Table 1

Table 1 : Description of sampled plots (trees and regeneration).
site	N/ha	G/ha	V/ha	spruce %	douglas %	other %	saplings/m²	H spruce	H douglas	H fir	H larch	H hemlock	H other
6	565.00	39.11	449.68	0.00	99.84	0.16	0.02		10.47
5	177.00	42.45	583.08	0.00	100.00	0.00	35.83	17.70	55.52	8.67	21.04	46.20	28.80
8	165.29	39.82	548.76	0.00	99.94	0.06	7.10	99.29	174.44		24.04		44.78
1	573.43	33.29	370.70	62.27	29.94	7.79	1.47	3.82	5.30		6.79	11.94	6.32
7	225.87	29.30	365.09	33.97	21.54	44.49	5.31	45.58	98.87	84.75		94.75	7.83
9	194.54	42.85	578.94	57.23	23.51	19.26	1.37	93.24	82.54		70.06	57.00	133.68
3	849.00	27.47	267.15	99.84	0.00	0.16	0.07						6.90
2	272.73	36.28	460.18	100.00	0.00	0.00	43.48	37.42		47.81			47.75
4	346.00	33.95	440.68	89.39	0.00	10.61	2.25	104.80					22.68

Table 2

Table 2 : Description of sampled saplings
sp	n_plot	n_ind	n_obs	mean shoot	min shoot	max shoot	mean H	min H	max H	mean PACL	min PACL	max PACL
Norway spruce	7	227	625	9.1	0.1	54.0	64.6	0.0	395.0	14.2	1.1	43.9
Douglas fir	6	128	323	11.0	0.3	55.1	90.5	0.0	443.9	12.1	2.8	28.4
Larch	3	56	138	17.3	1.9	82.6	77.2	2.5	199.9	17.2	6.8	28.4
Silver fir	4	52	105	7.5	0.4	36.0	52.5	0.0	407.0	12.3	1.7	21.5
Hemlock	4	48	67	28.8	7.0	47.8	45.5	3.0	106.5	10.5	4.0	19.9
Rowan	6	18	19	7.2	1.3	18.0	29.0	0.0	202.5	11.5	3.2	19.3
Oak	5	15	16	6.4	0.5	18.0	16.3	0.0	58.5	9.7	3.1	21.0
Birch	5	13	13	19.5	5.5	44.0	32.3	0.0	100.2	11.4	3.1	17.7
Beech	4	7	11	10.8	1.4	30.0	55.0	0.0	149.6	8.7	2.5	19.8
Sycamore maple	1	3	6	6.5	2.0	11.0	3.8	0.0	11.0	3.1	3.1	3.1

Table 4

Mean, min and max of browsing percentage and defoliation percentage
sp	mean_browsing	min	max	mean_defoliation	min	max
Beech	28.6	0.0	100.0
Birch	35.0	0.0	100.0
Douglas fir	3.1	0.0	33.3	47.5	18.3	95.0
Hemlock	8.8	0.0	100.0
Larch	5.7	0.0	50.0
Norway spruce	1.4	0.0	33.3	15.4	5.0	58.3
Oak	18.5	0.0	100.0
Rowan	30.0	0.0	100.0
Silver fir	27.6	0.0	100.0	15.3	5.0	31.7
Sycamore maple	33.3	33.3	33.3

Text figure : Number of observations and statistics of shoot measures and PACL.
site	n_ind	n_obs	mean shoot	min shoot	max shoot	mean H	min H	max H	mean PACL	min PACL	max PACL
1	54	87	5.6	0.7	44.0	5.5	0.0	23.0	7.1	2.8	13.9
2	56	136	9.6	1.5	37.0	39.9	9.5	101.3	15.1	9.6	43.9
3	3	3	2.9	1.3	4.5	6.9	6.7	7.0	9.8	8.3	10.5
4	43	116	13.0	0.5	54.0	100.6	5.8	395.0	17.7	1.1	29.6
5	127	286	13.5	0.5	47.8	40.5	1.0	159.4	11.1	5.6	20.4
6	1	2	3.0	2.6	3.5	7.7	5.9	9.4	5.8	5.8	5.8
7	103	275	13.7	0.1	82.6	71.3	0.0	301.0	17.4	6.8	28.4
8	96	221	9.7	0.3	55.1	113.0	0.0	443.9	11.2	3.1	21.5
9	84	197	9.7	0.4	41.0	85.7	1.1	407.0	13.2	1.7	21.5

Text figure : Description of the saplings used to analyse ADR.
species_name_en	n_plot	n_indiv	n_obs	mean_adr	min_adr	max_adr	mean_h	min_h	max_h	mean_pacl	min_pacl	max_pacl
Norway spruce	7	226	582	0.86	0.02	3.2	57.0	3.5	252.0	14.1	1.1	43.9
Douglas fir	5	109	246	1.20	0.06	3.2	94.1	6.5	331.7	12.8	3.1	28.4
Larch	2	46	112	1.09	0.11	2.3	84.9	5.9	199.9	17.3	6.8	28.4
Silver fir	4	41	86	0.69	0.17	1.4	49.0	4.9	199.0	12.1	2.5	21.5

Table 3 : Model parameters
sp	a	a_error	a_p	A	A_error	A_p	b	b_error	b_p	c	c_error	c_p	cov_aA	cov_ab	cov_ac	cov_Ab	cov_Ac	cov_bc	alpha_plot	alpha_year	phi	epsilon	rmse
Norway spruce	0.207	0.039	***	-0.0505636	0.0137133	***	0.708	0.029	***	0.421	0.055	***	-0.482	-0.389	-0.610	0.236	0.447	-0.209	5.58e-02	2.81e-02	0.441	0.821	5.084
Douglas-fir	2.419	0.501	***	-0.8540482	0.3764416	***	0.357	0.033	***	0.027	0.088	n.s.	-0.594	-0.231	-0.782	-0.047	0.560	-0.407	2.37e-05	3.84e-09	0.279	2.066	6.979
Larch	0.410	0.219	n.s.			n.s.	0.412	0.062	***	0.711	0.180	***		-0.261	-0.881			-0.217	1.39e-07	2.22e-07	0.433	1.704	11.160
Silver fir	0.249	0.089	**	-0.0584714	0.0378762	**	0.541	0.047	***	0.600	0.141	***	-0.687	-0.125	-0.838	0.263	0.538	-0.350	4.11e-02	1.03e-02	0.212	1.413	3.160
Western hemlock	3.502	1.254	**			**	0.404	0.074	***	0.257	0.108			-0.653	-0.575			-0.189	4.66e-05	6.07e-01	-0.023	9.181	8.225

Figure 2 : Model predictions

Suppl. fig 2 : Model residuals

Relationship between defoliation and PACL

Suppl. Figure 3 : Relationship between defoliation and the social position

Figure 3 : Apical dominance versus light

same plot but excluding the suppressed saplings (not showed in the manuscript)

Statistics of the observed damages by Contarinia
plot	m	sd	min_pc	max_pc	m_pc	sd_pc
4	1.73	0.69	1.5	28.5	13.40	8.93
5	1.80	1.10	0.5	39.5	14.90	14.56
7	3.21	1.51	3.5	95.0	39.33	27.93
8	2.76	1.08	1.5	60.0	30.47	17.80
9	2.01	0.93	2.0	52.5	18.30	14.62

Figure 4 : Model prediction comparison between this study and a preliminary study

Suppl. Table 1 : Model parameters for model including only the diffuse light. In addition to the table presented in the manuscript, this table contains the values of the matrix variance-covariance.
sp	a	a_error	a_p	A	A_error	A_p	b	b_error	b_p	c	c_error	c_p	cov_aA	cov_ab	cov_ac	cov_Ab	cov_Ac	cov_bc	alpha_plot	alpha_year	phi	epsilon	rmse	deltaAIC
Norway spruce	0.166	0.030	***	-0.0409652	0.0120468	***	0.632	0.029	***	0.575	0.065	***	-0.571	-0.295	-0.777	0.105	0.493	-0.307	2.64e-04	3.37e-02	0.448	0.799	5.150	-10.111652
Douglas-fir	1.328	0.414	**	-0.3744339	0.1780312	**	0.577	0.051	***	-0.101	0.106	n.s.	-0.667	-0.395	-0.654	0.332	0.536	-0.280	4.02e-01	2.48e-05	0.230	2.316	6.254	-35.146475
Larch	0.519	0.282	n.s.			n.s.	0.410	0.061	***	0.607	0.172	***		-0.302	-0.887			-0.163	8.81e-08	8.67e-12	0.452	1.590	11.378	2.837202
Silver fir	0.195	0.077		-0.0393116	0.0289514		0.533	0.049	***	0.703	0.158	***	-0.691	-0.039	-0.851	0.188	0.580	-0.385	4.15e-02	8.98e-03	0.207	1.431	3.107	-2.499572
Western hemlock	2.690	1.085					0.398	0.075	***	0.359	0.140			-0.472	-0.689			-0.272	4.38e-05	4.82e-01	0.005	8.373	8.293	1.451231