Figure legends
Fig. 1: Total biomasses (a) and root: shoot ratio (b) ofStipa grandis and S. krylovii under different conditions.
Non-significant difference is shown by the same English letter.
Fig. 2: Results of analysis of variance on competitive
intensity on S. grandis and S. krylovii both under the
high and low nutrition treatments in each plantation condition. (a) in
mixture with L. chinensis , (b) in mixture with A.
cristatum and (c) in S. grandis – S. krylovii mixture
system. Non-significant difference among the average values of the
competition intensity in the same box is indicated by the same English
letter.
Fig. 3: The importance of
competition (NImpA ) on S. grandis andS. krylovii under different conditions. Significant differences
with 0 are indicated by asterisks (**P <0.01;
***P<0.001) and non-significant differences are indicated by
‘ns’. The significantly negative NImpA under the
high nutrition treatment than that under the low nutrition treatment is
shown by ↓.
Fig. 4: Effects of target
species and plantation condition on the nutrition-addition effect.
Significant differences between the average value of S. grandisand S. krylovii are indicated by asterisks
(**P <0.01; ***P <0.001).
Non-significant differences among plantation conditions for the same
target species are indicated by the same English letters. All average
values are significantly higher than zero except the one with ‘ns’.
Fig. 1: Total biomasses (a) and root: shoot ratio (b) ofStipa grandis and S. krylovii under different conditions.
Non-significant difference is shown by the same English letter.