Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 1 Comparison of models from stage 1

From: Path analyses of cross-sectional and longitudinal data suggest that variability in natural communities of blood-associated parasites is derived from host characteristics and not interspecific interactions

Response variables included in the model Dataset and target parasite
Type Variable Cross-sectional Longitudinal
   M B S H M B S H
Environment aTemperature 0 0 0.02 0 n/a n/a 0 0
Host bAge 17 27 96 0.2 n/a 25 28 32
bBody condition 0 0 0 0 n/a 0 0 0
bReproductive status 35 22 0 99 n/a 29 43 43
Sex 13 24 0 0 n/a 23 29 29
Vector bFlea burden 0 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 0
bTick burden 0 0 0 n/a n/a 0 0 n/a
Bacteria b Mycoplasma presence n/a 27 n/a n/a n/a 23 n/a n/a
b Bartonella presence 35 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
  1. The models explain occurrence/abundance or temporal reduction for each of the four parasitic species in the cross-sectional and longitudinal datasets, respectively. Values are weights (w i ) in percentages of Akaike information criterion corrected for sample size—the relative likelihood of the current model, given the data and the set of models. Weights are normalized across the set of candidate models to summate to one, and are interpreted as probabilities. M = Mycoplasma haemomuris-like bacterium, B = Bartonella sp., S = Synosternus cleopatrae fleas, H = Hyalomma impeltatum ticks, n/a = not applicable. The best models (w i  > 10) are marked in bold and were used for stage 2 (Additional file 1: Table S1, Figure S1)
  2. aFor the longitudinal analyses, we used the between-period temperature differences
  3. bFor both datasets, we used the relevant factor measured in the first period