Ecological Archives A014-022-A1

Robyn L. Irvine, Elizabeth E. Crone, Leland J. Jackson, and Erland A. MacIsaac. 2004. Does scale affect ecological model predictions? A test with lake responses to fertilization. Ecological Applications 14:1178–1188.

Appendix A. Results from the model fitting for all 40 spatial and temporal models considered for ranking. 

Model-
Data partioned by
Estimated
Parameters
Total Log
Likelihood
AIC
Value
AICc
Value
Delta
AICc
AICc
Weights
AICc
Rank
BIC
Value
BIC
Rank
Locale, FU, Year, Portion, Season
213
-18.66
458.3
500.74
983.98
2.14E-214
10
1691.93
19
Lake, FU, Year, Station, Season
264
538.93
-549.9
-483.24
0
1
1
972.91
5
Lake, FU, Portion, Station, Season
195
274.55
-159.1
-123.85
359.39
9.09E-79
4
965.675
3
Lake, FU, Year, Portion, Station
111
-317.76
857.51
868.56
1351.8
2.89E-294
14
1497.77
15
Lake, FU, Year, Portion, Season
219
413.99
-390.0
-345.03
138.21
9.72E-31
2
873.24
1
Lake, FU, Locale, Year, Season
210
372.78
-325.6
-284.4
198.84
6.65E-44
3
885.74
2
Lake, Station, Locale, Season
165
15.1
299.8
324.72
807.97
3.57E-176
8
1251.54
9
Locale, FU, Season, Year
126
-457.76
1167.5
1181.8
1665.08
0
19
1894.31
24
Lake, FU, Portion, Season
126
-62.93
377.86
392.18
875.43
8.01E-191
9
1104.54
7
Lake, Portion, Station, Season
174
150.89
46.23
74.05
557.29
9.67E-122
6
1049.88
6
Lake, FU, Locale, Season
117
-183.92
601.85
614.15
1097.39
5.06E-79
12
1276.62
11
Lake, FU, Station, Season
195
274.33
-158.7
-123.4
359.84
7.26E-79
5
966.122
4
Lake, FU, Locale, Year
90
-390.6
961.21
968.41
1451.66
0
16
1480.34
14
Lake, Year, Station
111
-1008.51
2239.0
2250.1
2733.31
0
28
2879.29
30
Lake, Year, Portion
93
-357.9
901.8
909.51
1392.75
3.7E-303
15
1438.24
13
Lake, Portion, Station
75
-486.65
1123.3
1128.3
1611.52
0
18
1555.9
16
Lake, FU, Station
84
-459.76
1087.5
1093.8
1577.03
0
17
1572.04
17
Year, FU, Locale
48
-1159.03
2414.1
2416.1
2899.33
0
29
2690.04
28
Lake, FU, Portion
54
-619.55
1347.1
1349.7
1832.92
0
21
1658.58
18
Lake, FU, Season
117
-182.86
599.71
612.0
1095.25
1.48E-238
11
1274.58
10
Lake, Year, Season
186
71.46
229.01
261.0
744.24
2.46E-162
7
1301.95
12
Year, FU, Season
99
-667.62
1533.2
1542.0
2025.24
0
24
2104.29
26
Lake, Portion, Season
105
-197.89
605.78
615.64
1098.88
2.4E-239
13
1211.43
8
Locale, FU, Season
30
-1908.97
3877.9
3878.7
4361.98
0
32
4050.99
32
Lake, Year
78
-691.67
1539.3
1544.7
2027.98
0
25
1989.25
25
Year, Season
54
-1510.2
3128.4
3131.0
3614.22
0
31
3439.89
31
Locale, FU
12
-2578.54
5181.1
5181.2
5664.45
0
35
5250.29
35
Year, FU
33
-1305.4
2676.8
2677.8
3161.01
0
30
2867.15
29
Lake, FU
51
-736.24
1574.5
1576.8
2060.01
0
26
1868.65
23
Lake, Station
72
-630.25
1404.5
1409.1
1892.33
0
22
1819.81
22
Lake, Portion
45
-676.7
1443.4
1445.2
1928.43
0
23
1702.97
20
FU, Season
18
-2036.8
4109.6
4109.9
4593.13
0
33
4213.43
33
Locale, Season
18
-2684.72
5405.4
5405.7
5888.97
0
37
5509.26
37
Lake, Season
96
-495.57
1183.1
1191.4
1674.61
0
20
1736.89
21
Locale
6
-3566.27
7144.5
7144.6
7627.81
0
39
7179.14
39
Year
18
-2116.53
4269.1
4269.3
4752.59
0
34
4372.88
34
FU
6
-2607.69
5227.4
5227.4
5710.66
0
36
5261.99
36
Lake
42
-1052.05
2188.1
2189.7
2672.91
0
27
2430.37
27
Season
9
-2956.82
5931.6
5931.7
6414.96
0
38
5983.55
38
Unseparated
3
-3676.86
7359.7
7359.7
7842.97
0
40
7377.03
40

   Notes: FU represents fertilization status. The number of parameters estimated comes from three parameters estimated for each individual curve fitted.  The AIC value is provided along with the AICc value to provide comparison of the correction for small sample sizes found in the AICc.  The (Delta) AICc is the difference in AICc value between the top-ranked model and the model under consideration.  BIC (Bayesian Information Criteria) values are also given for comparison of the dimension consistent ranking of the models.  


[Back to A014-022]