Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 6 Output of GLMs used to compare location-specific detection probabilities of acoustic-tagged lake sturgeon 15–29 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 74.4 0.04 21.5 (0.20)
2 Release group 16 76.3 0.02 20.9 (0.18)
3 Year 15 77.7 0.01 19.3 (0.20)
4 Location 15 68.8 0.68 10.5 (0.79)
II 5 Location, release group 14 71.5 0.18 9.8 (0.78)
6 Location, year 13 73.8 0.06 8.2 (0.83)
III 7 Location, release group, year 12 76.5 0.01 6.3 (0.90)
IV 8 Location, release group, location × release group 12 77.9 0.01 7.7 (0.81)
9 Location, release group, year, location × release group 10 86.7 0.00 4.0 (0.95)
10 Location, release group, year, location × year 8 107.3 0.00 5.3 (0.73)
11 Location, release group, year, release group × year 10 86.7 0.00 4.0 (0.95)
  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 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 15–29 days post-surgery and simultaneously-observed conspecifics tagged in prior years. The highest-ranking (best) model is italicized