The risk of contact between visitors and Borrelia burgdorferi-infected ticks is associated with fine-scale landscape features in a southeastern Canadian nature park

Table 2 Parameter estimates for the best spatial trend surface models of population exposure (model 1), tick hazard (model 2) and risk (model 3) indices, in 2017 and 2018. The risk index represents the probability of human-ticks contact in the population visiting the park

Parameters	β	SE	Edf	P
Parameters	Model 1: Population exposure (density) ^a
(Intercept)	9.01	0.16		< 0.001
Elevation	-0.35	0.15		0.03
Forest proportion (100 m radius)	0.28	0.05		< 0.001
Nearest park entrance
2 vs 1	-0.36	0.14		0.01
3 and 4 vs 1	-0.17	0.27		0.53
5 vs 1	-0.09	0.31		0.77
6 and 7 vs 1	-0.92	0.57		0.10
8 and 9 vs 1	-0.32	0.34		0.35
Nearest refuge
2 vs 1	-0.02	0.11		0.88
3 vs 1	0.11	0.15		0.50
4 vs 1	0.80	0.26		0.002
Nearest viewpoint
2 vs 1	-1.09	0.34		0.002
3 vs 1	-0.46	0.25		0.071
4 vs 1	-0.04	0.10		0.679
5 vs 1	-0.10	0.20		0.612
Year
2018 vs 2017	0.43	0.03		< 0.001
Smoothed coordinates of trail segment centroids			27.2	< 0.001
	Model 2: Tick hazard (DIN) ^b
(Intercept)	4.06	0.01		< 0.001
Forest proportion (200 m radius)	0.04	0.02		0.026
Year
2018 vs 2017	-1.99	0.02		< 0.001
Smoothed coordinates of trail segment centroids			21.42	< 0.001
	*Model 3: Risk (hazardexposure)** ^a
(Intercept)	8.24	0.10		< 0.001
Forest proportion (100 m radius)	0.24	0.05		< 0.001
Nearest refuge
2 vs 1	0.01	0.12		0.95
3 vs 1	0.04	0.16		0.80
4 vs 1	0.84	0.27		0.002
Nearest viewpoint
2 vs 1	-0.76	0.34		0.03
3 vs 1	-0.53	0.29		0.07
4 vs 1	-0.01	0.11		0.90
5 vs 1	-0.28	0.20		0.17
Year
2018 vs 2017	-1.56	0.03		< 0.001
Smoothed coordinates of trail segment centroids			27.61	< 0.001

ISSN: 1471-2458