Modeling regional occupancy of fishes using acoustic telemetry: a model comparison framework applied to lake trout

Table 5 Estimated lake trout occupancy for seven regions of Lake Champlain separated by tagging location (North and South) and calculated using least-cost interpolated positions (Int)

Region	Int North	Int South	North CI	South CI
Missisquoi Bay	0.0 ± 0.0	0.0 ± 0.0	NA	NA
Northeast Arm	3.4 ± 18.0	2.7 ± 16.3	3.2, 3.6^b	2.5, 3.0^b
Malletts Bay	3.5 ± 18.2	4.6 ± 20.9	3.3, 3.7^b	4.3, 4.9^c
Main Lake North	38.8 ± 48.4	13.1 ± 33.4	38.2, 39.3^e	12.7, 13.6^d
Main Lake Central	29.0 ± 45.1	34.3 ± 47.0	28.5, 29.5^d	33.6, 34.8^e
Main Lake South	25.3 ± 43.3	45.2 ± 49.5	24.8, 25.8^c	44.5, 45.8^f
South Lake	0.0 ± 0.8	0.0 ± 0.0	0.0, 0.0^a	0.0, 0.0^a

The 95% confidence intervals (CI) from predicted values based on parameter estimates are also included for each group. All regional occupancy estimates are represented as a percentage of total occupancy with Int estimates presented as average values with one standard deviation. Significant differences in lake trout distributions, represented by non-overlapping CIs, among regions by tagging location (differing letters within columns) and between tagging locations for each region (bold font across columns) are included

ISSN: 2050-3385