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