Table 1.

Regression coefficients and R² from a complete two-factor linear and quadratic model (equation 1) using trunk movement 1.4 m (4.62 ft) aboveground, wind speed (wind), and pruning dose (dose) for each tree.

Pruning type^{^z}	Tree no.^{^y}	Intercept	Wind	Dose	Wind × wind	Dose × dose	Wind × dose	R²
LT	1	NS	0.03947	0.004720	0.00046	−0.00022	−0.00102	0.93
LT	2	0.05216	0.02832	−0.01594	0.00020	0.00058	−0.00044	0.91
LT	3	NS	0.05910	−0.00658	−0.00010	0.00011	−0.00073	0.81
LT	4	0.06780	0.05907	−0.00984	0.00007	0.00017	−0.00071	0.82
LT	5	−0.13997	0.05650	−0.00265	−0.00037	0.00006	−0.00036	0.76
LT	6	0.05627	0.02285	−0.00850	0.00010	0.00017	−0.00033	0.88
LT	7	NS	0.03519	−0.00653	−0.00000	0.00015	−0.00070	0.84
RA	2	NS	0.04782	NS	0.00027	0.00002	−0.00066	0.95
RA	3	−0.06430	0.02960	0.00170	0.00010	0.00001	−0.00044	0.96
RA	4	0.12652	0.04827	NS	0.00030	−0.00002	−0.00057	0.96
RA	5	NS	0.03459	0.00213	0.00033	−0.00006	−0.00034	0.98
RA	6	−0.09167	0.02932	0.00496	0.00015	−0.00004	−0.00047	0.91
RA	7	NS	0.03116	0.00245	0.00017	−0.00005	−0.00033	0.95
RE	1	0.04733	0.04321	0.00515	0.00013	−0.00017	−0.00054	0.91
RE	2	−0.09332	0.03575	0.00542	0.00041	−0.00003	−0.00040	0.90
RE	3	NS	0.05964	NS	0.00012	−0.00005	−0.00048	0.90
RE	4	NS	0.03332	0.00512	0.00028	−0.00008	−0.00031	0.97
RE	5	0.04898	0.02694	−0.00449	0.00018	0.00008	−0.00021	0.93
RE	6	NS	0.05304	NS	−0.00023	NS	−0.00021	0.75
RE	7	0.04920	0.05088	NS	0.00034	−0.00012	−0.00009	0.96
ST	1	−0.15436	0.02881	0.00379	0.00012	−0.00004	−0.00032	0.96
ST	2	NS	0.04060	−0.00576	−0.00023	0.00008	−0.00042	0.75
ST	3	−0.06809	0.04117	NS	0.00014	NS	−0.00046	0.87
TH	1	0.06958	0.04023	−0.00919	0.00060	0.00018	−0.00068	0.94
TH	2	−0.05864	0.03670	NS	0.00045	0.00003	−0.00042	0.96
TH	3	NS	0.04686	NS	0.00039	0.00004	−0.00053	0.90
TH	4	−0.15341	0.04060	0.00356	0.00029	NS	−0.00040	0.93

↵^zPruning types: LT = lion’s tailing; RA = raising; RE = reduction; ST = structural; TH = thinning.
↵^yTree no.: number assigned to a tree within a pruning type.
NS = not statistically significant at P < 0.05.
Note: 16 trees had intercepts not equal to zero. This may have slightly over- or underestimated deflection on these trees.