Differences in body condition and macroparasite burden between cluster 2 and non-cluster animals captured at the same time.

<p>A. Cluster 2 animals (dark bar) had significantly better body condition (BW<i>^resid</i>) than non-cluster animals, adjusting for size and stage. B. Cluster 2 animals (dark bar) had greater grouped macroparasite burdens (PC1<i>^P</i>) than non-cluster animals, adjusting for size and stage. PC1<i>^P</i> represents first principal component scores from a principal components analysis of common macroparasite species at Cotgrave Forest. This principal component accounted for 23% of total variation and showed high loadings of the same sign for most species. It was thus taken to represent the major pattern of positive covariation within the assemblage. Variable coefficients on PC1<i>^P</i> were: <i>Skrjabinotaenia lobata</i> 0.25, <i>Brachylaemus recurvum</i> 0.28, <i>Calodium hepaticum</i> 0.24, <i>Syphacia nigeriana</i> 0.52, <i>Heligmosomoides polygyrus</i> 0.50, <i>Ixodes ricinus</i> −0.040, laelapid mites 0.102, <i>Polyplax serrata</i> 0.52. There were individually significant associations with cluster 2 membership, in the same direction as PC1<i>^P</i>, for <i>P. serrata</i> and <i>S. lobata</i>, adjusting for host size and stage.