Table 1 Results of model selection for factors influencing spatial variation of red fox detection rates in Maremma RP and Białowieża PF at different temporal scales (coarse: c. 1 month; fine: daily) estimated through generalized linear mixed models with negative binomial errors.

Study area	Response variable	Model	Variables	K	logLik	AICc	ΔAICc	Weight
Maremma RP	Red fox—coarse	Best	Wolf + distance human settlements	5	− 400.312	811.1	0.00	0.341
		Second	Wolf	4	− 401.401	811.1	0.01	0.340
		Third	Wolf + people + distance human settlement	6	− 400.033	812.8	1.65	0.150
		Fourth	Wolf + people	5	− 401.176	812.8	1.73	0.144
		Fifth	Wolf + habitat + distance human settlements	8	− 399.568	816.4	5.24	0.025
	Red fox—fine	Best	Wolf	6	− 2302.862	4617.8	0.00	0.493
		Second	Wolf + people	7	− 2302.743	4619.5	1.77	0.203
		Third	Wolf + distance human settlements	7	− 2302.781	4619.6	1.85	0.196
		Fourth	Wolf + people + distance human settlements	8	− 2302.664	4621.4	3.62	0.080
		Fifth	Wolf + habitat	9	− 2302.705	4623.5	5.72	0.028
Białowieża PF	Red fox—coarse	Best	Wolf + people + distance human settlements	6	− 830.976	1674.2	0.00	0.571
		Second	Wolf + people + habitat + distance human settlements	9	− 829.048	1676.7	2.47	0.166
		Third	People + distance human settlement	5	− 833.287	1676.8	2.54	0.160
		Fourth	Wolf + people	5	− 834.104	1678.4	4.17	0.070
		Fifth	Wolf + people + habitat	8	− 831.730	1679.9	5.71	0.033
	Red fox—fine	Best	Wolf + distance human settlements + people	8	− 4793.571	9603.2	0.00	0.384
		Second	Wolf + people	7	− 4794.736	9603.5	0.33	0.326
		Third	Wolf + distance human settlements	7	− 4795.418	9604.8	1.69	0.165
		Fourth	Wolf	6	− 4796.607	9605.2	2.07	0.101
		Fifth	Distance human settlements + people	7	− 4797.079	9608.2	5.01	0.024

The top-five models are shown, together with their number of parameters, AICc, ∆AICc and standardized weight. Selected models are shown in bold.

Search