Table 3.
Analyses of the spatial associations of each Quercus species with non‐Quercus species in Plot 2
| Species | The influence of Quercus species to others | The influence of others to Quercus species | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QS | QV | QA | QS | QV | QA | |||||||
| Carpinus henryana var. henryana | − | .14 | r | .50 | r | .13 | − | .04 | r | .49 | r | .15 |
| Bothrocaryum controversum | − | .03 | − | .10 | − | .05 | − | .03 | − | .49 | r | .16 |
| Forsythia suspensa | − | .16 | − | .04 | − | .42 | − | .04 | − | .05 | r | .53 |
| Spiraea dasyantha | − | .15 | + | .03 | r | .72 | − | .10 | + | .02 | r | .80 |
| Cornus walteri | − | .07 | − | .67 | − | .14 | − | .04 | − | .62 | − | .11 |
| Castanea seguinii | r | .06 | r | .16 | − | .55 | − | .02 | − | .12 | r | .51 |
| Lindera obtusiloba | − | .09 | − | .15 | − | .90 | − | .06 | − | .15 | r | .71 |
| Sorbus folgneri | − | .05 | − | .30 | − | .22 | − | .29 | r | .92 | − | .52 |
| Dendrobenthamia japonica var. chinensis | − | .06 | − | .19 | − | .35 | − | .01 | − | .08 | − | .26 |
| Euonymus alatus | − | .18 | − | .07 | − | .46 | − | .26 | − | .16 | r | .81 |
The bivariate statistic of the pair correlation function was used to analyze interspecific associations of each Quercus species with non‐Quercus species under the heterogeneous Poison null model. QS means Q. serrata var. brevipetiolata, QV means Q. variabilis, and QA means Q. aliena var. acutiserrata. “−” and “+” mean the interspecific associations significantly departure from the 99% simulation envelopes which were obtained from 199 Monte Carlo simulations and indicate negative and positive association between species, respectively. “r” indicates no association between species. The values in the table are p‐values which were calculated from a goodness‐of‐fit test.