The special height of sample 2, sample 3, and sample 4 changed from 17.3 to 65.8, 50.3, and 68.7 cm; the impact sensitivity was significantly reduced.
Relative height of each disc sample was then calculated as disc height divided by predicted total tree height.
Figure 3 a-2) to (d-2) are the height distribution histograms of each sample, which depict the height distribution around zero with Gaussian distribution.
The average QD diameter and height of sample A and sample E are listed in Table 2.
For these individuals, the average height of the sample for each sex was imputed (174.2 ± 9.6 cm for male subjects and 160.8 ± 8.5 cm for female subjects).
The height and basal diameter of each sample (sample size of 10) were measured before stress as baseline values.
This involved using a compatible volume and taper function (Katz et al. 1984) along with data on the diameter and heights of each disc sampled from the tree.
To overcome the problem of missing heights, total height was predicted for each tree using a compatible volume and taper function along with data on the diameter and heights of each disc sampled from the tree.
Fluctuations in the peak height ratios in subsequent analyses of each sample ranged between 5 and 10%%.
To cover the total height of each habitat and to sample a representative mosquito population, traps were set up to the canopy level for each habitat.
