Figure Legends (also included below figures in this draft form)
Figure 1. Leaf-level photosynthesis, leaf-level transpiration,
and diurnal leaf water potential range of Acacia drepanolobiumtrees in Transition sites (that were invaded by P. megacephala in
December 2017 after initial wet and dry season surveys) and in paired
Control sites (that were protected by C. mimosae throughout the
study). Means of invaded Transition sites are surrounded by red circles.
Effect tests are reported in each panel.
Figure 2. Differences in leaf-
(Amax-leaf ; i.e., per-unit-leaf-area)
and canopy-level (Amax-canopy ; i.e.,
canopy photosynthetic capacity) photosynthesis (means ± SEM) of P.
megacephala - vs. C. mimosae- occupied Acacia drepanolobiumadults in wet and dry seasons at long-term Invaded and Uninvaded sites.
Results of pairwise comparisons are indicated as significant (* P
< 0.05, ** P < 0.001, *** P < 0.0001) or
not significant (NS).
Figure 3. Differences in photosynthesis (means ± SEM) ofP. megacephala -occupied Acacia drepanolobium adults in a
2x2 full-factorial experiment (presence/exclusion of ants, large
herbivores) conducted at 3 long-term Invaded sites in wet and dry
seasons. Photosynthetic indices are estimated at the leaf-
(Amax-leaf ) and canopy-level
(Amax-canopy ). Results of effect tests
are reported in panels.
Figure 4. Differences in canopy-level transpiration
(Ecanopy ) and leaf water potential
diurnal range (∆ψ) (means ± SEM) for Acacia drepanolobium adults
in a 2x2 full-factorial experiment (presence/exclusion of ants, large
herbivores) conducted at 3 long-term Invaded sites in wet and dry
seasons. Significant results of effect tests are reported in panels.