Table 1 Statistical results of kelp responses.

From: Run-off impacts on Arctic kelp holobionts have strong implications on ecosystem functioning and bioeconomy

Parameter

Fixed effect

numDF

denDF

F value

P value

Biogenic elemental mass fraction

Aluminium (Al)

Area

2

68

23.1

< 0.001

Station

8

61

10.6

< 0.001

Iron (Fe)

Area

2

66

30.7

< 0.001

Station

8

61

9.1

< 0.001

Manganese (Mn)

Area

2

67

20.6

< 0.001

Station

8

61

20.7

< 0.001

Copper (Cu)

Area

2

69

13.2

< 0.001

Station

8

63

5.8

< 0.001

Cobalt (Co)

Area

2

68

1.2

0.3

Station

8

60

5.3

< 0.001

Cadmium (Cd)

Area

2

69

5.6

0.006

Station

8

63

2.9

0.007

Lead (Pb)

Area

2

68

16.1

< 0.001

Station

8

62

8.2

< 0.001

Mercury (Hg)

Area

2

68

53.1

< 0.001

Station

8

61

28.8

< 0.001

Biochemistry

Chlorophyll a

Area

2

69

6.5

0.002

Station

8

62

3.1

0.006

De-epoxidation state of xanthophyll cycle pigments (DPS)

Area

2

68

14.5

< 0.001

Station

8

63

5.1

< 0.001

Antioxidant activity

Area

2

69

8.5

< 0.001

Station

8

63

3.8

0.001

Biodiversity indices

Shannon entropy

Area

2

64

7.0

0.002

Station

8

57

5.4

< 0.001

Pielou evenness

Area

2

63

15.5

< 0.001

Station

8

57

6.2

< 0.001

Relative abundance of microbial taxa

Bacteroidetes

Area

2

64

9.4

< 0.001

Station

5

58

5.77

0.001

Proteobacteria

Area

2

64

4.4

0.02

Station

8

55

9.5

< 0.001

Alphaproteobacteria

Area

2

64

0.07

0.93

Station

8

56

4.82

< 0.001

Gammaproteobacteria

Area

2

64

4.55

0.01

Station

8

58

5.05

< 0.001

Flavobacteria

Area

2

64

12.2

< 0.001

Station

8

58

6.8

< 0.001

Tiotrichales

Area

2

62

18.2

< 0.001

Station

8

56

4.42

< 0.001

Pirellulales

Area

2

61

17.3

< 0.001

Station

8

55

5.74

< 0.001

Planctomycetes

Area

2

61

17.3

< 0.001

Station

8

55

5.74

< 0.001

Saprospirales

Area

2

64

3.7

0.03

Station

8

56

3.3

0.003

Rhodobacterales

Area

2

64

0.07

0.93

Station

8

56

4.8

< 0.001

  1. Results of analysis of variance (ANOVA). As the data met all requirements (normality, homoscedasticity), a linear model was fit on each response parameter. Sampling area and station (Fig. 1a) were modelled as single fixed effect to analyse spatial differences of kelp responses. Analysis of variance was tested on the model using the “anova” function (type I sums of squares). Significant results are marked in bold. Note: tested values are the means of replicates (Area: N = 3; Station: N = 6–9) numDF: numerator degrees of freedom. denDF: denominator degrees of freedom.
Back to article page