Table 4.

Results of comparisons of the slope of change in length, diameter and number of nodes between parent growth units of different size for each axis type of N. dombeyi and N. pumilio by means of one‐way ANOVAs, and between species and parent growth unit sizes (in terms of number of nodes) for each axis type by means of two‐way ANOVAs (species × size : species × parent growth unit size interaction)

		One‐way ANOVA				Two‐way ANOVA
		N. dombeyi		N. pumilio		Species		GU size		Species × size
Slope of change in	Branch type	F	P	F	P	F	P	F	P	F	P
Length	MB	3·6	*	3·8	*	0·0	ns	6·9	**	0·4	ns
	SCB	1·8	ns	6·8	**	4·4	*	6·9	**	3·0	ns
	SHB	1·0	ns	–	–	–	–	–		–
Diameter	MB	0·8	ns	1·8	ns	5·2	*	2·5	ns	2·2	ns
	SCB	1·1	ns	9·7	***	5·0	*	7·5	**	2·0	ns
	SHB	0·0	ns	–	–	–	–	–		–
No. of leaves	MB	2·5	ns	2·7	ns	0·9	ns	4·8	*	0·7	ns
	SCB	2·5	ns	5·1	*	20·6	***	6·0	**	0·5	ns
	SHB	0·1	ns	–	–	–		–		–

For each comparison, the value of Fisher’s statistic (F) and the probability of error (P) are indicated.

MB, main branches; SC, secondary branches; SHB short branches.

*** P < 0·001; ** P < 0·01; * P < 0·05; ns, P > 0·05.