Supplemental online file
Supplemental Figure 1. Observed DNA CV for each location (raw data without corrections).
1
Supplemental Figure 2. DNA CV: Estimated correction parameters and standard deviations (σ)
from the model. Parameters for which an estimate is different from zero have a significant effect
on DNA CV value. The dot represents the median DNA CV, the heavy line represents the 80%
credible interval and the thin line represents the 95% credible interval.
2
Supplemental Figure 3. EROD scores: Estimated correction parameters and standard deviations
(σ) from the model. Parameters for which an estimate is different from zero have a significant
effect on EROD activity value. The dot represents the median coefficient of variation of EROD
value, the heavy line represents the 80% credible interval and the thin line represents the 95%
credible interval.
3
Supplemental Figure 4. Oxidative stress: Estimated correction parameters and standard
deviations (σ) from the model. Parameters for which an estimate is different from zero have a
significant effect on oxidative stress value. The dot represents the median coefficient of variation
of each oxidative stress value, the heavy line represents the 80% credible interval and the thin
line represents the 95% credible interval. All subfigures were arbitrarily scaled to allow
comparisons across different measures of oxidative stress. Values and units are listed in
Supplemental Table 6.
4
Supplemental Table 1: Estimated DNA CV parameters for study locations. This table includes
the number of individuals per location as well as a description of the posterior distribution
including the median as well as the upper and lower 80% and 95% credible intervals.
Groups
Green Mountain
Root River
Shellhorn
Lawrence Lake
Island W2
Schnick's Bay
Pig's Eye
Pool 2
a
N
Estimate
L95%
L80%
U80%
U95%
33
15
15
18
15
15
32
16
2.41
2.46
2.50
2.53
2.61
2.64
2.69
2.84
2.30
2.31
2.36
2.39
2.46
2.49
2.56
2.70
2.34
2.49
2.52
2.36
2.41
2.44
2.51
2.54
2.61
2.75
2.55
2.60
2.61
2.70
2.73
2.77
2.94
2.60
2.65
2.66
2.76
2.78
2.81
2.98
Aa
AB
AB
AB
AB
ABC
BC
C
Location medians with the same letter are not significantly different from each other (Cumming
and French 2005)."
5
Supplemental Table 2: Estimated correction parameters and standard deviations. The parameter’s
posterior distribution including the median as well as the upper and lower 80% and 95% credible
intervals. The top of the table (above the dashed line) contains the individual level parameters;
the bottom of the table contains the location level parameters.
Parameter
CV Duplicate
Batch
Year (2011)
Nestling
Order slope
Estimate
0.21
-0.08
0.12
0.20
-0.01
-0.04
-0.01
L95%
0.20
-0.11
0.08
0.17
-0.11
-0.12
-0.01
L80%
0.20
-0.10
0.09
0.18
-0.08
-0.09
-0.01
U80%
0.22
-0.06
0.16
0.23
0.06
0.01
0.00
U95%
0.22
-0.05
0.18
0.24
0.10
0.04
0.00
6
Supplemental Table 3: Estimated EROD activity (pmol product/min/mg protein) for study
locations. This table includes the number of individuals per location as well as a description of
the posterior distribution including the median as well as the upper and lower 80% and 95%
credible intervals.
Location
Green Mountain
Pool 2
Root River
Island Pool 8
Lawrence Lake
Shellhorn
Schnick’s Bay
Pig's Eye
a
N
20
10
10
8
10
10
8
20
Estimate
25.50
27.50
29.40
31.85
34.74
38.53
44.24
71.16
L95
14.41
14.87
14.86
17.38
21.78
25.47
29.24
60.15
U95
36.51
40.35
43.96
45.86
47.84
51.82
59.39
82.01
L80
18.39
19.07
19.94
22.51
26.13
30.09
34.53
63.86
U80
32.53
35.90
38.62
41.17
43.26
47.18
53.66
78.13
Aa
A
A
A
A
A
AB
B
Medians not sharing the same letter are significantly different based on 95% credible intervals
(Cumming and Finch 2005).
7
Supplemental Table 4: Estimated correction parameters (EROD activity) and standard
deviations. The parameter’s posterior distribution including the median as well as the upper and
lower 80% and 95% credible intervals.
Parameter Estimate
2011
38.35
sigma
21.05
L95
24.81
18.28
U95
51.64
24.67
L80
29.67
19.16
U80
46.86
23.25
8
Supplemental Table 5: Estimated oxidative stress parameters for study locations. This table
includes the number of individuals per location as well as a description of the posterior
distribution including the median as well as the upper and lower 80% and 95% credible intervals.
9
Response
Location
Green Mountain
Island W2
Lawrence Lake
Pig's Eye
GSSG/GSH
Pool 2
Root River
Schnick's Bay
Shellhorn
Green Mountain
Island W2
Lawrence Lake
Pig's Eye
GSSG
(µmol/g) Pool 2
Root River
Schnick's Bay
Shellhorn
Green Mountain
Island W2
Lawrence Lake
Pig's Eye
rGSH
(µmol/g) Pool 2
Root River
Schnick's Bay
Shellhorn
Green Mountain
Island W2
Lawrence Lake
Pig's Eye
PBSH
(µmol/g) Pool 2
Root River
Schnick's Bay
Shellhorn
Green Mountain
Island W2
Lawrence Lake
TBARS
Pig's Eye
(nmol/mg
Pool 2
Protein)
Root River
Schnick's Bay
Shellhorn
Green Mountain
Island W2
Lawrence Lake
Pig's Eye
TSH
(µmol/g) Pool 2
Root River
Schnick's Bay
Shellhorn
N
Estimate
L95
U95
L80
U80
20
8
10
20
10
10
8
10
20
8
10
20
10
10
8
10
20
8
10
20
10
10
8
10
20
8
10
20
10
10
8
10
20
8
10
20
10
10
8
10
20
8
10
20
10
10
8
10
0.74
1.28
0.61
0.75
0.60
0.60
0.87
0.75
2.68
3.08
3.18
2.52
2.43
2.65
3.30
2.99
5.04
4.78
6.07
4.40
4.67
5.33
5.35
6.25
17.73
14.93
15.26
11.18
13.41
9.09
14.99
16.34
0.77
0.60
0.84
1.13
0.79
0.84
0.54
0.85
22.79
19.76
21.30
15.66
18.02
14.49
20.50
22.57
0.42
0.85
0.24
0.43
0.22
0.15
0.43
0.39
2.32
2.61
2.76
2.17
2.02
2.17
2.82
2.58
3.70
3.09
4.53
3.11
3.14
3.72
3.74
4.77
12.83
8.97
10.06
6.36
7.70
2.79
8.37
10.93
0.55
0.30
0.58
0.90
0.53
0.55
0.22
0.59
17.12
12.46
14.72
10.03
11.47
7.39
12.79
16.13
1.07
1.70
0.99
1.07
0.98
1.00
1.31
1.14
3.03
3.51
3.61
2.87
2.86
3.13
3.78
3.41
6.32
6.44
7.62
5.67
6.15
6.91
7.01
7.71
22.40
20.88
20.85
15.93
19.15
15.28
21.43
21.87
1.01
0.91
1.10
1.36
1.05
1.15
0.84
1.12
28.20
27.20
27.82
21.11
24.18
21.61
27.92
29.08
0.54
1.00
0.37
0.55
0.35
0.32
0.58
0.51
2.45
2.77
2.91
2.29
2.16
2.34
2.99
2.72
4.24
3.66
5.08
3.57
3.71
4.28
4.28
5.29
14.67
11.13
11.76
8.06
9.71
4.94
11.03
12.83
0.63
0.40
0.67
0.98
0.62
0.66
0.33
0.69
19.20
14.98
17.00
11.82
13.94
9.67
15.50
18.38
0.95
1.56
0.86
0.95
0.85
0.86
1.15
1.00
2.91
3.37
3.47
2.75
2.72
2.95
3.60
3.26
5.90
5.88
7.09
5.22
5.63
6.39
6.44
7.21
20.85
18.82
18.84
14.40
17.11
13.04
19.14
20.04
0.92
0.80
1.02
1.28
0.97
1.04
0.74
1.03
26.40
24.57
25.55
19.07
22.01
19.20
25.18
26.72
10
Supplemental Table 6: Estimated correction parameters (oxidative stress) and standard
deviations. The parameter’s posterior distribution including the median as well as the upper and
lower 80% and 95% credible intervals.
Response Parameter Estimate
GSSG/GSH
GSSG
rGSH
PBSH
TBARS
TSH
L95
U95
L80
U80
2011
-0.22
-0.55
0.13
-0.44
0
sigma
0.61
0.53
0.71
0.55
0.67
2011
1.17
0.81
1.56
0.93
1.42
sigma
0.68
0.59
0.79
0.61
0.75
2011
3.24
1.9
4.62
2.35
4.12
sigma
2.41
2.1
2.81
2.19
2.67
2011
18.58
13.59
23.41
15.32
21.8
sigma
8.94
7.77
10.46
8.14
9.87
2011
0.33
0.1
0.57
0.18
0.49
sigma
0.43
0.37
0.5
0.39
0.47
2011
21.76
15.97
27.42
18.04
25.6
sigma
10.42
9.04
12.18
9.47
11.5
11
Supplemental Table 7: Pearson correlation coefficient matrix among eight biomarkers (n=84).
P value / (R)
GSSG
GSS.GSSG 0.09
(0.19)
GSSG
PBSH
rGSH
TBARS
TSH
EROD
PBSH
rGSH
TBARS TSH
EROD
DNA CV
0.0496
<0.001
0.96
0.003
0.83
0.96
(-0.21)
(-0.69)
(0.01)
(-0.33)
(-0.02)
(0.01)
<.0001
0.003
0.36
<0.001
0.02
0.17
(0.39)
(0.32)
(0.10)
(0.40)
(0.25)
(-0.15)
<0.001
0.20
<0.001
0.06
0.23
(0.61)
(0.14)
(0.99)
(0.20)
(-0.13)
0.92
<0.001
0.14
0.55
(-0.01)
(0.73)
(0.16)
(-0.07)
0.28
0.01
0.29
(0.12)
(0.27)
(-0.12)
0.06
0.25
(0.21)
(-0.13)
0.38
(0.10)
12
Supplemental Table 8: Loadings for first two axes from Redundancy Analysis (RDA).The axis is
a linear combination of the value for each parameter. For example, Axis 1 would be 0.49 * the
CV score for a site + -0.937 * the EROD value for a site + -0.743* the TBARS value for a site +
-0.535* the TSH value for a site + -0.463 * the tGSH value for a site + -0.412 * the rGSH value.
Biological
parameters
DNA CV
EROD
TBARS
TSH
tGSH
rGSH
Axis 1
Axis 2
0.49
-0.937
-0.743
-0.535
-0.463
-0.412
-1.032
-0.735
-0.166
0.184
0.229
0.246
13