Skip to main content

Table 3 Model selection results based on logistic regression of factors influencing the use of foraging patches by American three-toed woodpeckers compared to subplots at the Hayman Fire (2003 to 2004), Colorado, USA. Logit models are listed with the best-fitting model first and sorted by ΔAIC c . The AIC c weights (w i ), indicate the relative likelihood of each model.

From: American Three-Toed Woodpecker Response to Burn Severity and Prey Availability at Multiple Spatial Scales

a. Foraging patch vs. subplots 2003.

Model ( n = 70) a

K

AIC c

ΔAIC c

w i

dNBR + (dNBRh)2 + dbh + TBI

5

61.85

0.00

0.81

dNBR + (dNBR)2 + TBI

4

65.55

3.70

0.13

dNBRh + (dNBRh)2 + dbh

4

67.36

5.51

0.05

dNBRh + (dNBRh)2

3

70.35

8.50

0.01

Constant

1

89.20

27.35

0.00

b. Foraging patch vs. subplots 2004.

Model ( n = 58) a

K

AIC c

ΔAIC c

w i

dNBRh + dbh

3

49.05

0.00

0.41

dNBRh + dbh + Beetlesb + TBI

5

50.22

1.17

0.23

dNBRh + dbh + Beetles

4

50.28

1.23

0.22

dNBRh + dbh + TBI

4

51.32

2.27

0.13

dNBRh + TBI + Beetles

4

65.10

16.05

0.00

dNBRh + Beetles

3

67.15

18.10

0.00

dNBRh

2

70.02

20.97

0.00

dNBRh + TBI

3

72.12

23.07

0.00

Constant

1

81.85

32.80

0.00

  1. a dNBRh represents burn severity at the home range scale (36 ha); dbh and TBI were evaluated within foraging patches or subplots.
  2. b Beetle occurrence (proportion of trees with internal evidence of beetles) within foraging patches or subplots.