Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 5 Output of GLMs used to compare location-specific detection probabilities of acoustic-tagged lake sturgeon 0–14 days post-release and simultaneously-observed conspecifics tagged in prior years

From: Effects of acoustic tag implantation on lake sturgeon Acipenser fulvescens: lack of evidence for changes in behavior

Phase Model IV(s) df AICc w D* (P)
I 1 Null (intercept only) 17 126.0 0.00 67.9 (<0.01)
2 Release group 16 124.9 0.00 64.3 (<0.01)
3 Year 15 131.2 0.00 67.7 (<0.01)
4 Location 15 88.9 0.19 25.4 (0.04)
II 5 Location, release group 14 88.2 0.28 21.3 (0.09)
6 Location, year 13 96.0 0.01 25.2 (0.02)
III 7 Location, release group, year 12 96.4 0.00 20.9 (0.05)
IV 8 Location, release group, location × release group 12 86.9 0.53 11.4 (0.49)
9 Location, release group, year, location × release group 10 98.9 0.00 11.1 (0.35)
10 Location, release group, year, location × year 8 119.8 0.00 12.6 (0.13)
11 Location, release group, year, release group × year 10 108.6 0.00 20.8 (0.02)
  1. IVs independent variables, df degrees of freedom, AICc Akaike’s Information Criterion, w Akaike weights, and goodness of fit statistics (scaled deviance, D*, and P value of associated Chi square test) for generalized linear models used to analyze probability of detection of acoustic-tagged lake sturgeon (0–14 days post-surgery vs. 1+ years post-surgery) at locations in the North Channel of the lower St. Clair River (≤2 km from release sites, >2 km upstream or downstream from release sites) during 2012, 2013, and 2014. Release group identifies individuals observed 0–14 days post-surgery and simultaneously-observed conspecifics tagged in prior years. The highest-ranking (best) model is italicized