Ecological Archives E095-004-A2
Laura Radville, Liahna Gonda-King, Sara Gómez, Ian Kaplan, Evan L. Preisser. 2014. Are exotic herbivores better competitors? A meta-analysis. Ecology 95:30–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/13-0728.1
Appendix B. Supplemental results: analyses of the importance of coevolutionary history, temporal separation, and spatial separation on interspecific competition when controlling exotic/native status of the focal and competing herbivore.
Table B1. The effect of native/exotic status on interspecific competition with native and exotic competitors with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
|
Focal insect is native |
Focal insect is exotic |
|||||||||
Competitor is native |
|
QB |
P value |
Effect size (RR)focal |
CI lowerfocal |
CI upperfocal |
df |
Effect size (RR)competitor |
CI lowercompetitor |
CI uppercompetitor |
df |
Growth |
12.7908 |
0.022 |
0.9639 |
0.9434 |
0.9848 |
146 |
0.8883 |
0.8532 |
0.9248 |
54 |
|
Fecundity |
28.861 |
0.002 |
0.5271 |
0.4351 |
0.6386 |
22 |
1.3449 |
0.9564 |
1.8911 |
8 |
|
Survival |
18.4264 |
0.006 |
0.9414 |
0.8776 |
1.0099 |
73 |
0.7224 |
0.6514 |
0.8011 |
30 |
|
Development time |
21.0842 |
0.001 |
0.952 |
0.9303 |
0.9742 |
61 |
1.0602 |
1.0157 |
1.1067 |
18 |
|
Competitor is exotic |
|
QB |
P value |
Effect size (RR)focal |
CI lowerfocal |
CI upperfocal |
df |
Effect size (RR)competitor |
CI lowercompetitor |
CI uppercompetitor |
df |
Growth |
0.3825 |
0.616 |
0.9203 |
0.874 |
0.969 |
38 |
0.8954 |
0.8311 |
0.9646 |
27 |
|
Fecundity |
0.0961 |
0.745 |
0.7622 |
0.2945 |
1.9727 |
2 |
0.8202 |
0.6886 |
0.9769 |
22 |
|
Survival |
13.1907 |
0.001 |
0.4069 |
0.298 |
0.5556 |
18 |
0.7826 |
0.6365 |
0.9622 |
40 |
|
Development time |
52.65 |
0.002 |
1.2762 |
1.2014 |
1.3557 |
10 |
0.9841 |
0.9365 |
1.0341 |
16 |
Table B2. The effect of focal insect and host plant coevolutionary history on interspecific competition with 95% confidence intervals (CI) when the status of the focal and competing insects are controlled for. "." indicates that there were not enough data to run analyses.
|
Focal insect and host plant share a coevolutionary history |
Focal insect and plant do not share a coevolutionary history |
|||||||||
Nativefocal vs. nativecompetitor |
|
QB |
P value |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Growth |
9.9372 |
0.014 |
0.9682 |
0.9487 |
0.9881 |
96 |
1.0959 |
0.994 |
1.2082 |
5 |
|
Fecundity |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
Survival |
5.5204 |
0.218 |
0.9554 |
0.8677 |
1.052 |
33 |
1.4759 |
0.1519 |
14.3408 |
1 |
|
Development time |
0.3151 |
0.523 |
0.9633 |
0.9336 |
0.9941 |
35 |
0.9885 |
0.8615 |
1.1341 |
3 |
|
Exoticfocal vs. exoticcompetitor |
|
QB |
P value |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Growth |
0.0766 |
0.833 |
0.9902 |
0.8396 |
1.1678 |
5 |
1.0344 |
0.6541 |
1.6357 |
3 |
|
Fecundity |
0.0011 |
0.968 |
0.7849 |
0.586 |
1.0512 |
11 |
0.792 |
0.2793 |
2.2456 |
2 |
|
Survival |
1.4084 |
0.283 |
0.7004 |
0.5269 |
0.931 |
11 |
0.8606 |
0.6714 |
1.103 |
14 |
|
Development time |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
Nativefocal vs. exoticcompetitor |
|
QB |
P value |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Growth |
3.3874 |
0.097 |
0.9615 |
0.8847 |
1.0449 |
12 |
0.7947 |
0.2341 |
2.6977 |
1 |
|
Fecundity |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
Survival |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
Development time |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
Exoticfocal vs. nativecompetitor |
|
QB |
P value |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Growth |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
Fecundity |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
Survival |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
Development time |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
Table B3. The effect of spatial separation on interspecific competition when control for native/exotic status of focal and competing insects. "." indicates there were not enough data to run analyses.
|
Spatial separation between focal and competing insect |
No spatial separation between focal and competing insect |
|||||||||
Nativefocal vs. nativecompetitor |
|
QB |
P value |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Growth |
7.8688 |
0.043 |
0.9972 |
0.9644 |
1.0311 |
63 |
0.9361 |
0.9084 |
0.9646 |
82 |
|
Fecundity |
4.704 |
0.114 |
0.6512 |
0.4919 |
0.8619 |
7 |
0.4678 |
0.3808 |
0.5746 |
14 |
|
Survival |
43.6897 |
0.001 |
1.6975 |
1.3618 |
2.1159 |
8 |
0.8638 |
0.8034 |
0.9288 |
64 |
|
Development time |
31.0246 |
0.001 |
1.0161 |
0.9864 |
1.0466 |
18 |
0.9242 |
0.9066 |
0.9422 |
42 |
|
Exoticfocal vs. exoticcompetitor |
|
QB |
P value |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Growth |
1.189 |
0.32 |
0.8788 |
0.7873 |
0.981 |
10 |
0.936 |
0.8799 |
0.9957 |
27 |
|
Fecundity |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
Survival |
2.9878 |
0.106 |
0.8346 |
0.1915 |
3.6384 |
3 |
0.3401 |
0.2051 |
0.5641 |
14 |
|
Development time |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
Nativefocal vs. exoticcompetitor |
|
QB |
P value |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Growth |
68.0697 |
0.002 |
0.6749 |
0.6217 |
0.7326 |
18 |
0.9677 |
0.93 |
1.0069 |
35 |
|
Fecundity |
3.6297 |
0.214 |
0.8401 |
0.3006 |
2.348 |
3 |
1.919 |
0.8595 |
4.2844 |
4 |
|
Survival |
0.1402 |
0.792 |
0.7549 |
0.5343 |
1.0667 |
5 |
0.714 |
0.6253 |
0.8152 |
24 |
|
Development time |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
Exoticfocal vs. nativecompetitor |
|
QB |
P value |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Growth |
1.4367 |
0.41 |
0.8702 |
0.794 |
0.9537 |
20 |
0.943 |
0.8331 |
1.0673 |
6 |
|
Fecundity |
1.0224 |
0.382 |
0.9629 |
0.6202 |
1.4947 |
6 |
0.7821 |
0.632 |
0.9678 |
15 |
|
Survival |
4.2684 |
0.106 |
0.6162 |
0.4515 |
0.841 |
10 |
0.8621 |
0.7271 |
1.022 |
29 |
|
Development time |
14.8769 |
0.036 |
0.8158 |
0.6563 |
1.0141 |
2 |
0.9967 |
0.9717 |
1.0223 |
13 |
Table B4. The effect of temporal separation on interspecific competition when control for native/exotic status of focal and competing insects. "." indicates there were not enough data to run analyses.
Nativefocal vs. nativecompetitor |
|
QB |
P value |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Growth |
10.6983 |
0.012 |
0.9229 |
0.8902 |
0.9568 |
51 |
0.9945 |
0.967 |
1.0228 |
87 |
|
Fecundity |
6.8365 |
0.071 |
0.444 |
0.3546 |
0.5559 |
11 |
0.6556 |
0.5148 |
0.835 |
10 |
|
Survival |
9.1942 |
0.055 |
0.801 |
0.7025 |
0.9134 |
21 |
1.0066 |
0.9267 |
1.0934 |
48 |
|
Development time |
4.4395 |
0.033 |
0.9293 |
0.9013 |
0.9582 |
21 |
0.9666 |
0.9444 |
0.9893 |
37 |
|
Exoticfocal vs. exoticcompetitor |
|
QB |
P value |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Growth |
0.5464 |
0.539 |
0.8895 |
0.8184 |
0.9667 |
16 |
0.9253 |
0.8577 |
0.9983 |
19 |
|
Fecundity |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
Survival |
2.9962 |
0.106 |
0.8264 |
0.1933 |
3.5332 |
3 |
0.3398 |
0.2053 |
0.5624 |
14 |
|
Development time |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
|
Nativefocal vs. exoticcompetitor |
|
QB |
P value |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Growth |
0.5282 |
0.732 |
0.8909 |
0.8468 |
0.9374 |
28 |
0.9134 |
0.8699 |
0.9592 |
24 |
|
Fecundity |
9.2802 |
0.044 |
2.0158 |
1.0976 |
3.7021 |
5 |
0.5755 |
0.1351 |
2.4507 |
2 |
|
Survival |
0.8657 |
0.493 |
0.7809 |
0.6186 |
0.986 |
9 |
0.6955 |
0.601 |
0.8048 |
20 |
|
Development time |
0.0009 |
0.987 |
1.0578 |
0.8064 |
1.3875 |
2 |
1.0599 |
1.0005 |
1.1229 |
15 |
|
Exoticfocal vs. nativecompetitor |
|
QB |
P value |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Effect size (RR) |
CI lower |
CI upper |
df |
Growth |
0.0404 |
0.893 |
0.9032 |
0.8333 |
0.9789 |
20 |
0.8889 |
0.7502 |
1.0532 |
6 |
|
Fecundity |
0.5194 |
0.54 |
0.783 |
0.6186 |
0.9911 |
14 |
0.8924 |
0.6343 |
1.2555 |
7 |
|
Survival |
2.642 |
0.221 |
0.6668 |
0.5522 |
0.8053 |
22 |
0.8469 |
0.6584 |
1.0894 |
12 |
|
Development time |
2.1756 |
0.407 |
0.936 |
0.8307 |
1.0547 |
3 |
0.9921 |
0.9661 |
1.0188 |
12 |