Table 1. Open in new tab Discriminant... | Oxford Academic

Table 1.

Open in new tab

Discriminant function analysis of the begging calls of cuckoo chicks reared by LBG and cuckoo chicks cross-fostered LFW, LBG chicks, and LFW chicks. Significant P-values are shown in bold

Nestling age	Significant variables	Wilk’s λ	Exact F	P-value
Day 3	Call duration Differences in frequency	< 0.0001	3.30	< 0.0001
Day 7	Call duration Maximum frequency Minimum frequency Peak frequency	< 0.0001	7.57	< 0.0001
Day 13	Call duration Maximum frequency Minimum frequency Differences in frequency	< 0.0001	12.53	< 0.0001

Nestling age	Significant variables	Wilk’s λ	Exact F	P-value
Day 3	Call duration Differences in frequency	< 0.0001	3.30	< 0.0001
Day 7	Call duration Maximum frequency Minimum frequency Peak frequency	< 0.0001	7.57	< 0.0001
Day 13	Call duration Maximum frequency Minimum frequency Differences in frequency	< 0.0001	12.53	< 0.0001

Table 1.

Open in new tab

Discriminant function analysis of the begging calls of cuckoo chicks reared by LBG and cuckoo chicks cross-fostered LFW, LBG chicks, and LFW chicks. Significant P-values are shown in bold

Nestling age	Significant variables	Wilk’s λ	Exact F	P-value
Day 3	Call duration Differences in frequency	< 0.0001	3.30	< 0.0001
Day 7	Call duration Maximum frequency Minimum frequency Peak frequency	< 0.0001	7.57	< 0.0001
Day 13	Call duration Maximum frequency Minimum frequency Differences in frequency	< 0.0001	12.53	< 0.0001

Nestling age	Significant variables	Wilk’s λ	Exact F	P-value
Day 3	Call duration Differences in frequency	< 0.0001	3.30	< 0.0001
Day 7	Call duration Maximum frequency Minimum frequency Peak frequency	< 0.0001	7.57	< 0.0001
Day 13	Call duration Maximum frequency Minimum frequency Differences in frequency	< 0.0001	12.53	< 0.0001