Closed teixeirak closed 4 years ago
I can look at this tomorrow.
In terms of a really simple, easily-made plot I can make this. Did we want it different / more made up?
This is good; thanks. I saved it as FigureS3_height_histogram.png.
This is now Fig. S3.
comment from R2: "138 you might discuss the adequacy of the height range studied. If it is true that conduit diameter predicts vulnerability, then the greatest differences in vulnerability should be over the height range over which conduit diameter changes most rapidly. The relationship between conduit diameter and plant height turns out to follow a power-law like distribution, see for example the SI in (Olson et al., 2018). This means that differences in vulnerability should be very marked across smaller size classes (say below 7 m or so and very marked below 3 m) and be less and less visible across larger plants. So, studies of changes in conduit diameter/ vulnerability with height would ideally include plants smaller than those included here, so maybe comment on how the height range might affect the ability to detect the patterns of interest. It strikes me that it is appropriate because it is the height range over which the putative preferential susceptibility of large trees to drought is being observed."
This isn't essential, but may be nice to stick in the SI.