Skip to main content

Table 3 Relative importance (%) of micro-habitat variables in the four models (two per season) predicting overall bank vole presence and infected (Inf.) bank vole presence in 58 1-ha plots between fall 2003 and 2013

From: Spatial prediction and validation of zoonotic hazard through micro-habitat properties: where does Puumala hantavirus hole – up?

 

Relative importance (%)

Spring

Fall

Habitat variable

Bank vole presence

Inf. bank vole presence

Bank vole presence

Inf. bank vole presence

Bilberry

7.4

4.0

7.6

3.6

Shrubs

4.0

5.8

4.7

-

Cobbles

-

-

-

3.0

CWD

6.8

4.3

-

-

FWD

3.2

-

-

5.1

Large holes

6.8

10.3

11.4

12.1

Lichens

-

-

2.6

-

Lingonberry

8.1

4.8

-

-

Pine

-

-

4.2

-

Spruce

4.1

3.9

-

3.7

Stoneholes

-

-

4.9

-

Tree layer 1

-

-

2.7

3.5

Tree layer 2

4.6

4.4

-

-

Uveg

-

-

3.2

4.2

  1. The three variables with highest relative importance (%) in each model are given in bold