Foraging tree species and their influence on the number of foraging IFF in different foraging sites of the study area in Kolkata, West Bengal, India [Values with bold number and * mark indicate a significant positive influence in abundance of foraging IFF between the foraging trees in four different foraging sites of Kolkata according to Generalized Linear Mixed Models (GLMMs) with negative binomial distribution and log-link analysis (P < 0.05)]
Model term . | Coefficient . | Std. error . | t . | Sig. . | 95% Confidence interval . | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lower . | Upper . | |||||
Intercept | 2.188 | 0.537 | 4.074 | 0.000* | 1.132 | 3.244 |
ACA | 0.489 | 0.758 | 0.645 | 0.519 | −1.002 | 1.980 |
AHE | 0.256 | 0.759 | 0.338 | 0.736 | −1.235 | 1.748 |
BLA | 0.331 | 0.759 | 0.436 | 0.663 | −1.161 | 1.823 |
CNU | −0.238 | 0.760 | −0.312 | 0.755 | −1.732 | 1.257 |
CPA | −0.831 | 0.763 | −1.089 | 0.277 | −2.332 | 0.670 |
ERO | 0.336 | 0.759 | 0.443 | 0.658 | −1.155 | 1.828 |
FBE | 2.259 | 0.757 | 2.985 | 0.003* | 0.771 | 3.747 |
FGL | 1.021 | 0.757 | 1.348 | 0.179 | −0.468 | 2.510 |
FRE | 1.541 | 0.757 | 2.036 | 0.043* | 0.052 | 3.029 |
MIN | 0.626 | 0.758 | 0.826 | 0.409 | −0.864 | 2.117 |
MZA | −0.236 | 0.760 | −0.311 | 0.756 | −1.731 | 1.259 |
MPA | 0.021 | 0.759 | 0.027 | 0.978 | −1.472 | 1.514 |
PLO | −0.716 | 0.763 | −0.939 | 0.349 | −2.215 | 0.784 |
PGU | −0.039 | 0.760 | −0.052 | 0.959 | −1.533 | 1.454 |
SCU | 0.633 | 0.758 | 0.835 | 0.404 | −0.858 | 2.123 |
Model term . | Coefficient . | Std. error . | t . | Sig. . | 95% Confidence interval . | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lower . | Upper . | |||||
Intercept | 2.188 | 0.537 | 4.074 | 0.000* | 1.132 | 3.244 |
ACA | 0.489 | 0.758 | 0.645 | 0.519 | −1.002 | 1.980 |
AHE | 0.256 | 0.759 | 0.338 | 0.736 | −1.235 | 1.748 |
BLA | 0.331 | 0.759 | 0.436 | 0.663 | −1.161 | 1.823 |
CNU | −0.238 | 0.760 | −0.312 | 0.755 | −1.732 | 1.257 |
CPA | −0.831 | 0.763 | −1.089 | 0.277 | −2.332 | 0.670 |
ERO | 0.336 | 0.759 | 0.443 | 0.658 | −1.155 | 1.828 |
FBE | 2.259 | 0.757 | 2.985 | 0.003* | 0.771 | 3.747 |
FGL | 1.021 | 0.757 | 1.348 | 0.179 | −0.468 | 2.510 |
FRE | 1.541 | 0.757 | 2.036 | 0.043* | 0.052 | 3.029 |
MIN | 0.626 | 0.758 | 0.826 | 0.409 | −0.864 | 2.117 |
MZA | −0.236 | 0.760 | −0.311 | 0.756 | −1.731 | 1.259 |
MPA | 0.021 | 0.759 | 0.027 | 0.978 | −1.472 | 1.514 |
PLO | −0.716 | 0.763 | −0.939 | 0.349 | −2.215 | 0.784 |
PGU | −0.039 | 0.760 | −0.052 | 0.959 | −1.533 | 1.454 |
SCU | 0.633 | 0.758 | 0.835 | 0.404 | −0.858 | 2.123 |
Foraging tree species and their influence on the number of foraging IFF in different foraging sites of the study area in Kolkata, West Bengal, India [Values with bold number and * mark indicate a significant positive influence in abundance of foraging IFF between the foraging trees in four different foraging sites of Kolkata according to Generalized Linear Mixed Models (GLMMs) with negative binomial distribution and log-link analysis (P < 0.05)]
Model term . | Coefficient . | Std. error . | t . | Sig. . | 95% Confidence interval . | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lower . | Upper . | |||||
Intercept | 2.188 | 0.537 | 4.074 | 0.000* | 1.132 | 3.244 |
ACA | 0.489 | 0.758 | 0.645 | 0.519 | −1.002 | 1.980 |
AHE | 0.256 | 0.759 | 0.338 | 0.736 | −1.235 | 1.748 |
BLA | 0.331 | 0.759 | 0.436 | 0.663 | −1.161 | 1.823 |
CNU | −0.238 | 0.760 | −0.312 | 0.755 | −1.732 | 1.257 |
CPA | −0.831 | 0.763 | −1.089 | 0.277 | −2.332 | 0.670 |
ERO | 0.336 | 0.759 | 0.443 | 0.658 | −1.155 | 1.828 |
FBE | 2.259 | 0.757 | 2.985 | 0.003* | 0.771 | 3.747 |
FGL | 1.021 | 0.757 | 1.348 | 0.179 | −0.468 | 2.510 |
FRE | 1.541 | 0.757 | 2.036 | 0.043* | 0.052 | 3.029 |
MIN | 0.626 | 0.758 | 0.826 | 0.409 | −0.864 | 2.117 |
MZA | −0.236 | 0.760 | −0.311 | 0.756 | −1.731 | 1.259 |
MPA | 0.021 | 0.759 | 0.027 | 0.978 | −1.472 | 1.514 |
PLO | −0.716 | 0.763 | −0.939 | 0.349 | −2.215 | 0.784 |
PGU | −0.039 | 0.760 | −0.052 | 0.959 | −1.533 | 1.454 |
SCU | 0.633 | 0.758 | 0.835 | 0.404 | −0.858 | 2.123 |
Model term . | Coefficient . | Std. error . | t . | Sig. . | 95% Confidence interval . | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lower . | Upper . | |||||
Intercept | 2.188 | 0.537 | 4.074 | 0.000* | 1.132 | 3.244 |
ACA | 0.489 | 0.758 | 0.645 | 0.519 | −1.002 | 1.980 |
AHE | 0.256 | 0.759 | 0.338 | 0.736 | −1.235 | 1.748 |
BLA | 0.331 | 0.759 | 0.436 | 0.663 | −1.161 | 1.823 |
CNU | −0.238 | 0.760 | −0.312 | 0.755 | −1.732 | 1.257 |
CPA | −0.831 | 0.763 | −1.089 | 0.277 | −2.332 | 0.670 |
ERO | 0.336 | 0.759 | 0.443 | 0.658 | −1.155 | 1.828 |
FBE | 2.259 | 0.757 | 2.985 | 0.003* | 0.771 | 3.747 |
FGL | 1.021 | 0.757 | 1.348 | 0.179 | −0.468 | 2.510 |
FRE | 1.541 | 0.757 | 2.036 | 0.043* | 0.052 | 3.029 |
MIN | 0.626 | 0.758 | 0.826 | 0.409 | −0.864 | 2.117 |
MZA | −0.236 | 0.760 | −0.311 | 0.756 | −1.731 | 1.259 |
MPA | 0.021 | 0.759 | 0.027 | 0.978 | −1.472 | 1.514 |
PLO | −0.716 | 0.763 | −0.939 | 0.349 | −2.215 | 0.784 |
PGU | −0.039 | 0.760 | −0.052 | 0.959 | −1.533 | 1.454 |
SCU | 0.633 | 0.758 | 0.835 | 0.404 | −0.858 | 2.123 |
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
View Article Abstract & Purchase OptionsFor full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.