Analysis | P-label | Character state | Cov (%) | Sz | Ps | Df | Sz/Df |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Geographic origin (Figure 2A) | 1 | Palearctic | 46 | 12, P = 0.004 | 2 | 1 | 12 |
Tot cov = 16% | |||||||
Host genus (Figure 2B) | 2 | Pinus | 100 | 32, P = 0.008 | 3 | 4 | 8 |
Tot cov = 90.4% | 3 | Pseudotsuga | 100 | 5, P < 0.0001 | 2 | 0 | ∞ |
4 | Larix | 100 | 4, P < 0.0001 | 1 | 0 | ∞ | |
5 | Picea | 82 | 15, P < 0.0001 | 2 | 1 | 14 | |
6 | Cupressaceae | 80 | 4, P = 0.004 | 2 | 0 | ∞ | |
7 | Abies | 88 | 7, P < 0.0001 | 1 | 1 | 7 | |
Feeding site (Figure 2C) | 8 | Shoot & branch | 67 | 4, P = 0.005 | 2 | 3 | 1.3 |
Tot cov = 5% | |||||||
Host genus & geographic origin (Figure 3) | 9 | Nearctic & Pinus | 100 | 20, P < 0.0001 | 3 | 11 | 11 |
Tot cov = 82.2% | 10 | Pseudotsuga/ Abies | 100 | 5, P < 0.0001 | 2 | 0 | ∞ |
11 | Larix | 100 | 4, P < 0.0001 | 1 | 0 | ∞ | |
12 | Palearctic & Pinus | 42 | 5, P = 0.054 | 1 | 0 | ∞ | |
13 | Palearctic & Picea | 100 | 7, P < 0.0001 | 2 | 0 | ∞ | |
14 | Nearctic & Picea | 70 | 7, P < 0.0001 | 1 | 0 | ∞ | |
15 | Palearctic & Pinus | 50 | 6, P = 0.001 | 1 | 0 | ∞ | |
16 | Abies | 88 | 7, P < 0.0001 | 1 | 1 | 7 | |
17 | Cupressaceae | 80 | 4, P = 0.002 | 2 | 0 | ∞ | |
Ecological niche (Figure 4) | 18 | Shoots and branches of Pseudotsuga spp. and/or Abies spp. | 100 | 5, P < 0.0001 | 2 | 0 | ∞ |
Tot cov = 56.2% | 19 | Shoots of Pinus spp. subsect. Pinus | 100 | 4, P < 0.0001 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
20 | Shoots of Picea spp. | 60 | 3, P = 0.002 | 1 | 0 | ∞ | |
21 | Branches of Picea spp. | 70 | 7, P < 0.0001 | 1 | 5 | 1.4 | |
22 | Branches of Pinus contorta | 100 | 3, P = 0.002 | 1 | 2 | 1.5 | |
23 | Shoots of Pinus edulis and/or monophylla | 100 | 3, P = 0.003 | 1 | 0 | ∞ | |
24 | Branches of Pinus sylvestris and/or P. nigra | 100 | 3, P = 0.003 | 1 | 1 | 3 | |
25 | Shoots of Pinus spp. subsection Pinaster | 100 | 3, P < 0.0001 | 1 | 0 | ∞ | |
26 | Shoots of Juniperus spp. | 100 | 4, P < 0.0001 | 2 | 0 | ∞ | |
 | 27 | Branches of Abies spp. | 86 | 6, P < 0.0001 | 2 | 1 | 2 |