Fig 1.
Relationship between mean NDVI in spring-summer and FN content during the rut, from model 1.
Line represents model prediction when all other variables are set to their mean values. Points are raw observed data. Shaded areas denote 95% confidence intervals.
Table 1.
Results of model 1 for the response variable FN content and the covariates NDVI in spring-summer, population density and calves/hind ratio.
Fig 2.
Effect of the interaction between the spring-summer NDVI and the NDVI of the previous-year spring-summer on the rut peak date, from model 2.
Figure shows predicted relationships between previous-year NDVI and the rut peak date for different values of spring-summer NDVI in the current year.
Table 2.
Results of model 2 for the response variable rut peak date and the covariates NDVI in spring-summer just before the rut and NDVI in spring-summer of the precedent year (t-1).
Fig 3.
Model predictions for the effect of spring-summer NDVI (a), FN content (b) and rut peak date (c), on the percentage of calves per hind in the following year. Lines represent predictions from equations of models of Table 3, when the rest of variables were set at their mean values. Points are raw observed data.
Table 3.
Models for the response variable calves/hind ratio and the fixed factors calves/hind ratio in the previous year, population density and spring-summer NDVI (3.a), FN content (3.b) or rut peak date in julian days (3.c).
Observation point was added as random factor only in model b (variance = 0. 031, SD = 0.177) because of the absent of variance in the other models.