Table 3.

HFC comparisons following Szulkin et al. (2010) for both mesic and dry provenances of Swietenia macrophylla (Ĥ_j and σ²(Ĥ_j), heterozygosity mean and variance, respectively; f, inbreeding estimate derived from the MLTR selfing rate where f = s/(2 − s); g₂, interlocus heterozygosity correlation inferred from RMES (David et al. 2007); r²_ωj,Ĥj, the variation in fitness explained by heterozygosity; β_ωj,Ĥj, regression slope of fitness-heterozygosity regression; r²_ωj,f, variation in fitness explained by inbreeding; β_ωj,f, regression slope of fitness-inbreeding, the inbreeding load; variance parameters in parentheses; g₂ values followed by ‘^*’ or ‘^NS’ indicate significant and non-significant interlocus heterozygosity correlation respectively)

Provenance	Ĥj	σ2(Ĥj)	f	βωj,Ĥj	r2ωj,Ĥj	g2	r2ωj,f	βωj,f
Mesic	0.593	0.139	0.032	0.047	0.209	0.033*	0.317	− 0.042
Dry	0.632	0.056	0.004	0.020	0.016	− 0.012NS