Ecological Archives E096-157-A1
Erik T. Ascheoug, F. S. Sivakoff, H. L. Cayton, W. F. Morris, and N. M. Haddad. 2015. Habitat restoration affects immature stages of a wetland butterfly through indirect effects on predation. Ecology 96:1471–1477. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/14-2403.1
Appendix A. Detailed results of all statistical tests, means and confidence intervals or standard error, and figure showing vegetation response to restoration treatments.
Table A1. Type II Wald chi-square test, degrees of freedom, and significance from Before After Control Impact tests of key vegetation community components using linear mixed models. Bold values indicate significant effects (P < 0.05).
|
Carex mitchelliana |
|
All Sedges |
|
Total Vegetation |
|||||||
Restoration Treatment |
χ2 |
df |
p |
|
χ2 |
df |
p |
|
χ2 |
df |
p |
|
Tree Removal |
5.618 |
1 |
0.018 |
|
15.049 |
1 |
<0.001 |
|
40.741 |
1 |
<0.001 |
|
Damming |
0.083 |
1 |
0.774 |
|
0.800 |
1 |
0.371 |
|
21.893 |
1 |
<0.001 |
|
Tree Removal × Damming |
<0.001 |
1 |
0.990 |
|
0.421 |
1 |
0.516 |
|
3.030 |
1 |
0.082 |
|
Table A2. Z test, significance, and number of observations from generalized linear mixed model tests of egg and juvenile survival. Fixed factors and interaction terms indicated under each test. The three-way interaction of tree removal, damming, and predation was not significant for juveniles and therefore dropped from the model. Bold values indicate significant effects (P < 0.05).
|
|
Eggs |
|
|
|
Juveniles |
|
Direct Effects Test |
z |
p |
n |
|
z |
p |
n |
Flight Period |
-2.323 |
0.020 |
29 |
|
NA |
NA |
NA |
Tree Removal |
1.956 |
0.050 |
29 |
|
1.559 |
0.119 |
45 |
Damming |
-0.072 |
0.943 |
29 |
|
0.827 |
0.408 |
45 |
Tree Removal × Damming |
-1.924 |
0.054 |
29 |
|
-0.410 |
0.682 |
45 |
|
|
Eggs |
|
|
|
Juveniles |
|
Net Effects Test |
z |
p |
n |
|
z |
p |
n |
Flight Period |
0.922 |
0.357 |
30 |
|
NA |
NA |
NA |
Tree Removal |
0.928 |
0.354 |
30 |
|
2.027 |
0.043 |
45 |
Damming |
0.417 |
0.676 |
30 |
|
-1.147 |
0.252 |
45 |
Tree Removal × Damming |
0.888 |
0.375 |
30 |
|
0.252 |
0.801 |
45 |
|
|
Eggs |
|
|
|
Juveniles |
|
Indirect Effects Test |
z |
p |
n |
|
z |
p |
n |
Flight Period |
-1.801 |
0.072 |
59 |
|
NA |
NA |
NA |
Predation |
-3.639 |
<0.001 |
59 |
|
-3.030 |
0.002 |
90 |
Tree Removal × Predation |
-1.206 |
0.228 |
59 |
|
1.120 |
0.263 |
90 |
Damming × Predation |
-0.100 |
0.921 |
59 |
|
-2.389 |
0.017 |
90 |
Tree × Damming × Predation |
3.551 |
<0.001 |
59 |
|
NA |
NA |
NA |
Table A3. Least square mean survival and lower and upper 95% confidence intervals of eggs and juveniles in all restoration and predation treatment types.
Predators excluded |
Accessible to predators |
Predation effect |
||||||
Eggs |
Treatment |
Mean |
- CI |
+ CI |
Mean |
- CI |
+ CI |
Response Ratio |
Flight Period 1 |
Control |
0.783 |
0.569 |
0.907 |
0.742 |
0.547 |
0.872 |
0.040 |
|
Tree Removal |
0.826 |
0.659 |
0.921 |
0.360 |
0.188 |
0.578 |
0.715 |
|
Dam |
0.941 |
0.775 |
0.987 |
0.432 |
0.242 |
0.645 |
0.688 |
|
Tree Removal and Dam |
0.791 |
0.559 |
0.919 |
0.326 |
0.172 |
0.530 |
0.692 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Flight Period 2 |
Control |
0.479 |
0.278 |
0.686 |
0.562 |
0.353 |
0.751 |
-0.268 |
|
Tree Removal |
0.498 |
0.288 |
0.708 |
0.117 |
0.044 |
0.276 |
0.847 |
|
Dam |
0.507 |
0.288 |
0.723 |
0.232 |
0.096 |
0.461 |
0.666 |
|
Tree Removal and Dam |
0.586 |
0.392 |
0.757 |
0.418 |
0.234 |
0.628 |
0.403 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Juveniles |
Control |
0.594 |
0.406 |
0.758 |
0.195 |
0.096 |
0.356 |
0.672 |
|
Tree Removal |
0.439 |
0.267 |
0.628 |
0.071 |
0.028 |
0.171 |
0.838 |
|
Dam |
0.539 |
0.331 |
0.735 |
0.370 |
0.198 |
0.583 |
0.315 |
|
Tree Removal and Dam |
0.350 |
0.201 |
0.536 |
0.138 |
0.062 |
0.277 |
0.607 |
Fig. A1. Mean percent cover of (A) Carex mitchelliana; (B) all sedges; and (C) total vegetation averaged by primary restoration treatment type. Note different scales on y axis in each panel. Black bars represent pre-restoration estimates from April 2011 and gray bars represent post-restoration estimates from April 2012. Error bars are ±1SE.