Table 3. Comparison of best phenological regression models for combined and historical data.
Historical data | Combined data | ||||||||||
Tree species | Phenophase | Slope | SE | tdf | p | R2 adj | Slope | SE | tdf | p | R2 adj |
P. bolleana | BL* | −0.23 | 0.05 | −4.318 | <.001 | 0.66 | −0.22 | 0.03 | −8.6024 | <.001 | 0.79 |
L1* | −0.14 | 0.03 | −4.258 | <.001 | 0.65 | −0.15 | 0.02 | −9.1424 | <.001 | 0.77 | |
LA | −0.22 | 0.06 | −3.577 | <.001 | 0.59 | −0.22 | 0.04 | −5.7724 | <.001 | 0.56 | |
S. babylonica | BL* | −0.24 | 0.05 | −4.547 | <.001 | 0.71 | −0.24 | 0.04 | −5.7219 | <.001 | 0.84 |
L1 | −0.23 | 0.04 | −5.427 | <.001 | 0.78 | −0.25 | 0.03 | −7.4820 | <.001 | 0.72 | |
LA | −0.14 | 0.02 | −5.849 | <.001 | 0.77 | −0.08 | 0.02 | −3.5421 | 0.002 | 0.61 | |
BF* | −0.22 | 0.13 | −1.655 | 0.16 | 0.22 | −0.27 | 0.08 | −3.288 | 0.01 | 0.52 | |
F1* | −0.17 | 0.06 | −2.877 | <.001 | 0.47 | −0.20 | 0.04 | −4.6410 | 0.001 | 0.65 | |
PF* | −0.13 | 0.05 | −2.646 | 0.04 | 0.46 | −0.12 | 0.03 | −4.2710 | 0.002 | 0.61 | |
U. pumila | BL* | −0.09 | 0.08 | −1.1114 | 0.29 | 0.02 | −0.10 | 0.07 | −1.3717 | 0.19 | 0.26 |
L1* | −0.07 | 0.02 | −3.3117 | <.001 | 0.36 | −0.08 | 0.02 | −3.4723 | 0.002 | 0.46 | |
LA* | −0.04 | 0.02 | −2.3619 | 0.03 | 0.19 | −0.04 | 0.02 | −2.3024 | 0.03 | 0.60 | |
F1 | −0.10 | 0.04 | −2.7615 | 0.015 | 0.29 | −0.10 | 0.03 | −3.1820 | 0.005 | 0.30 |
Notes: Phenophases are same as in Table 1. SE = standard error of the slope. Bold face font indicates significance at p<0.05.
denotes phenophases for which combining historical and spatial data resulted in improvements.