27 research outputs found

    Multiple regression of the phytomass of the seven most common species against soil and light parameters across all plots.

    No full text
    <p>(a) Soil nitrogen, pH, soil microbial respiration, organic carbon and PAR. (b) The same variables as well as species richness and biomass per plot. β values are standardized coefficients. The absolute value of β coefficients are an index of the importance of that variable as long as it is significant. The r<sup>2</sup> values are coefficients of determination of all the variables. ΔAIC = change in AIC from multiple regression containing soil and light variables only. Note that there is an increase in the r<sup>2</sup> value in all cases in (b) relative to (a) for each species. ΔAIC < 2 in the cases of <i>E</i>. <i>curvula</i> and <i>E</i>. <i>plana</i> (Table 4b), which is conventionally viewed as an insufficient improvement over the models in Table 4a (Burnham & Anderson 2002). PAR = photosynthetically active radiation.</p

    There were significant correlations between phytomass of <i>Panicum maximum</i> per plot and ANPP, species richness and photosynthetically active radiation.

    No full text
    <p>a) There was a significant positive correlation (r = 0.87) between phytomass of <i>Panicum maximum</i> per plot and total biomass (ANPP) across all plots. b) There was a significant negative correlation (r = -0.38) between phytomass of <i>Panicum maximum</i> per plot and species richness. c) There was a significant negative correlation (r = -0.61) between phytomass of <i>Panicum maximum</i> per plot and photosynthetically active radiation (PAR), measured as % sunlight reaching just above the substrate.</p

    Relationship between volumetric soil water content (%) and soil depth (cm) in the two years of the experiment (September 2018 and August 2019) and mean soil moisture content at different depths over the experiment (two years).

    No full text
    Volumetric soil water content at different depths in 2018 (18-Sep) and 2019 (19-Aug) for (a) JUVI, (c) QUST, (e) BRIN, and (g) QUST+BRIN. Volumetric soil water content at different depths for the different measurement periods for (b) JUVI, (d) QUST, (f) BRIN, and (h) QUST+BRIN. In panels a, c, e, and g the circles and lines represent moisture content and LOESS regressions for 2018 (black) and 2019 (grey). In panels b, d, f, and h, the square symbols with dashed line represent water moisture data at 10 cm, the triangles and black line represent water moisture data at 20 cm, the circles and dotted line (..) represent water moisture content at 30 cm, and the and diamond long-dashed line (––) represent water moisture data at 40 cm. JUVI = J. virginiana only, QUST = J. virginiana growing with Q. stellata, BRIN = J. virginiana growing with B. inermis, and QUST+BRIN = J. virginiana growing with both Q. stellata and B. inermis.</p

    Midday water potential (MPa) at the end of the experiment for <i>J</i>. <i>virginiana</i> grown in four treatments.

    No full text
    There was a significant difference in water potential only between the QUST and BRIN treatments. Different letters represent significant differences (Scheffe´ post hoc test). JUVI = J. virginiana only, QUST = J. virginiana growing with Q. stellata, BRIN = J. virginiana growing with B. inermis, and QUST+BRIN = J. virginiana growing with both Q. stellata and B. inermis.</p
    corecore