DIGITALNA ARHIVA ŠUMARSKOG LISTA
prilagođeno pretraživanje po punom tekstu
| ŠUMARSKI LIST 3-4/2018 str. 51 <-- 51 --> PDF |
The model {φ (hab), p(hab+t), pent(t), N(.)} indicates that probabilities of survival varied between habitats while being constant over time, probabilities of recapture were different between habitats and between study periods, the estimated values of entry rate varied only over time, while the estimated size of super-population was constant (N = 424, ±SE = 16.65, CV = 3.9%) over the study periods and did not differ between forest habitats. However, the hypothesis that the abundance of bank vole is different between the three forest stands was supported by the second best candidate model {φ (hab), p(hab+t), pent(t), N(hab)} in model ranking due to small DAICc value (DAICc < 2), thus we used the estimated number of super-population of this model. The first candidate model presented that the survival of bank vole differed between the two habitats. The estimated value of survival was significantly higher in protected forest than in the reforested habitat, which was shown by the non-overlapping 95% confidence intervals of estimation. In case of the other two habitat pairings (PFH-HU vs HUFM-CRO, RF-HU vs HUFM-CRO) due to the large overlap of confidence intervals, the survival rate of bank vole population did not differ significantly (Fig. 3). |