Impacts of Elevational Changes and Leaf Maturity Stages on Photoprotective Strategies and Biochemical Traits of Wild Fig [Ficus Carica Subsp. Rupestris (Hausskn)]

Figures & data

Table 1. Geographical coordinates of the selected sits.

A. No	Sampling site	Elevation (m)	Region	Geographical coordinate	Habitat
1.	Yāhyȃ-ȃbȃd	AL1	Ȃb-shirin	51°12ʹ19ʹ’N-34°15ʹ17ʹ’E	Shrubland northern slopes
2.	Boambȃ	AL2	Bire-ghoon	50°57ʹ38ʹN’-34°22ʹ18ʹ’E	Scrubland
3.	Dāre-Gāz	AL3	Fordov	50°51ʹ39ʹ’N-34°17ʹ43ʹ’E	Rocky walls

Table 2. Combined analysis of variance results for the impact of site elevation and leaf phenophase on photosynthetic pigment traits in leaves of F. carica subsp. Rupestris.

source	df	MSS
		Chl.a	Chl.b	TCC	Car	TCC/Car
Site position (S)	2	0.0002	0.00004	0.0006	0.000017	0.0003
Phenophase (P)	2	0.647*	0.502*	1.037*	0.059*	0.17*
S × P	4	0.00008	0.00005	0.00002	0.00003	0.00008
CV		4.73	11.46	5.02	7.18	7.480

*Significantly different at P < 0.001.

Table 3. Comparison of different photosynthetic pigments through various elevation levels indices in leaves of F. carica subsp. Rupestris.

site position	Mean
	Chl. a	Chl. b	TCC	Car	TCC/Car
AL1	0.963a	0.273a	1.224a	0.281a	0.244a
AL2	0.956a	0.270a	1.226a	0.279a	0.242a
AL3	0.957a	0.272a	1.236a	0.275a	0.236a

Different letters in the table characterize significant difference among the site position indices.

Table 4. Comparison of different photosynthetic pigments through leaf phenophases in leaves of F. carica subsp. Rupestris.

Leaf phenophase	Mean
	Chl. a	Chl. b	TCC	Car	TCC/Car
YL	0.973b	0.281b	1.254b	0.226a	0.181b
ML	1.139a	0.325a	1.478a	0.261b	0.177b
SL	0.744c	0.210c	0.954c	0.348c	0.365a

Different letters in the table characterize significant difference among the phenophase indices.

Table 5. Comparison of different photosynthetic pigments through interaction effects of site position and leaf phenophase indices (S × P) in leaves of F. carica subsp. Rupestris.

Site position (S)	Phenophase (P)	Mean
		Chl. a	Chl. b	TCC	Car	TCC/Car
AL1	YL	0.97b	0.28c	1.25b	0.23c	0.184b
	ML	1.16a	0.33a	1.47a	0.26b	0.178b
	SL	0.74c	0.21d	0.95c	0.35a	0.371a
AL2	YL	0.97b	0.28c	1.25b	0.23c	0.181b
	ML	1.16a	0.32a	1.48a	0.26b	0.176b
	SL	0.74c	0.21d	0.95c	0.35a	0.369a
AL3	YL	0.98b	0.28c	1.26b	0.22c	0.177b
	ML	1.16a	0.32a	1.48a	0.26b	0.176b
	SL	0.75c	0.21d	0.96c	0.34a	0.355a

Different letters in the table characterize significant difference among the S × P indices.

Table 6. Combined analysis of variance results for impact of site position and leaf phenophase on biochemical traits in leaves of F. carica subsp. Rupestris.

source	df	MSS
		FPC	TSP	TSS	Starch
Site position (S)	2	0.53*	0.0004	2.352*	134.82
Phenophase (P)	2	26.53*	0.055*	303.719*	9997.36*
S × P	4	0.96*	0.00003	0.505*	23.06
CV		1.26	13.35	1.75	6.39

*Significantly different at P < 0.01.

Table 7. Comparison of different biochemical variables through leaf phenophases in leaves of F. carica subsp. Rupestris.

Leaf phenophase	Mean
	FPC	TSP	TSS	Starch
YL	6.353c	0.324a	13.919b	105.73b
ML	6.533b	0.347a	13.859b	118.73a
SL	8.710a	0.233b	21.683a	96.00c

Different letters in the table characterize significant difference among the phenophase indices.

Table 8. Comparison of different biochemical variables through site positions in leaves of F. carica subsp. Rupestris.

Site position	Mean
	FPC	TSP	TSS	Starch
AL1	7.413a	0.306a	16.933a	101.27a
AL2	7.171b	0.302a	16.352b	95.80a
AL3	7.043c	0.295a	16.176b	96.40a

Different letters in the table characterize significant difference among the site position indices.

Table 9. Comparison of different biochemical variables through interaction effects of site position and leaf phenophase indices (S × P) in leaves of F. carica subsp. Rupestris.

Site position	Leaf phenophase	Mean
		FPC	TSP	TSS	Starch
AL1	YL	6.446^e	0.330^a	13.970^d	111.b^c
	ML	6.670^d	0.350^a	14.406^c	120.2^a
	SL	9.124^a	0.238^b	22.422^a	72.6^e
AL2	YL	6.380^e	0.322^a	13.906^d	104.0^c
	ML	6.496^e	0.350^a	13.664d^e	116.2^a
	SL	8.638^b	0.234^b	21.486^b	67.2^e
AL3	YL	6.234^f	0.320^a	13.880^de	102.2^d
	ML	6.434^e	0. 340^a	13.508^e	119.8^a
	SL	8.462^c	0.226^b	21.140^b	67.2^e

Different letters in the table characterize significant difference among the S × P indices.

Table 10. Combined analysis of variance results for impact of site position and leaf phenophase on ΨL and RWC in leaves of F. carica subsp. Rupestris.

Source	df	MSS
		ΨL	RWC
Site position (S)	2	0.00009	7.2*
Leaf phenophase (P)	2	3.54*	736.86*
S × P	4	0.0001	0.64
CV		−4.02	1.32

*Significantly different at P < 0.01.

Table 11. Comparison of ΨL and RWC through various site positions in leaves of F. carica subsp. Rupestris.

Site position	Mean
	ΨL (MPa)	RWC (%)
AL1	−1.907^a	71.28^b
AL2	−1.902^a	71.78^b
AL3	−1.905^a	72.65^a

Different letters in the table characterize significant difference among the site position indices.

Table 12. Comparison of ΨL and RWC through various leaf phenophase stages in leaves of F. carica subsp. Rupestris.

Leaf phenophase	Mean
	ΨL (MPa)	RWC (%)
YL	−1.474^a	78.533^a
ML	−1.809^b	72.613^b
SL	−2.431^c	64.569^c

Different letters in the table characterize significant difference among the leaf phenophase indices.

Table 13. Comparison of leaf water potential (ΨL) and (RWC %) through interaction effects of site position and leaf phenophase indices (S × P) in leaves of F. carica subsp. Rupestris.

Site position	Leaf phenophase	Mean
		ΨL (MPa)	RWC (%)
AL1	YL	−1.48^a	77.44^b
	ML	−1.81^b	72.17^c
	SL	−2.43^c	64.23^d
AL2	YL	−1.47^a	78.61a^b
	ML	−1.80^b	72.39^c
	SL	−2.43^c	64.36^d
AL3	YL	−1.47^a	79.55^a
	ML	−1.81^b	73.28^c
	SL	−2.43^c	65.12^d

Different letters in the table characterize significant difference among the S × P indices.

Table 14. Combined analysis of variance results for impact of site position and leaf phenophase on chlorophyll a fluorescence traits in leaves of F. carica subsp. Rupestris.

source	df	MSS
		F0	Fm	Fv/Fm	Fm/F0	qP	NPQ	ΦPSII
Site position (S)	2	1943.89**	99.09	0.001**	0.00002	0.004**	0.005	0.0005
Phenophase (P)	2	59475.56**	728637.1**	0.081**	0.0029	0.129**	1.7488**	1.07^*
S × P	4	1310.56**	235.16	0.0006**	0.008	0.0007	0.002	0.011
CV		2.42	0.58	0.9	30.29	3.33	9.81	18.91

Significantly different at **P < 0.01, *P < 0.05

Table 15. Comparison of different fluorescence variables through leaf phenophases in leaves of F. carica subsp. Rupestris.

Leaf phenophase	Mean
	F0	Fm	Fv/Fm	Fm/F0	qP	NPQ	ΦPSII
YL	321.33^c	1820.72^a	0.822^a	0.218^a	0.544^a	0.915^c	0.502^a
ML	373.33^b	1779.07^b	0.786^b	0.238^a	0.513^a	1.013^b	0.467^b
SL	446.67^a	1419.87^c	0.681^c	0.244^a	0.370^c	1.547^a	0.454^b

Different letters in the table characterize significant difference among the phenophase indices.

Table 16. Comparison of different fluorescence variables through sit positions in leaves of F. carica subsp. Rupestris.

Site position	Mean
	F0	Fm	Fv/Fm	Fm/F0	qP	NPQ	ΦPSII
AL1	390.3^a	1672.5^a	0.75^b	0.234^a	0.464^b	1.164^a	0.472^a
AL2	383.0^b	1676.0^a	0.76^b	0.234^a	0.469^b	1.172^a	0.483^a
AL3	368.0^c	1671.0^a	0.77^a	0.232^a	0.493^a	1.139^a	0.476^a

Different letters in the table characterize significant difference among the site position indices.

Table 17. Comparison of fluorescence variables through interaction effects of site position and leaf phenophase indices (S × P) in F. carica subsp. Rupestris trees.

Site position	Leaf phenophase	Mean
		F0	Fm	Fv/Fm	Fm/F0	qP	NPQ	ΦPSII
AL1	YL	321^e	1816^a	0.82^a	0.189^a	0.534^bc	0.916^b	0.527^a
	ML	372^d	1781^b	0.79^bc	0.254^a	0.510^d	1.04^b	0.434^a
	SL	477^a	1420^cd	0. 70^d	0.258^a	0.348^f	1.536^a	0.456^a
AL2	YL	326^e	1823^a	0.82^a	0.267^a	0.542^ab	0.918^b	0.451^a
	ML	378^d	1776^b	0.78^c	0.231^a	0.506^d	1.02^b	0.494^a
	SL	445^b	1425^d	0.68^e	0.204^a	0.360^f	1.58^a	0.505^a
AL3	YL	317^e	1823^a	0.82^a	0.198^a	0.556^a	0.91^b	0.527^a
	ML	369^d	1780^b	0.79^b	0.229^a	0.522^cd	0.98^b	0.473^a
	SL	418^c	1410^d	0.66^f	0.271^a	0.402^e	1.53^a	0.429^a

Different letters in the table characterize significant difference among the S × P indices.