Table 2 Selected best model for the abundance of ticks questing in the vegetation with estimated coefficients (in log scale), explained by the vole abundance, the amount of ticks in other stages in vegetation during the previous session and/or during the current session, and the saturation deficit (SatDef) and its second degree polynomial term (SatDef2)
From: Temporal dynamics of the tick Ixodes ricinus in northern Europe: epidemiological implications
Y = Larva abundance | Estimate (SE) | z-value | P-value |
Intercept | -5.426 (1.002) | -5.41 | <0.005 |
Vole abundance | 0.029 (0.009) | 3.11 | 0.002 |
Amount of adult ticks during the previous session | 1.007 (0.308) | 3.27 | 0.001 |
SatDef | 0.969 (0.192) | 5.03 | <0.005 |
Random effect: site | σ2 = 4.59e-06 (SD = 0.002) | ||
Negative binomial dispersion parameter | 0.34 (SE = 0.06) | ||
Y = Nymph abundance | Estimate (SE) | z-value | P-value |
Intercept | -0.279 (0.233) | -1.20 | 0.232 |
Amount of adult ticks during the same session | 0.381 (0.167) | 2.28 | 0.023 |
Random effect: site | σ2 = 0.098 (SD = 0.31) | ||
Negative binomial dispersion parameter | 1.12 (SE = 0.21) | ||
Y = Adult (male + female) abundance | Estimate (SE) | z-value | P-value |
Intercept | -1.294 (0.461) | -2.81 | 0.005 |
SatDef | 0.621 (0.239) | 2.60 | 0.009 |
SatDef2 | -0.098 (0.037) | -2.63 | 0.009 |
Amount of nymph during the same session | 0.222 (0.075) | 2.97 | 0.003 |
Amount of nymph during the previous session | -0.135 (0.071) | -1.91 | 0.056 |
Random effect: site | σ2 = 0.33 (SD = 0.57) | ||
Negative binomial dispersion parameter | 3.04 (SE = 0.81) | ||
Y = Female + nymph abundance | Estimate (SE) | z-value | P-value |
Intercept | 0.011 (0.316) | 0.04 | 0.971 |
Vole abundance | 0.006 (0.003) | 1.98 | 0.048 |
Random effect: site | σ2 = 0.27 (SD = 0.52) | ||
Negative binomial dispersion parameter | 1.53 (SE = 0.29) | ||