Application of Basic Statistical Tools in Ecology using

Correlations of Ficus nana (Moraceae) Leaf Length-Width Ratio

and Human Height-Weight-Age Relation

Camao, ErlJohn C., De Guzman, Patricia Mae C., Dupla, Allan R., Miano, Lyndie Pearl M., Seroma,
Amira Shiekah
Biology Students, Department of Biology, College of Science, Polytechnic University of the Philippines,
Sta. Mesa, Manila

Abstract
In Ecology, gathering data from the environment is important. Statistical approach gives us
better understanding in the relationship of the data to other data in correlation. Statistical tools help us
to accomplish the collection and interpretation of data. We collected 100 leaves of Ficus nana and
measured the length and width. We also conducted a survey from 100 students within the College of
Science. Age, Height and Weight were the information gathered from them. Frequency distribution of
Ficus nana shows that there are more leaves that have 53-55 cm length (30%) and 35-36 cm width (32%)
while in College of Science, there are more students under 18 years old (31%), weights 45-49 kg (27%)
and has a height of 158-164 cm (39%). 18.31 is the average value in the set of data for age, 162.06 is the
average value for the set of data for height. 53.25 is the average value for the weight. All variances
obtained are Positive, data points are very spread out from the mean and from each other. For the
standard Deviation, data points tend to be far from the mean or expected value. . Both the length and
the width of the leaves are insignificant having correlation is significant at the 0.01 level The affinity of
LWR to length is directly proportional while the connection between width and LWR is reversely
proportional. The scatter diagram show can be considered as weak positive correlation because the
value of (y) width increases slightly as the value of (x) length increases. In using statistical tools, the data
we have gathered were organized using tables and graphs. The resulting regression is
Y=0.412888494x+14.06673946. Through this we can easily understand and relate the results to draw
logical conclusions. Statistical analysis makes research papers more reliable reference for a study.

Keywords: basic statistical tools, frequency distribution, scatter diagram, length-width ratio, correlation,
regression

Introduction
Ecology is undergoing some major changes in response to changing times of societal concerns
coupled with remote sensing information and computer technology. Both theoretical and applied
ecology are using more of statistical thought processes and procedures with advancing software and
hardware to satisfy public policy and scientific research, variously incorporating sample survey data,
intensive site-specific data, and remote sensing image data.
Ecology and Statics are disciplines that belong to two (2) different branch of Science. Ecology
belongs to life science studying and dealing with the total relations of the animal to both its organic and
inorganic environment while Statistics is a branch of Mathematics thats described as a mathematical
body of science that pertains to the collection, analysis, interpretation or explanation, and presentation
of data. Even though Ecology and Statistics came from different branches of Science they have been
fused together to help and solve one another.
Statistical methods were initially developed for use in basic and applied sciences, and later in
engineering and management. While basic statistical science is common to all areas, there are specific
techniques developed to answer specific questions in each area.
Statistical ecology and environmental statistics are relatively new and need some of its own
special methodologies. Statistical thinking is an aid to the collection and interpretation of data. It may
help confuse seeming clarity. The statistical approach is expected to contribute to the overall balance,
insight and perspective of the substantive issue and its resolution in the light of the evidence on hand,
be it in the nature of empirical data, literature-assembled data, expert opinion data or a combination
thereof. Statistics will be more a way of thinking or reasoning rather than a tool for beating data to yield
answers (Patil, 1995). This paper aims review some statistical tools useful in ecological studies, to
determine the relationship of the data to other data in correlation and to apply it in practical use:
relationship of height and width ratio of Ficus nana and age, height and weight relationship in humans.

Methodology
In this activity 100 leaves of Ficus nana were collected. The general morphology and laminar
shape were described. The length of the leaves, from tip of the apex to its base was measured. The
greatest width of the leaves was measured to the nearest millimeter. Then, a scatter diagram was made
to show the relationship between length and width. The standard deviate was computed and the mean,
minimum, and maximum value of the leaf. Next, the slope and Y-intercept was computed using the
equation of linear regression line. Data was summarized by presenting the number of leaves with such
length and width in a frequency distribution table (FDT). Length width ratio (lwr) was computed and
correlated using the leaf length and width. Finally, diagram was made to show the relationship of lwr
and leaf length and width. Also in this activity were survey 100 students in Polytechnic University of the
Philippines Sta. mesa Manila, 50 male and 50 female students were ask knowing their age,
height

and

weight.

Then

solve

for

the

mean

of

age,

height

and

weight.

Next is the standard deviation and variance of height and weight. Data was summarized using
frequency distribution table presenting the age, height and weight. The ratio of height and weight was
obtained.
Computed and the correlation of height and weight. Finally, diagram was made to show the relationship
of
height
and
weight.

Figure 1. Ficus nana leaves

Discussions
Leaf samples of Ficus Sp. gathered from a single tree located near the PUP Chapel was obtained
randomly on the different parts of the tree to prevent any form of bias to observe the correlation of the
length and width of the leaf. . The thick, shiny, two to five-inch-long, evergreen leaves generously clothe
the long branches, and the tiny figs eventually turn a deep red. Branches will weep toward the ground
forming a canopy so dense that nothing grows beneath it. (Caine and Zane).
Leaves are important organs for photosynthesis and play an important role in survival and
growth of a plant. Many previous studies have revealed that variations in leaf traits are the result of
adapting to growth habits (Pandey Nagur, 200). Quantification and visualization of morphological
variation of of leaves, flowers and other structures are essential for an overview of evolutionary and
ecological processes of phenotypic diversification and is the fundamental basis from which to develop
more complex studies to achieve new perspective on the interaction of phenotype, genotype and
environment (Jensen,2003). Leaf traits are globally repeated despite large variations in the values of the
traits across individual species with very diverse phylogenetic, biogeographical and environmental
affinities.
The best indicator of species differences is the average length/width ratio, where averaging has
smoothed out the overlapping range extremes. Leaf size serves as a reflection of the environment in
dry, hot, sunny environments; water is often a limiting factor. So leaves from these environments may
exhibit special adaptations that retard water loss. For example, the leaves may be covered with a thick
waxy layer that keeps moisture inside the leaf. Small leaves have less total surface area than large

leaves, and they lose less water than large leaves. Overheating can also be a problem for large leaved
plants in dry, hot environments. Studies have shown that wide leaves heat up more than narrow leaves
of the same length. An evaluation of the length to width ratio of plants from different habitats can yield
interesting results. In general, leaves with higher length-to-width ratios are relatively elongate and
narrow and dissipate heat faster than leaves with smaller length to width ratios. Leaves with higher
length-to-width ratios have more surface area per volume for heat loss than leaves with lower length to
width ratios. In general, small, narrow leaves are well adapted to hot, dry, sunny environments. Leaves
may also be arranged vertically to reduce exposure to the hot drying sun when the sun is at its zenith.
In moist, shady environments light may be a limiting factor. Leaves from these environments
may exhibit adaptations that enhance their ability to absorb the sunlight that penetrates to the forest
floor. Where radiant energy is scarce, overheating is not a problem and leaves may have a low length to
width ratio (EdScope, 2005).
As well, leaf traits can thus provide a link between various environmental factors and leaf
functions and they have been widely used in functional structural plant models (Roche et al.,2004 Price
and Equist, 2007).
Shape, size and leaf morphology, whose interest in studies of biomass, and organic and mineral
nutrition is well established. This knowledge are currently a component of increasing importance in
studies of morphological and genetic diversity of many species, In order to improve their conservation
and to base management efforts on sound scientific information of their biology (Dupouey et al., 1991;
Harrison et al., 1997, Wu et al. 1997, Leite, 2002, Lutz Eckstein et al., 2006, Xu et al., 2009)
One of the reasons for measuring the length and width of the leaf is because it serves as a
reflection of the environment the plant lives in. In dry, hot environments, water is often a limiting factor.
So leaves from these environments may exhibit special adaptations that retard water loss. Small leaves
have less total surface area than large leaves, so they lose less water than large leaves. In general, leaves
with higher length-to width ratios are relatively longer and narrower and these leaves dissipate heat
faster than leaves with smaller length to width ratios. In addition, leaves with higher length-to-width
ratios have more surface area per volume for heat loss than leaves with lower length to width ratios. In
moist, shady environments light may be a limiting factor. Leaves from these environments may exhibit
adaptations that enhance their ability to absorb the sunlight that penetrates to the forest floor. Where
radiant energy is scarce, overheating is not a problem and leaves may have a low length to width ratio
(EdScope, 2005). Leaf size and shape may covary with each other and with other physical or
physiological characteristics of the tree (Brown et al., 1991) this may be especially true of very small
leaves where biomechanical tradeoffs relating to the production of support structures become less
relevant. Furthermore, it has already been shown (Malhado et al., 2009) that the proportion of largeleaved species in the RAINFOR database decreases with some metrics of water availability. Thus, in
order to control for the potential covariance between leaf size and leaf shape a sub-set of the data that
included only trees with large leaves (those in mesophyll, macrophyll, and megaphyll categories sensu
Webb, 1959)

Table 1. Measure of Central Tendency and Dispersion for Human Data

MEAN
STDEV
VAR

AGE
18.31
1.276794
1.630202

HEIGHT
162.06
8.59389
73.85495

Mean value: 18.31 is the average value in the set of data for age.
162.06 is the average value for the set of data for height.
53.25 is the average value for the weight

WEIGHT
53.25
8.83562
78.06818

Variance: All variances obtained are Positive, data points are very spread out from the mean and from
each other.
Standard Deviation: Data points tend to be far from the mean or expected value.
Table 2. Standard error of the mean ( age, weight and height).

Standard error of Mean

Age

Weight

Height

0.1276794

0.859389

0. 883562

Table 3. Measure of Central Tendency and Dispersion for Leaf Data

LENGTH
54.95
4.461677
19.90657

MEAN
STDEV
VAR

WIDTH
36.74
2.769312
7.669091

Mean value: 54.95 is the average value in the set of data for length.
36.74 is the average value for the set of data for width.
Variance: All variances obtained are Positive, data points are very spread out from the mean and from
each other.
Standard Deviation: Data points tend to be far from the mean or expected value.

Table 4. Standard error of the mean (length and width)

Standard error of Mean

Length

Width

0.4461677

0.2769312

The values of Mean, Variance, Standard deviation and minimum and maximum value were
obtained using standard error. These values are also significant in statistics because aside from the
relationship of variables it can also show the behaviors.

The mean of any distribution is the average of all the values added together. This is computed
by taking all the values and adding them together, and dividing by the number of values. The Variance is
the
average
of
the squared differences
from
the
Mean
.It
is
a
determinant of measure of how far a set of numbers is spread out. It is typically a raw material of
statistics and it is important since it helps and allows you to compute the dispersion of a set of variables
around their mean likewise they are useful because it can tell the accuracy of the data. Meanwhile, the
Standard deviation measures the amount of variation or dispersion from the average or how spread out
numbers are. (Altman and Bland, 1996) It helps in measuring the variability of a mean. It used in
evaluating values in records set to the mean and measuring of dispersion. So, using the Standard
Deviation we have a "standard" way of knowing what is normal, and what is extra large or extra small.
To sum up the values for the length and width of the leaves obtained, Tables 3.1-3.5 were
provided to show the different figures and the implication of the values of thee other factors to be
solved in this activity.
Frequency Distribution Table (FDT) for X and Y was made to summarize all the values and to
present it in a systematic manner. Moreover, Frequency Distribution Table (FDT) was used in the activity
in order to know the number of leaf/leaves that were similar, close or different from one another in
terms of their length and width. in this way, the table summarizes the distribution of values in the
sample. Each entry in the table contains the frequency or count of the occurrences of values within a
particular group or interval, Frequency is an important element in Statistical analysis because it shows
the relationship of different variables hence it also show how far or how near the variables are from
each other. It is a particular observation is the number of times the observation occurs in the data. The
distribution of a variable is the pattern of frequencies of the observation (Viljoen et al., 2000).
Table 5. Frequency Distribution Table for Height

Human height
Class Interval
121-128
129-136
137-143
144-150
151-157
158-164
165-171
172-178
179-185

Class Boundaries
120.5-128.5
128.5-136.5
136.5-143.5
143.5-150.5
150.5-157.5
157.5-164.5
164.5-171.5
171.5-178.5
178.5-185.5

f
1
0
0
6
14
39
32
4
4
n=100

Class Mark
124.5
132.5
140
147
154
161
168
175
182

rf(%)
1
0
0
6
14
39
32
4
4

Table 6. Frequency Distribution Table for Weight

Human weight
Class Interval
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75-79
80-84

Class Boundaries
39.5-44.5
44.5-49.5
49.5-54.5
54.5-59.5
59.5-64.5
64.5-69.5
69.5-74.5
74.5-79.5
79.5-84.5

f
10
27
25
10
12
10
3
2
1
n=100

Class Mark
42
47
52
57
62
67
72
77
82

rf(%)
10
27
25
10
12
10
3
2
1

Table 7. Frequency Distribution Table for Age

Class Interval
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

Class Boundaries
14.5-15.5
15.5-16.5
16.5-17.5
17.5-18.5
18.5-19.5
19.5-20.5
20.5-21.5

Human age
f
1
7
17
31
28
11
5
n=100

Class Mark
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

rf(%)
1
7
17
31
28
11
5

Table 8. Frequency Distribution Table for (X) Length

Leaf length
Class Interval

Class Boundaries

Class Mark

rf%

47-49
50-52
53-55
56-58
59-61
62-64
65-67

46.5-49.5
49.5-52.5
52.5-55.5
55.5-58.5
58.5-61.5
61.5-64.5
64.5-67.5

11
19
30
19
15
4
0

48
51
54
57
60
63
66

11
19
30
19
15
4
0

68-70

67.5-70.5

2
n=100

69

Furthermore, the y-values or the width was also represented with a frequency distribution
table. In Table 3, Frequency distribution of Ficus nana shows that there are more leaves that have 53-55
cm length (30%) and 35-36 cm width (32%) while in College of Science, there are more students under
18 years old (31%), weights 45-49 kg (27%) and has a height of 158-164 cm (39%). The tables were
made by first assigning a desired number of class.
We have also determined the relationship between length (x) and width (y) which possesses the
values for x and y acquired through direct measurement using a ruler. Regression, on the other hand, is
used to describe the linear association between quantitative variables. It is used to assess the
contribution of one or more explanatory variables (called independent variables) to one response
(or dependent) variable. Regression takes a group of random variables, thought to be predicting the
value of one variable based on the values of others, and tries to find a mathematical relationship
between them. This relationship is typically in the form of a straight line (linear regression) that best
approximates all the individual data points. Regression is often used to determine how many specific
factors influence the other. When there is only one independent variable and when the relationship can
be expressed as a straight line, the procedure is called simple linear regression (Yan et al.,
2009).Regression analysis was used in the activity so that we could predict the value of the length based
on the value of the width. In this case, the width is the independent variable or the predictor variable,
and the length is the dependent variable or sometimes known as the outcome variable. It attempts to
determine the strength of the relationship between one dependent variable (usually denoted by Y) and
a
series
of
other
changing
variables
(known
as
independent
variables).

Table 9. Frequency Distribution Table for (Y) Width

Leaf width
Class Interval

Class Boundaries

Class Mark

rf%

31-32
33-34
35-36
37-38
39-40
41-42
43-44
45-46

30.5-32.5
32.5-34.5
34.5-36.5
36.5-38.5
38.5-40.5
40.5-42.5
42.5-44.5
44.5-46.5

7
13
32
23
18
3
2
2
n=100

31.5
33.5
35.5
37.5
39.5
41.5
43.5
45.5

7
13
32
23
18
3
2
2

Regression Equation (y) = a + bx

Slope (b) = (Nxy - (x)(y)) / (Nx2 - (x)2)
Intercept (a) = (y - b(x)) / N
Where:
x and y are the variables.
b = the slope of the regression line
a = the intercept point of the regression line and the y axis.
N = number of values or elements
x = first score
y = second score
xy = sum of the product of first and second scores
x = sum of first scores
y = sum of second scores
x2 = sum of the square of first scores
The values are shown in the appendix A

Likewise we have also computed the slope, y-intercept and the regression line for us to show,
understand and graph the relationship of the data that we have gathered. The LWR or Length-Width
ratio was also done; a diagram that shows the relationship of Leaf Length, Width and LWR was made.
The
resulting
regression
is
Y=0.412888494x+14.06673946
Table 10. Leaf Length-Width Ratio

#
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33

Length x
56
47
50
50
49
50
51
61
54
55
54
70
56
55
47
58
64
55
49
57
53
68
58
52
55
52
63
51
57
53
48
53
55

Width y
39
36
31
31
34
36
35
36
35
34
38
45
39
36
35
43
41
37
37
39
35
46
38
34
35
36
41
36
32
34
33
35
37

xy ratio
1.435897
1.305556
1.612903
1.612903
1.441176
1.388889
1.457143
1.694444
1.542857
1.617647
1.421053
1.794872
1.435897
1.527778
1.342857
1.348837
1.560976
1.486486
1.324324
1.461538
1.514286
1.478261
1.526316
1.529412
1.571429
1.444444
1.536585
1.416667
1.78125
1.558824
1.454545
1.514286
1.486486

34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73

56
52
55
53
49
47
53
53
60
61
54
58
56
59
59
59
50
60
55
61
48
52
51
60
55
58
58
61
50
55
56
55
59
51
59
64
60
52
55
56

39
35
34
32
35
33
32
32
40
39
36
36
35
38
38
41
38
39
39
38
36
38
38
40
39
37
40
39
38
37
36
38
40
37
38
43
39
37
36
36

1.435897
1.485714
1.617647
1.65625
1.4
1.424242
1.65625
1.65625
1.5
1.564103
1.5
1.611111
1.6
1.552632
1.552632
1.439024
1.315789
1.538462
1.410256
1.605263
1.333333
1.368421
1.342105
1.5
1.410256
1.567568
1.45
1.564103
1.315789
1.486486
1.555556
1.447368
1.475
1.378378
1.552632
1.488372
1.538462
1.405405
1.527778
1.555556

74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100

52
49
53
57
52
49
53
50
51
55
53
55
62
55
55
54
53
56
56
49
54
51
57
56
60
54
60

36
33
34
40
36
35
32
34
33
36
37
35
36
37
37
39
36
36
38
34
39
36
36
39
36
38
34

1.444444
1.484848
1.558824
1.425
1.444444
1.4
1.65625
1.470588
1.545455
1.527778
1.432432
1.571429
1.722222
1.486486
1.486486
1.384615
1.472222
1.555556
1.473684
1.441176
1.459459
1.416667
1.583333
1.435897
1.666667
1.421053
1.764706

A scatter diagram is a tool for analyzing relationships between two variables. One variable is
plotted on the horizontal axis and the other is plotted on the vertical axis. The pattern of their
intersecting points can graphically show relationship patterns. Most often a scatter diagram is used to
prove or disprove cause-and-effect relationships. While the diagram shows relationships, it does not by
itself prove that one variable causes the other. In addition to showing possible cause and-effect
relationships, a scatter diagram can show that two variables are from a common cause that is unknown
or that one variable can be used as a surrogate for the other.

Line regression

Figure.1 Scatter plot diagram of L and W

Scatter diagrams will generally show one of six possible correlations between the variables: Strong Positive

Correlation The value of Y clearly increases as the value of X increases. Strong Negative Correlation The
value of Y clearly decreases as the value of X increases. Weak Positive Correlation The value of Y
increases slightly as the value of X increases. Weak Negative Correlation The value of Y decreases slightly
as the value of X increases. Complex Correlation The value of Y seems to be related to the value of X, but
the relationship is not easily determined. No Correlation There is no demonstrated connection between
the two variables. (Concordia, 2014)
In this case, the scatter diagram show can be considered as weak positive correlation because the value
of (y) width increases slightly as the value of (x) length increases.
The Relationship of L,W and L,W,R

70
60
50

Series1

40

Series2

30

Series3

20
10
0
1

9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37

Figure.2 Length, Width and LWR relationship

Table 11. The relationship of LWR to Length and Width of the Leaves of Ficus nana using Pearson Correlation
Correlations
Width
LWR

**

Pearson Correlation

-.339

Sig. (2-tailed)

.001

100

LWR

Length

.472

**

.000
100

100

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The relationship of the length of leaves (Ficus nana) to its LWR with a coefficient of 0.472 and a
significance value of 0 and the relationship of width to LWR having a coefficient of -0.339 having
significance value of 0.001. Both the length and the width of the leaves are insignificant having
correlation is significant at the 0.01 level as shown in table 5.

Figure 3. Graph showing the relationship of LWR to Length and Width of the Leaves of Ficus nana.

Figure 3 , shows the relationship of LWR to width and length: having length and width as the
independent variable and LWR ratio as the dependent variable. The affinity of LWR to length is directly
proportional while the connection between width and LWR is reversely proportional.
Table 12. The 12 Factors affection Regression

1. n

12 Factor
100

2. x
3. y

5495
3674

4. x2
5. y2

303921
135742

6. xy
7. (x)2

202700
30195025

8.
9.
10.
11.
12.

(y)2
(x) (y)
Ctx
Cty
Ctxy

13498276
20188630
3039.21
134982.76
201886.3

Conclusion
In using statistical tools, the data we have gathered were organized using tables and graphs. Through
this we can easily understand and relate the results to draw logical conclusions. Statistical analysis
makes
research
papers
more
reliable
reference
for
a
study.

Appendix A
x
56
47
50
50
49
50
51
61
54
55
54

y
39
36
31
31
34
36
35
36
35
34
38

Xy

x2
2184
1692
1550
1550
1666
1800
1785
2196
1890
1870
2052

3136
1521
2500
2500
2401
2500
2601
3721
2916
3025
2916

70
56
55
47
58
64
55
49
57
53
68
58
52
55
52
63
51
57
53
48
53
55
56
52
55
53
49
47
53
60
61
54
58
56
59
59
59
50
60
55

45
39
36
35
43
41
37
37
39
35
46
38
34
35
36
41
36
32
34
33
35
37
39
35
34
32
35
33
32
40
39
36
36
35
38
38
41
38
39
39

3150
2184
1980
1645
2497
2694
5335
1813
2223
1855
3128
2204
1768
1925
1872
2583
1836
1824
1802
1584
1855
2035
2184
1820
1870
1696
1715
1551
1696
2400
2379
1944
2088
1960
2242
2242
2419
1900
2340
2145

4900
3136
3025
2209
3364
4096
3025
2401
3249
2809
4624
3364
2704
3025
2704
3969
2601
3249
2809
2304
2809
3025
3139
2704
3025
2809
2401
2209
2809
3600
3721
2916
3364
3136
3481
3481
3481
2500
3600
3025

61
48
52
51
60
55
58
58
61
50
55
56
55
59
51
59
64
60
52
55
56
52
49
53
57
52
49
53
50
51
55
53
55
62
55
55
54
53
56
56

38
36
38
38
40
39
37
40
39
38
37
36
38
40
37
38
43
39
37
36
36
36
33
34
40
36
35
32
34
33
36
37
35
36
37
37
39
36
36
38

2318
1728
1976
1938
2400
2145
2146
2320
2379
1900
2035
2016
2090
2360
1887
2242
2752
2340
1924
1980
2016
1872
1617
1802
2280
1872
1715
1696
1700
1683
1980
1961
1925
2232
2035
2035
2106
1908
2016
2128

3721
2304
2704
2601
3600
3025
3364
3364
3721
2500
2025
3136
3025
3481
2601
3481
4096
3600
2704
3025
3136
2704
2401
2809
3249
2704
2401
2809
2500
2601
3025
2809
3025
3844
3025
3025
2916
2809
3136
3136

49
54
51
57
56
60
54
60
56
x=5495

34
39
36
36
39
36
38
34
34
y=3674

1666
2106
1836
2052
2184
2160
2052
2040
1904
xy= 202700

2401
2916
2601
3249
3136
3600
2916
3600
3136
x2= 303921

REFERENCES
Dale, M. R. T. et al. 2002. Conceptual and mathematical relationships among methods for spatial
analysis. Ecography 25: 558577
EdScope, L.C.C. November 2005. Learning from leaves: A look at leaf. Botanical Garden Programs:
Reading Plants. pp. 3 - 4. Gilman,
Patil, G. P. 1991. Encountered data, statistical ecology, environmental statistics, and weighted
distribution methods. Environmetrics 2:377-423
Viljoen, C.S., and L Van der Merwe. 2000. Applied Elementary Statistics. Pearson Education South Africa.
The HigherEducation Division of Maskew Miller Longman. Vol.2. p25.
Yan, X., X. Gang Su.2009. Linear regression Analysis. World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte.Ltd. Singapore.
pp.9-10
Brown, V. K., Lawton, J. H., and Grubb, P. J.: Herbivory and the evolution of leaf size and shape, Philos. T.
Roy. Soc. B, 333, 265272, 1991.
Caine, S. and Zane, T.L. UADA Fact Sheet ST-251, Ficus sp.
Jensen , R.J 2003 The conundrom of morphometics. Taxon 52: 663-671.
Malhado, A. C. M., Malhi, Y., Whittaker, R. J., Ladle, R. J., ter Steege, H., Phillips, O. L., Butt, N., Aragao, L.
E. O. C., Quesada, C. A., Araujo-Murakami, A., Arroyo, L., Peacock, J.,Lopez-Gonzalez, G., Baker, T. R.,
Anderson, L. O., Almeida,S., Higuchi, N., Killeen, T. J., Monteagudo, A., Neill, D., Pitman, N., Prieto, A.,
Salomao, R. P., V asquez-Mart nez, R., and Laurance, W. F.: Spatial trends in leaf size of Amazonian
rainforest trees, Biogeosciences, 6, 15631576, 2009, http://www.biogeosciences.net/6/1563/2009/

Pandey S., Nagar P.K , 2002 . Leaf surface wetness and morphological characteristics of Valeriana
jatamansi grown under open and shade habitats. Biol Plant.45: 291-294
Dupouey L.L. , Daval L., Prat D., 1991. Foursier analysis of leaf shape. L arbre. Biologie at
developpement- C. Edelin ed.- Naturalia Monspeliensia n h s. 598-599.
Roche P., Daz-Burlinso N., Gachet S., 20 4. Congruency analysis of species ranking based on leaf traits:
are the more reliable? Plant Ecol, 174.37-48