Historical Past Most Typically Associated With UNC2881

I used a locally weighted polynomial regression running line smoother (Hastie and Tibshirani 1990) determined with the lowess function in the stats package in R (http://www.R-project.org/) for descriptive purposes. Together, the sensitivity and the slope of the regression are used to conduct a regression-design LTRE, which decomposes the effect of density (x) on �� (d��/dx) into contributions from each matrix element: In addition to looking at the contributions of individual matrix elements, I also assessed how several lower-level vital rates contributed to density effects on �� (d��/dx). This included survival of each stage class, sexual reproduction of flowering first-year and flowering adult stage classes, and asexual reproduction from adult stage classes. Results ANCOVA: vital-rate response to density and fire Population diglyceride growth rate had different relationships with density in the non-fire and fire years (Fig. ?(Fig.2);2); however, the interactive AZD0530 cell line effect was not significant, likely due to non-linear relationships between density and ��. In the non-fire year, �� had a positive, linear relationship with density (mean low density �� = 0.53, mean medium density �� = 0.65, mean high density �� = 0.79; y = 0.002x + 0.38; R2 = 0.57, P = 0.02). In the fire year, the relationship was curvilinear (y = 0.34x2 + 0.55x + 0.87; R2 = 0.901, P = 0.008), where �� was highest at the most extreme density values (196 density �� = 1.14, 206 density �� = 1.29; Fig. ?Fig.2B).2B). The values of �� were higher in the fire year (mean non-fire year �� = 0.66, mean fire year �� = 0.87; F1,14 = 6.43, P = 0.02). Density also contributed to differences in �� (mean low density �� = 0.70, mean high density �� = 0.95; F1,14 = 6.67, P = 0.02). Figure 2. Population growth rate (��) as a function of density in (A) non-fire and (B) fire years. Dotted lines indicate upper and lower 95 % confidence intervals. Vital rates had dissimilar relationships with density in both the non-fire and fire years. Fecundity was highest at intermediate density in the non-fire year (Table ?(Table1).1). Fecundities of plants that withstood the burning had GDC-0941 in vivo a positive relationship with density in the fire year and were, in general, lower in the fire than in the non-fire year (fire �� density effect F1,14 = 6.3, P = 0.02). In the non-fire year, flowering first-year survival and flowering adult survival were positively related to density and were higher, on average, than those in the fire year. Neither first-year survival nor flowering adult survival appeared to be related to density in the fire year (fire �� density effect F1,14 = 4.46, P = 0.05 and F1,14 = 76.90, P