Table 2 Results from general linear models type III sums of squares analyses of turkey vulture responses to UAS approach.

From: Responses of turkey vultures to unmanned aircraft systems vary by platform

 

F

df

P

Focal vulture reaction time (n = 47)

UAS platform1

14.98

1, 36

 < 0.01

Approach

17.08

1, 36

 < 0.01

UAS platform * approach

6.55

1, 36

0.01

Square root gull group size

2.11

1, 36

0.15

Wind speed (m s−1)

1.44

1, 36

0.24

Square root UAS speed

0.05

1, 36

0.83

Ambient light (µmol m−2 s−1)

0.04

1, 36

0.84

Log10 vulture group size

0.00

1, 36

0.97

Square root focal vulture FID (n = 35)

UAS platform2

0.01

2, 28

0.99

Square root gull group size

3.77

1, 28

0.06

Log10 vulture group size

1.98

1, 28

0.17

Wind speed (m s−1)

1.37

1, 28

0.25

Ambient light (µmol m−2 s−1)

0.00

1, 28

1.00

Vulture remaining index (n = 100)

UAS platform2

4.69

2, 91

0.01

Approach

18.49

1, 91

 < 0.01

UAS platform * approach

1.10

2, 91

0.34

Square root gull group size

1.34

1, 91

0.25

Ambient light (µmol m−2 s−1)

0.76

1, 91

0.38

Wind speed (m s−1)

0.16

1, 91

0.69

Log10 latency to return (n = 31)

UAS platform2

0.03

2, 23

0.98

Square root UAS speed

5.07

1, 23

0.03

Log10 vulture group size

0.77

1, 23

0.39

Wind speed (m s−1)

0.72

1, 23

0.40

Square root gull group size

0.11

1, 23

0.75

Square root ambient light (µmol m−2 s−1)

0.00

1, 23

0.98

  1. For UAS platform, the categories were fixed-wing, multirotor, and ornithopter and approach included targeted or overhead. Trials were conducted at the Erie County Landfill, Ohio, between July and September 2019. Significant results are marked in bold.
  2. 1Multirotor and fixed-wing.
  3. 2Multirotor, fixed-wing and ornithopter.
Back to article page