Tab. 3 in Is coexistence between non-native and native Erythrinidae species mediated by niche differentiation or environmental filtering? A case study in the upper Paraná River floodplain

Tab. 3. Co-occurrence in terms of number and proportion (in parentheses) of each pair of Erythrinidae species in the upper Paraná River floodplain. Valid comparisons can be made only between the rows of a single column. SpeciesH. unitaeniatusH. mbiguaHoplias sp. BHoplias cf. malabaricusFloodplainH. unitaeniatus63 (100%)41 (15%)47 (23%)38 (29%)H. mbigua41 (65%)271 (100%)173 (84%)114 (88%)Hoplias sp. B47 (75%)173 (64%)206 (100%)105 (81%)Hoplias cf. malabaricus38 (60%)114 (42%)105 (51%)129 (100%)Baía systemH. unitaeniatus33 (100%)23 (21%)28 (28%)19 (30%)H. mbigua23 (70%)109 (100%)91 (90%)60 (94%)Hoplias sp. B28 (85%)91 (83%)101 (100%)57 (89%)Hoplias cf. malabaricus19 (58%)60 (55%)57 (56%)64 (100%)Ivinhema systemH. unitaeniatus23 (100%)12 (15%)14 (21%)14 (32%)H. mbigua12 (52%)80 (100%)50 (74%)34 (77%)Hoplias sp. B14 (61%)50 (63%)68 (100%)37 (84%)Hoplias cf. malabaricus14 (61%)34 (43%)37 (54%)44 (100%)Paraná systemH. unitaeniatus7 (100%)6 (7%)5 (14%)5 (24%)H. mbigua6 (86%)82 (100%)32 (86%)20 (95%)Hoplias sp. B5 (71%)32 (39%)37 (100%)11 (52%)Hoplias cf. malabaricus5 (71%)20 (24%)11 (30%)21 (100%)