Skip to main content

Table 1 Parameter estimates (± standard errors) of the model selected for each species and season

From: Temporal patterns of three sympatric pheasant species in the Nanling Mountains: N-mixture modeling applied to detect abundance

Season Species Abundance Detection
Intercept Elevation Intercept
Winter Silver Pheasant 1.42 ± 0.58 0.89± 0.28 ‒ 3.09 ± 0.56
White-necklaced Partridge 1.94 ± 0.80 ‒ ‒ 3.82 ± 0.81
Cabot’s Tragopan 0.39± 0.94 1.20 ± 0.30 ‒ 3.18 ± 0.91
Spring Silver Pheasant 2.67 ± 0.81 ‒ ‒ 3.26 ± 0.84
White-necklaced Partridge 2.78 ± 4.79  ‒ ‒ 3.57 ± 4.80
Cabot’s Tragopan 2.23 ± 1.24 ‒ ‒ 3.39 ± 2.72
Summer Silver Pheasant 2.73 ± 0.35 ‒ ‒ 2.95 ± 0.33
White-necklaced Partridge 2.03± 0.58 ‒ ‒ 3.35± 0.56
Cabot’s Tragopan 2.24 ± 0.75 ‒ ‒ 3.50 ± 0.77
Autumn Silver Pheasant 2.58 ± 0.47 ‒ ‒ 3.12 ± 0.47
White-necklaced Partridge 4.18 ± 1.05  ‒ ‒ 4.59 ± 1.07
Cabot’s Tragopan 1.29 ± 1.41 ‒ ‒ 1.80 ± 1.45
  1. Values are not back-transformed: estimates related to abundance and detection are on log and logit scale, respectively
  2. Standard errors are calculated based on parametric bootstrap method
  3. Estimates with p-value < 0.05 are in italic
  4. Note that there are only two cases that the covariate model with elevation was better than the null model (no covariate) based on AIC values: Silver Pheasant and Cabot’s Tragopan during winter. See Additional file 1: Table S2 for the summary of model selection (AIC values and weights of all models)
Back to article page

Avian Research

ISSN: 2053-7166