Skip to main content

Table 2 Summary of the best generalized linear mixed effect models fitted to species-specific relative bat activity (BAP) and foraging activity (FAP) using the binomial error distribution. All 29 candidate models (see model no. in Table 1) were compared via AICc to identify the best model (w i ≥ 0.9; w i is the weight of evidence of a model given the set of models; based on Burnham and Anderson (2002)). If no best model was found, we used the 90% confidence set of models for inference by summing up models from top to bottom until the accumulated number of weights reached w i = 0.9 (Σ w i). Here, we present only the most parsimonious models, so that Σ w i values are smaller than 0.9 (complete overview in Additional file 5)

From: Landscape and scale-dependent spatial niches of bats foraging above intensively used arable fields

 

Factor sets

Scale [km]

df

log()

AICc

Δi

w i

Σ w i

R2 cond.

Model no.

BAP

Nyctalus noctula

Local and landscape combined

5

19

−370.96

786.6

0

0.50

0.61

0.25

17

5

19

−372.46

789.6

3.00

0.11

 

0.25

16

Pipistrellus nathusii

Local and landscape combined

1

22

−284.21

621.5

0

0.39

0.60

0.25

14

P. pipistrellus

Local and landscape combined

3

23

−178.79

413.6

0

0.75

0.75

0.30

15

P. pygmaeus

Landscape

1

17

−247.74

534.7

0

0.64

0.64

0.33

7

FAP

N. noctula

Local combined

 

12

−124.66

275.9

0

0.99

0.99

0.23

11

P. nathusii

Local combined

 

11

−60.22

144.6

0

0.99

0.99

0.40

11

P. pygmeaus

Null model

 

2

−68.79

141.7

0

0.66

0.66

0

1

  1. Abbreviations: log( ) log likelihood, AICc Akaike information criterion corrected for small sample sizes, Δ i difference in AICc values related to the best model, R 2 cond. conditional pseudo R 2 gives the explained model variation including random factors