Table 2. Comparison of the competitor total fresh weight for each central plant and competitor composition.
Central plant | Competitor categories | Mean total competitor fresh weight | Standard error of total competitor fresh weight. | Tukey HSD test. |
HealthyF 4,17.02 = 38.349P<0.001 | 4 TuMV | 7.73 | 1.03 | A |
4 TEV | 14.40 | 1.49 | A | |
2 TuMV +2 healthy | 22.46 | 2.70 | B | |
2 TEV +2 healthy | 21.72 | 1.71 | B | |
4 healthy | 32.22 | 3.31 | C | |
TEV infectedF 4,19.35 = 22.787P<0.001 | 4 TuMV | 6.80 | 0.97 | A |
2 TEV +2 TuMV | 10.50 | 0.88 | A | |
4 TEV | 13.02 | 1.62 | A | |
2 healthy +2 TEV | 24.85 | 4.93 | B | |
4 healthy | 31.28 | 2.23 | B | |
TuMV infectedF 4,20 = 51.240P<0.001 | 4 TuMV | 8.03 | 1.30 | A |
2 TEV +2 TuMV | 10.18 | 0.51 | A, B | |
4 TEV | 14.36 | 0.94 | B | |
2 healthy +2 TuMV | 20.81 | 1.87 | C | |
4 healthy | 33.80 | 3.17 | D |
The sum of competitor fresh weight is used as a proxy for the intensity of competition. Below each central plant is indicated the F and the P value corresponding to the effect of the factor “competitor composition” on the variable “total fresh weight of competitors”. The competitor categories are ordered for each central plant following the predicted increasing competition intensity. In the last column, categories not connected by the same letter (within each central plant category) are significantly different from each other in terms of total fresh weight of competitors.