Skip to main content

Table 3 Optimal discriminate analysis models for R. aurora breeding abundance addressing the seven variables examined. Presentation is identical to Table 2

From: Identification of habitat controls on northern red-legged frog populations: implications for habitat conservation on an urbanizing landscape in the Pacific Northwest

 

Training analysisa

LOO analysisb

Variable

Model

Number

Accuracy (%)

p<

ESS

Accuracy (%)

p<

ESS

AREA

–

–

–

0.1082

43.8

–

–

–

BULL

–

–

–

0.5757

20.8

–

–

–

CON

If CON ≤ 96.26 predict ≤ 1 egg mass

8

87.5

0.0001

87.5

75.0

0.0005

70.0

 

If CON > 96.26 predict > 1 egg mass

20

100.0

  

95.0

  

EMG

If EMG ≤ 2526 predict ≤ 1 egg mass

8

100.0

0.0448

55.0

–

0.2184

25.0

 

If EMG > 2526 predict > 1 egg mass

20

55.0

     

FISH

If FISH = 0 predict ≤ 4 egg masses

12

91.7

0.0390

41.7

91.7

0.0241

41.7

 

If FISH = 1 predict > 4 egg masses

16

50.0

  

50.0

  

FRP

If FRP ≤ 58.6% predict ≤ 40 egg masses

19

84.2

0.0012

73.1

84.2

0.0005

73.1

 

If FRP > 58.6% predict > 40 egg masses

21

88.9

     

PCF

If PCF ≤ 56.0% predict ≤ 69 egg masses

21

90.00

0.0006

81.0

76.2

0.0070

61.9

 

If PCF > 56.0% predict > 69 egg masses

7

100.00

  

85.7

  
  1. aTraining analysis reveals the maximum-accuracy (optimal) model by using every possible cut-point (or assignment rule) to classify sample observations
  2. bLeave-one-out or LOO analysis is used to assess potential cross-generalizability of the model. See text for details