Table 3.

The effects of waterlogging with and without nitrogen (N) fertilization on growth of English oak (Quercus robur L.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.).^{^z}

Treatment	Leaf area (cm²)	Shoot DW (g)	Root DW (g)	Total Plant DW (g)	S:R
English oak
Control	4170.3	295.6	146.3	441.9	2.02
Tapwater	1695.9^*	216.5^*	102.3^*	338.8^*	2.31^*
7.25 g (0.25 oz) N	2111.5^*	236.8^*	123.8^*	360.6^*	1.91^*
14.5 g (0.51 oz) N	3889.0^ns	275.3^ns	139.0^ns	414.3^ns	1.98^ns
29 g (1.02 oz) N	4001.0^ns	288.5^ns	151.7^ns	440.2^ns	1.90^*
LSD	996.71	38.96	20.56	76.64	0.11
European beech
Control	3667.4	265.7	159.0	424.7	1.67
Tapwater	515.2^*	176.8^*	105.7^*	282.5^*	1.68^ns
7.25 g (0.25 oz) N	917.8^*	201.3^*	133.3^ns	334.6^ns	1.51^*
14.5 g (0.51 oz) N	1143.5^*	223.4^ns	150.7^ns	374.1^ns	1.48^*
29 g (1.02 oz) N	1767.3^*	235.7^ns	155.1^ns	390.8^ns	1.52^*
LSD	828.32	50.44	36.91	97.66	0.14

↵^zData presented is combined from measurements taken immediately at the cessation of the end of an 18-day waterlogging period and 10 days after the 18-day waterlogging treatment. Trees were situated outdoors subject to natural climatic conditions.
DW = dry weight; shoot DW = leaf and shoot DW combined; S:R = shoot:root ratio. All values mean of 12 trees. Six trees were harvested at the cessation of 18 days waterlogging and six trees harvested 10 days later. No significant differences (Student’s t test) were found between dry weights at both time periods.
↵*Significantly different from controls according to least significant difference (LSD) at P < 0.05.
^ns = not significantly different from control value.