Table 2.

Estimates of mating system parameters for weed beet progenies from four weed populations sampled within sugar beet fields

Population	A	B	C	D
N	20	20	20	75
n	480	480	480	1800
Ft − 1	0.068 (0.003)	–0.041 (0.011)	0.036 (0.006)	0.042 (0.001)
Ft	0.150 (0.006)	0.095 (0.003)	0.076 (0.003)	0.097 (0.004)
δ	0.503 (0.035)	0.581 (0.024)	0.562 (0.030)	0.031 (0.061)
tm	0.560 (0.011)	0.629 (0.009)	0.718 (0.010)	0.809 (0.006)
ts	0.537 (0.014)	0.615 (0.012)	0.697 (0.014)	0.695 (0.007)
tm− ts	0.023 (0.011)	0.014 (0.010)	0.021 (0.011)	0.114 (0.008)
rp	0.179 (0.022)	0.087 (0.016)	0.293 (0.024)	0.262 (0.015)
rs	0.813 (0.021)	0.855 (0.029)	0.787 (0.027)	0.777 (0.020)
1/rp	5.6	11.5	3.4	3.8

Standard errors, estimated using 1000 bootstraps, are indicated in parentheses.

N, number of adult plants for which progeny arrays were analysed; n, number of progeny; F_{t − 1}, mean inbreeding coefficient of maternal parents; F_t, mean inbreeding coefficient of progenies; δ, indirect estimates of inbreeding depression following Ritland (1990); t_m, mean multilocus population outcrossing rate; t_s, mean single-locus population outcrossing rate; (t_m − t_s), estimation of biparental inbreeding; r_p, multilocus correlated paternity within maternal sibships; r_s, correlation of selfing among families; 1/r_p, approximation of number of males contributing to the paternal mating pool.