Answers for Question #2: > (pipo.cl<-confint(mod.type)[1,])    2.5 %   97.5 % 1575.564 1864.473 > (abla.cl<-confint(mod.type)[1,])    2.5 %   97.5 % 1261.429 1474.411 > (jusc.cl<-confint(mod.type)[1,])    2.5 %   97.5 % 1261.429 1474.411 > (pied.cl<-confint(mod.type)[1,])    2.5 %   97.5 % 1261.429 1474.411 > (cegi.cl<-confint(mod.type)[1,])    2.5 %   97.5 % 1261.429 1474.411 The 95% confidence intervals for the mean elevation of the 5 tree species are as follows: For pipo.cl: [1575.564, 1864.473] For abla.cl: [1261.429, 1474.411] For jusc.cl: [1261.429, 1474.411] For pied.cl: [1261.429, 1474.411] For cegi.cl: [1261.429, 1474.411] The data for this analysis was created by randomly selecting points (n=100 for most species) using GIS maps of the distribution of the species. These were then intersected with digital elevation models and the mean annual temperature (Bio_1) layer from WorldClim (http://www.worldclim.org/). We are looking at five species: PIPO (Ponderosa pine, Pinus ponderosa), ABLA (Subalpine fir, Abies lasiocarpa), JUSC (Rocky Mountain juniper, Juniperus scopulorum), PIED (Piñon pine, Pinus edulis), and CAGI (Saguaro, Carnegiea gigantea). Based on your answers in #2, which species differ from subalpine fir in mean elevation? From piñon?