1 | 0.962 |
| AC | — | — | — | — | 9.572 | 3 | 0.022 |
| AC [immature→mature]a, b | 0.442 | 1.325 | −2.154 | 3.038 | — | — | — |
| AC [mature→immature]a, b | 2.286 | 0.922 | 0.478 | 4.094 | — | — | — |
| AC [mature→mature]a, b | 3.490 | 1.423 | 0.701 | 6.280 | — | — | — |
| Day/night | −1.392 | 1.186 | −2.880 | 0.095 | 3.368 | 1 | 0.066 |
| LF [presence/absence] | −1.692 | 0.927 | −3.509 | 0.125 | 2.291 | 1 | 0.068 |
Estimated parameters (Coeff), SE, 95% confidence intervals (2.5–97.5% CI), and results of the LRTs of the best Generalized LMM (with a Poisson distribution) investigating the effect of the following variables on the: log|PAI|; total HB displays (totHB); AC (immature→immature; immature→mature; mature→immature; mature→mature); Day/Night; LF (presence/absence); marginal R2 = 0.284; conditional R2 = 0.704; Ncases = 177; Ndyads = 62. Variance for the random factors: dyads = 2.572 (±1.604 SD). Significant P-values are shown in bold
Estimate parameters ± SE refer to the difference of the response between the reported level of this categorical predictor and the reference category of the same predictor
These predictors were dummy coded, with the “AC [immature→immature]” being the reference category.