Table 3 Dice indices for species dyads and results of randomisation tests (10⁷ steps; described in the “Methods” section) testing the strengths of dyadic associations observed in the five networks.

Network	Pair of species		Dice’s index	p-values, if preferences for habitat types are
Network	Pair of species		Dice’s index	Not considered	Considered
Inside lion home range	Zebra	Wildebeest	0.28	< 0.001	0.001
	Thomson’s gazelle	Grant’s gazelle	0.34	< 0.001	0.001
	Thomson’s gazelle	Giraffe	0.22	0.008	0.030
	Giraffe	Eland	0.13	0.016	0.035
	Wildebeest	Thomson’s gazelle	0.24	0.003	0.079
	Wildebeest	Grant’s gazelle	0.17	0.046	0.351
	Impala	Eland	0.11	0.029	0.080
Outside lion home range	Zebra	Wildebeest	0.26	< 0.001	< 0.001
	Zebra	Eland	0.07	0.005	0.003
	Impala	Waterbuck	0.10	0.004	< 0.001
	Thomson’s gazelle	Grant’s gazelle	0.40	< 0.001	< 0.001
	Impala	Lesser kudu	0.07	0.007	0.104
Small NDVI	Zebra	Wildebeest	0.33	< 0.001	< 0.001
	Zebra	Eland	0.10	0.028	0.011
	Thomson’s gazelle	Grant’s gazelle	0.29	< 0.001	< 0.001
Medium NDVI	Zebra	Wildebeest	0.14	0.001	< 0.001
	Zebra	Waterbuck	0.05	0.015	0.003
	Thomson’s gazelle	Grant’s gazelle	0.65	< 0.001	< 0.001
Large NDVI	Zebra	Wildebeest	0.31	< 0.001	< 0.001
	Impala	Eland	0.11	0.009	0.019
	Thomson’s gazelle	Grant’s gazelle	0.32	< 0.001	0.003
	Thomson’s gazelle	Giraffe	0.21	0.009	0.045
	Wildebeest	Thomson’s gazelle	0.20	0.006	0.079
	Wildebeest	Grant’s gazelle	0.18	0.024	0.385
	Wildebeest	Giraffe	0.19	0.013	0.074

In some cases, the significance of the association strength can be explained by preferences for the same habitat types (lines highlighted in italics). For each scenario, all dyadic associations between the ten most frequently encountered species (giraffe, eland, zebra, wildebeest, waterbuck, lesser kudu, Grant’s gazelle, impala, Thomson’s gazelle, Kirk’s dik–dik) were tested. Only dyads with significant values are shown.

Quick links

Search