Location of capture sufficiently characterises lifetime growth trajectories in a highly mobile fish

Table 2 Comparison of models including environmental conditions from the three different spatial scales

Environmental predictors	df	AICc	ΔAICc within spatial scale	ΔAICc across spatial scale	Cross-validated R²
Basin-scale models
Life stage × (SOI + Temp anomaly)	16	− 670.70	0.00	419.75	0.78
Life stage × Temp anomaly	13	− 666.46	4.24		0.79
Life stage × SOI	13	− 646.48	24.22		0.79
Null model	8	− 615.76	54.94		0.77
Reach-scale models (movement exclusive)
Life stage × (Spring discharge + Summer discharge + Antecedent discharge + Spring discharge variability + Summer discharge variability + Spring temperature)	29	− 1090.45	0.00	0.00	0.81
Life stage × (Spring discharge + Summer discharge + Antecedent discharge + Spring discharge variability + Spring temperature)	26	− 1090.37	0.08		0.81
Life stage × (Spring discharge + Summer discharge + Antecedent discharge + Spring temperature)	23	− 1090.16	0.30		0.81
Reach-scale models (movement inclusive)
Life stage × (Spring discharge + Summer discharge + Antecedent discharge + Spring temperature)	24	− 1053.42	0.00	37.03	0.81
Life stage × (Spring discharge + Summer discharge + Antecedent discharge + Summer discharge variability + Spring temperature)	27	− 1052.01	1.40		0.80
Life stage × (Spring discharge + Summer discharge + Antecedent discharge + Summer temperature + Spring temperature)	27	− 1049.91	3.51		0.80

The left column describes the environmental conditions in all basin-scale models, and the five best movement exclusive and movement inclusive location models. The three right columns are the degrees of freedom in the model (df), the AICc value, ΔAICc value, and marginal R² values based on tenfold cross validation. The top ranked model from each model comparison is shown in bold

ISSN: 2051-3933