Skip to main content

Table 3 Ceanothus cuneatus (buckbrush) cover model estimates with standard error and P-value for the main effects and interaction (treatment by years since treatment). Different letters depict significant differences in shrub cover at α ≤ 0.05. Numbers depict marginal significant levels 0.05 ≤ α ≥ 0.10. Significance codes: *** <0.001, ** <0.01, * <0.05, .<0.1. Estimates (Est), standard errors (± SE), and P-values (P) are rounded to the nearest one hundredth. P-value of *** implies P-value <0.001. Winter fire models would not compute for buckbrush likely because it is extremely uncommon and, if present, has very low cover.

From: Decade-Long Plant Community Responses to Shrubland Fuel Hazard Reduction

    Control Fire-fall Fire-spring Mastication-fall Mastication-spring
    Est ± SE P Est ± SE P Est ± SE P Est ± SE P Est ± SE P
Main effect Intercept   −7.27±0.45 *** −12.44±0.61 *** −15.19±0.70 *** −12.04±0.61 *** −11.68±0.58 ***
Yr since treatment   −1.69±0.36 *** 1.71±0.41 *** 0.65±0.48 0.18 3.39±0.44 *** 3.51±0.38 ***
Control A           
Fire-fall BC −5.17±0.67 ***         
Fire-winter B −5.94±0.68 *** −0.77±0.75 0.30       
Fire-spring E −7.93±0.76 *** −2.76±0.84 ***       
Mastication-fall C −4.78±0.68 *** 0.40±0.80 0.62 3.15±0.89 ***     
Mastication-spring C −4.41±0.63 *** 0.76±0.77 0.33 3.51±0.86 *** 0.36±0.75 0.63   
Slope   0.05±0.26 0.86 0.05±0.26 0.86 0.05±0.26 0.86 0.05±0.26 0.86 0.05±0.26 0.86
Solar radiation index   −0.06±0.25 0.81 −0.06±0.25 0.81 −0.06±0.25 0.81 −0.06±0.25 0.81 −0.06±0.25 0.81
Treatment × yr since treatment Control A           
Fire-fall 1 3.41±0.54 ***         
Fire-winter 1B 2.35±0.55 *** −1.06±0.58 0.07. 0.00±0.63 1.00     
Fire-spring 1B 2.35±0.60 *** −1.06±0.63 0.09.       
Mastication-fall C 5.09±0.57 *** 1.68±0.6 *** 2.74±0.65 ***     
Mastication-spring C 5.21±0.53 *** 1.8±0.56 *** 2.86±0.61 *** 0.12±0.57 0.83