SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Fig. S1. CIM (a) and VCH (b) mean decadal BAI vs. DBH, for the two periods 1960–1969 and 1987–1996. The BAI– DBH regression lines for the two periods have significantly different intercepts at both sites (see text for details).

Fig. S2. (Above) Hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA) of 50-year splines fit to individual-tree BAI at Monte Cimino (CIM) over the periods 1890–1996 and 1950–1996. For the period 1890–1996, codes assigned to the different clusters are as follows: A = increasing growth trend; B = decreasing growth trend; C = variable growth trend. For the period 1950–1996, these additional codes were used: d = decreasing growth trend; i = increasing growth trend; s = no trend. (below) Growth Type Chronologies (GTCs; dotted lines: ±1 SE; PC1: percentage of variance explained by the first principal component) obtained by grouping Monte Cimino trees with similar BAI trends over the periods 1890–1996 and 1950–1996. Each GTC is identified by two letters on the basis of codes assigned to different clusters.

Fig. S3. Same as Fig. S2, but for Valle Cervara (VCH).

This material is available as part of the online article from http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01570.x.

Please note: Blackwell Publishing is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supplementary materials supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing material) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.

FilenameFormatSizeDescription
GCB_1570_sm_figureS1-S3.doc116KSupporting info item

Please note: Wiley Blackwell is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.