Predicted and observed predator habitat use in 2009.

<p>A. The predicted density classes for each predator species using the full multiple-regression model based on transect data and B. the kernel densities for tagged individual predators at each sampled transect. C. The difference between the model category and the kernel category. Positive, cool colored values indicate that fewer predators used an area than predicted by the model while negative, warm colored values indicate the opposite. On each plot, the center of each transect that was visually surveyed for birds and mammals and thus was used to create the regression model is shown with a +. The center of each transect for which environmental and prey data were available but could not be used to create the regression model is shown by o. Map surfaces were generated using minimum curvature interpolation that did not allow values plotted at sampled points to differ from their actual values.</p

The distribution of juvenile walleye pollock in 2009 based on three different metrics.

<p>A. biomass density, the most commonly used measure, B. the mean volumetric density of pollock within aggregations, a measure of local density within a patch, and C. the maximum volumetric density of pollock per sampling transect. Map surfaces were generated using minimum curvature interpolations (N = 165).</p

Summary of best subsets multiple regression models for densities each of three focal predators visually surveyed in the Southeastern Bering Sea in 2008 and 2009.

<p>Explanatory variables are listed in descending order of importance for each species’ model. The slope of the relationship for each explanatory variable is shown along with its regression coefficient. The R² for each model adjusted for the number of variables in the model is also shown.</p

Predicted and observed predator densities.

<p>The observed density of each predator versus the density predicted by the full multiple regression model for each species.</p