THÈSE - Université de Franche-Comté

Figure legends
Fig. 1. Location of the study sites in the Doubs and the Jura departments, France. Circles:
study sites at the low density phase and subsequent increase phase; Triangles: study sites at
high density phase; Filled triangles: grazing study sites; Open triangles: soil work study sites.
Fig. 2. A. terrestris relative abundance changes against time (2001-2004) recorded in the fortysix
study parcels. For each parcel the analysis of A. terrestris population dynamics takes into
account the data from low density (2001) to the maximal value (●). The arrow (↔) represents
the time-lag between the beginning of the A. terrestris increase phase at the parcel scale as
compared to the communal scale.
Fig. 3. Scores of the 13 farming practices variables derived from Principal Component
Analysis (PCA), plotted against the first and the second axes.
Dots indicate the positions of the 46 sampling parcels, ordinated in the space of the first two
principal components (Axes 1 and 2).
Explained variation: axis 1: 31.6%, axis 2: 18.2%. The angles between farming practices
variables in the biplot reflect their correlations, i.e. the smaller the angle the higher the
correlation. The length of the arrow represents the correlation strength between sites (parcels)
and the farming practices variables. Farming practices variables contributing most to the first
axis are in bold and used for interpretation.
Abbreviations: Spgraz, grazing in spring; sumgraz, grazing in summer; autgraz, grazing in
autumn; minen, mineral nitrogen; organ, organic nitrogen; nfertil, nitrogen fertilisation; k,
mineral potassium; p, mineral phosphorus; broma, rodenticide. See Table 1 for more details.
Fig. 4. Projections of the maximum values (a) and the delay (b) in the canonical space of a
Redundancy Analysis (RDA) between the table of response variables (maximum and delay of
A. terrestris population dynamics) and the table of explanatory variables (organic nitrogen
fertilisation and mowing and T. europaea relative abundance).
Explained variation: axis 1: 18.7%, axis 2: 5.5%. The Monte Carlo permutation test was
significant for the overall regression model (P < 0.01).
Thèse C. Morilhat 2005 119