Figure Legends
Fig. 1. The difference between two populations in distribution, environment, demography and DNA methylation rates. (a), (b):individual distribution in recovering stand and native stand.(c): environment of two populations. (d), (e):Diameter at breast height (DBH) distribution of population in recovering stand and native stand. (f): Methylation rates of two populations; data show averages (+ SD), and different superscript letters indicate significant differences among different stands, P<0.05.
Fig. 2. Effects of biotic and abiotic factors on individual methylation rate. (a)–(g): Variation partitioning of C. chinensismethylation rates variation in (b)–(d) , recover, and(e)–(g) , native stand. The number is the significant interpretation rate; the residual is the unexplained part. (a):visualization outline (b), (e): full methylation rate(c), (f): hemi-methylation rate (d), (g): total methylation rate. The significant edaphic and topographic variables are presented in the table of each subgraph with the contributed variation.
Fig. 3. The relationships between DBH and methylation rates and relative growth rate. (a): MRM correlation coefficients for the relationship between individual DBH and methylation rates. * Significant at the 0.1 level. An edaphic, topography, spatial, DBH and genetic variable model was used in this MRM analysis. (b): DBH distribution of relative growth rates(RGR) of all individuals ofC. chinensis in DHS.
Fig. 4. Spatial autocorrelation of populations. Epigenetic(a)–(d) and genetic (e)–(h) autocorrelation analysis of different diameter groups. (a), (e). DBH<40 cm individuals in recovering forests, (b), (f):DBH>40 cm individuals in recovering forests, (c), (g): DBH<40 cm individuals in native forests and (d), (h): DBH>40 cm individuals in native forests, respectively. The solid line represents the autocorrelation coefficient R (with positive and negative deviations), and the dashed line represents the 95% confidence interval.