Supplementary Table 2. Meta-analysis results of the influence of experimental conditions and types of herbivores on the effect of herbivory on tree and shrub seedling growth, photosynthesis, and reproduction. Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence intervals. Effect sizes in bold are significant (95% confidence intervals do not cross zero). Rosenberg’s failsafe number for random effects model (N1) = 72.6.
Type of damageQB = 0.0002, df = 1, NS
Natural / Artificial
0.9 (0.5)
N = 76 / 0.9 (0.6)
N = 54
Location of experiment
QB = 0.0002, df = 1, NS
Field / Greenhouse/lab
0.9 (0.5)
N = 82 / 0.8 (0.7)
N = 48
Age class transition
QB = 0.005, df = 1, NS
No / Yes
0.8 ( 0.5)
N = 83 / 1.1 (0.7)
N = 47
Latitude
QB = 0.002, df = 1, NS
Temperate / Tropical
1.0 (0.5)
N = 90 / 0.7 (0.7)
N = 40
Herbivore
QB = 9.9, df = 6, NS
Stem borer / Browser / Leaf chewer / Gall-maker / Grazer / Root damage / Sucker
0.9 (1.1)
N = 9 / 1.2 (0.7)
N = 24 / 0.7 (0.4)
N = 76 / -2.0 (3.1)
N = 1 / 1.2 (1.1)
N = 9 / 0.9 (1.6)
N = 4 / 1.3 (1.3)
N = 7
Location of damage
QB = 0.02, df = 2, NS
Leaf / Stem / Root
0.7 (0.5)
N = 81 / 1.3 (0.7)
N = 45 / 0.9 (2.3)
N = 4
Supplementary Table 3. Meta-analysis results of the influence of experimental conditions and types of herbivores on the effect of herbivory on tree and shrub saplings. Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence intervals. Effect sizes in bold are significant (95% confidence intervals do not cross zero). Rosenberg’s failsafe number for random effects model (N1) = 22.0 for all comparisons except herbivore identity; the herbivore identity comparison included two fewer data points, and the failsafe number for it is 19.7.
Type of damageQB = 0.002, df = 1, NS
Natural / Artificial
0.9 (0.5)
N = 40 / 0.7 (0.7)
N = 27
Location of experiment
QB = 0.001, df = 1, NS
Field / Greenhouse/lab
0.8 (0.5)
N = 47 / 0.9 (0.7)
N = 20
Latitude
QB = 0.1, df = 1, NS
Temperate / Tropical
0.7 (0.5)
N = 49 / 1.2 (0.8)
N = 18
Herbivore
QB = 2.1, df = 7, NS
Stem borer / Browser / Leaf chewer / Gall maker / Grazer / Miner / Root damage / Sucker
1.0 (3.4)
N = 1 / 1.1 (0.7)
N = 23 / 0.3 (0.9)
N = 16 / 0.04 (2.4)
N = 2 / 0.9 (1.2)
N = 9 / 0.2 (2.0)
N = 3 / 1.7 (1.5)
N = 6 / 0.03 (1.6)
N = 5
Location of damage
QB = 0.1, df = 2, NS
Leaf / Stem / Root
0.5 (0.6)
N = 33 / 1.0(0.6)
N = 1 / 1.7 (1.4)
N = 6
Supplementary Table 4. Meta-analysis results of the influence of experimental conditions and types of herbivores on the effect of herbivory on tree and shrub adults. Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence intervals. Effect sizes in bold are significant (95% confidence intervals do not cross zero). Rosenberg’s failsafe number for random effects model (N1) = 0.0 because of small sample sizes.
Type of damageQB = 0.5, df = 1, NS
Natural / Artificial
2.1 (5.9)
N = 6 / 2.4 (10.1)
N = 2
Latitude
QB = 23.0, df = 1, P < 0.05
Temperate / Tropical
0.3 (2.2)
N = 5 / 5.6 (3.1)
N = 3
Herbivore
QB = 52.3, df = 1, P < 0.05
Insect / Mammal
4.4 (4.7)
N = 4 / 0.05 (4.6)
N = 4
Location of damage
QB = 75.2, df = 2, P < 0.05
Leaf / Stem / Root
3.2 (11.5)
N = 1 / 1.6 (4.6)
N = 6 / 4.8 (11.7)
N = 1
Supplementary Table 5. Meta-analysis results of the influence of experimental conditions and types of herbivores on the effect of herbivory on herbaceous plant and grass seedlings. Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence intervals. No effect sizes were significant, so failsafe numbers were not calculated.
Type of damageQB = 1.9, df = 1, NS
Natural / Artificial
1.5 (4.6)
N = 39 / 0.7 (5.2)
N = 30
Location of experiment
QB = 1.4, df = 1, NS
Field / Greenhouse/lab
1.6(4.5)
N = 21 / 0.6 (2.9)
N = 48
Latitude
QB = 0.3, df = 1, NS
Temperate / Tropical
1.1 (3.3)
N = 64 / 0.7 (11.8)
N = 5
Herbivore
QB = 81.0, df = 5, P < 0.05
Stem borer / Browser / Leaf chewer / Grazer / Root damage / Sucker
0.6 (17.0)
N = 1 / 2.9 (6.8)
N = 7 / 0.7 (2.7)
N = 40 / 0.6 (5.3)
N = 10 / -0.3 (9.7)
N = 3 / 0.9 (5.9)
N = 8
Location of damage
QB = 32.7, df = 2, P < 0.05
Leaf / Stem / Root
0.7 (3.2)
N = 46 / 1.6 (4.8)
N = 21 / -0.7 (15.1)
N = 2
Supplementary Table 6. Meta-analysis results of the influence of experimental conditions and types of herbivores on the effect of herbivory on herbaceous plant and grass saplings. Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence intervals. Effect sizes in bold are significant (95% confidence intervals do not cross zero). Rosenberg’s failsafe numberfor random effects model (N1) = 26.3 for all comparisons.
Type of damageQB = 0.004, df = 1, NS
Natural / Artificial
0.6 (0.5)
N = 42 / 0.9 (0.6)
N = 21
Location of experiment
QB = 0.005, df = 1, NS
Field / Greenhouse/lab
0.5 (0.6)
N = 25 / 0.9 (0.6)
N = 38
Latitude
QB = 0.0001, df = 1, NS
Temperate / Tropical
0.7 (0.4)
N = 61 / 0.7 (2.0)
N = 2
Herbivore
QB = 2.5, df = 6, NS
Stem borer / Browser / Leaf chewer / Gall maker / Grazer / Root damage / Sucker
1.3 (2.1)
N = 2 / 1.0 (1.0)
N = 9 / 0.7 (0.5)
N = 37 / 0.1 (2.9)
N = 1 / 0.4 (1.3)
N = 5 / -0.02 (1.3)
N = 5 / 1.9 (1.7)
N = 4
Location of damage
QB = 0.08, df = 2, NS
Leaf / Stem / Root
0.9 (0.5)
N = 43 / 0.7 (0.8)
N = 15 / -0.02 (1.3)
N = 5
Supplementary Table 7. Meta-analysis results of the influence of experimental conditions and types of herbivores on the effect of herbivory on herbaceous plant and grass adults. Numbers in parentheses are 95% confidence intervals. Effect sizes in bold are significant (95% confidence intervals do not cross zero). The pooled variance for Rosenberg’s failsafe number for random effects model = 0, but the N1 fixed effects value = 155.6.
Type of damageQB = 0.002, df = 1, NS
Natural / Artificial
0.5 (0.6)
N = 17 / 0.7 (0.5)
N = 17
Location of experiment
QB = 0.003, df = 1, NS
Field / Greenhouse/lab
0.8(0.6)
N = 14 / 0.49 (0.5)
N = 20
Latitude
QB = 0.002, df = 1, NS
Temperate / Tropical
0.6 (0.4)
N = 30 / 0.4 (1.0)
N = 4
Herbivore
QB = 1.0, df = 5, NS
Stem borer / Browser / Leaf chewer / Gall maker / Grazer / Root damage
1.2 (1.3)
N = 3 / 0.5 (0.9)
N = 5 / 0.4 (0.6)
N = 13 / 1.8 (2.0)
N = 1 / 1.0 (0.7)
N = 8 / -0.2 (1.0)
N = 4
Location of damage
QB = 0.1, df = 2, NS
Leaf / Stem / Root
0.4 (0.5)
N = 18 / 1.2 (0.6)
N = 13 / -0.2 (1.1)
N = 3