Similarly for LUE, the slope did not differ between treatments for the immature and the pole-stage1 stand. Plotwise regressions were all significant, except for the thinned mature stand (both efficiency patterns) and the unthinned pole-stage2 stand (LUE). Coefficients

of determination were generally weak, although higher in the pole-stage stands (except pole-stage2 UT) than in the mature and immature stands. As a general trend, both efficiencies indicate an increasing pattern over tree size (Fig. 5). With given tree size (i.e. bole volume) both efficiencies (LAE and LUE) were higher buy Icotinib for the unthinned variants (except for the mature stands). To identify further differences between the thinned and unthinned treatments we conducted this website a comparison at the stand-level. Because variances differed significantly in some

cases, we applied Welch two-sample t-tests to test for differences between the means. The thinned variant always showed significantly higher LAE than the unthinned variant (except for the immature stands). LUE showed the same pattern, except that additionally no significant difference could be found between thinned and unthinned for the pole-stage2 stand. The average tree from the thinned treatment received 28.8%, 34.7%, 104.2% and 84.7% more light (for mature, immature, pole-stage1 and pole-stage2, respectively) than an average tree from the unthinned treatment. The relationship between APAR and LA was linear and differed between growth classes and thinning variants. Binkley et al. (2010) found similar patterns for Eucalyptus grandis (W. Hill es Maid.) trees and concluded that “larger trees capture just as much light per unit leaf area as mid-size trees and canopies of small trees were not substantially shaded by neighbors”. Mathematically this is only true, however if the intercept in the APAR to LA relationship is not significantly different from zero. As for the actual Picea abies plots, all intercepts were highly significant, a curvi-linear relationship of APAR per LA over tree size could be expected. To get more insight,

we analyzed the amount of APAR that one unit of LA receives per tree. We found that overall growth classes and thinning variants, Isotretinoin larger trees absorbed more light per unit LA than smaller trees ( Fig. 2). There are two main reasons that could explain the difference in APAR to LA: (i) self-shading: light has to penetrate through the upper crown before it arrives at leaves in lower parts of the crown and (ii): inter-crown shading or competition: light has to penetrate through other crowns (either neighbors or upper story trees) before it hits the subject crown. To be able to differentiate those two effects, we manipulated Maestra to remove the effects of neighbors. This analysis revealed a pattern of decreasing APARno_comp per LA with increasing tree size (increasing effect of self-shading) ( Fig. 3).