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. grandisS. 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.