## Results  
### Canopy Architecture and Volatile Compounds  
Table 1 shows the results of the means and SD from the canopy architectures of each of the 24 sampled trees. There were significant differences (\(p<0.05\)) between samples for the six parameters. However, for the clumping index, only one sample (B1C4A) was significantly different. Table 2 shows the means and SD from the results of both blocks, in which significant differences (\(p<0.05\)) can be observed for LAI, LAI\({}_{\text{e}}\), and crown porosity (\(\Phi\)). Block 1 had higher mean values of LAI and, although not significantly different, crown cover results compared to Block 2. On the contrary, Block 1 presented lower and significant values of clumping index than Block 2. Table 3 presents the volatile compounds found in the fermented cocoa beans and the aromas associated with them. It can be observed that most of the associated aromas are related to cocoa, butter, honey, fruity, floral, nutty, and roasted. Figure 5 shows the peak area of each volatile compound found in every sample. It can be seen that most of the samples had phenylethyl alcohol as the most abundant volatile compound, except for the beans of five trees (B1C1A, B1C18A, B1C26B, B2C14A, and B2C16A). Tetramethylpyrazine was present in most of the samples and is higher in those from Block 1 than Block 2. Benzaldehyde and 2,3-butanediol were present in all samples. However, the peak area varied between samples. Pehenthyl acetate and isoamyl acetate were present in all except for two (B1C25A and B2C16A) and one (B1C25A) sample(s), respectively. Other compounds, such as 2-pentanone (fruity) and ethyl acetate (pineapple/fruity/green) were only detected in four (B1C1A, B1C27A, B2C16A, and B2C24A) and six samples (B1C16A, B1C26B, B1C27A, B1C36A, B1C45A, and B2C16A), respectively. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Sample**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**LAI**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**LAI\({}_{\epsilon}\)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Canopy Cover (\(f_{\alpha}\))**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Crown Cover (\(f_{\beta}\))**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Crown Porosity (\(\phi\))**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Clumping Index (\(\Omega\))**} \\ \cline{2-13}  & **Mean** & **SD** & \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**LAI**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**LAI\({}_{\text{e}}\)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Canopy Cover** \\ **(\(\mathbf{f_{\text{c}}}\))** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Crown Cover** \\ **(\(\mathbf{f_{\text{c}}}\))** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\
\begin{tabular}{c} **Crown** \\ **Porosity (\(\mathbf{\Phi}\))** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multicolumn{2}{c}{
\begin{tabular}{c} **Clumping** \\ **Index (\(\mathbf{\Omega}\))** \\ \end{tabular} } \\ \cline{2-13}  & **Mean** & **SD** & **Mean** & **SD** & **Mean** & **SD** & **Mean** & **SD** & **Mean** & **SD** & **Mean** & **SD** \\ \hline B1 & 3.35 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.93 & 3.04 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 1.01 & 0.822 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.11 & 0.919 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.095 & 0.107 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 0.048 & 0.880 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.126 \\ B2 & 2.89 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 0.67 & 2.68 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 0.76 & 0.796 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.12 & 0.923 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.116 & 0.139 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.043 & 0.907 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.116 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Means and standard deviation (SD) of canopy architecture parameters for the two blocks. Different letters represent statistically significant differences between samples using the Tukey studentized test with \(\alpha\) = 0.05.