## 2 Results
### Phytotoxicity of EOs in Liquid Phase  
Table 4 shows the germination and growth values of _L. multiformum_ and _S. alba_ whose seeds were treated (direct contact) with four different concentrations of EOs. As in the previous test, both receiver species were significantly affected by the four EOs (_p_-value \(<0.05\)), albeit differently. Again, _L. multiformum_ was more sensitive to the activity of _A. alba_ and _P. abies_, but in this case, _A. alba_ had a stronger effect than _P. abies_. _S. alba_ was mostly affected by _P. abies_ and _P. mugo_, with some exceptions. In general, _A. alba_ EO was more effective than _P. abies_ and _P. cembra_ than _P. mugo_. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Target** & **EO (\(\upmu\)L/mL)** & **G (\%)** & **GI** & **CVG** & **MGT** & **Shoot (mm)** \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{_A. alba_} \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{_L. multiformum_} & 0 & \(87\pm 0.0\) a & \(161\pm 13.7\) a & \(80\pm 5.6\) a & \(5.1\pm 0.1\) a & \(65\pm 3.5\) a \\  & 2 & \(82\pm 6.7\) ab & \(116\pm 27.5\) b & \(62\pm 11.7\) b & \(5.4\pm 0.1\) b & \(69\pm 5.1\) a \\  & 5 & \(75\pm 11.5\) ab & \(98\pm 17.7\) b & \(48\pm 12.3\) b & \(5.5\pm 0.2\) b & \(62\pm 12.6\) a \\  & 10 & \(70\pm 11.6\) b & \(80\pm 12.5\) c & \(47\pm 9.9\) b & \(5.8\pm 0.1\) c & \(58\pm 5.7\) a \\  & 20 & \(30\pm 3.5\) c & \(26\pm 2.9\) d & \(12\pm 1.9\) c & \(5.9\pm 0.1\) d & \(17\pm 2.2\) b \\ \cline{2-6}  & _p_-value & 0.000 * & 0.000 * & 0.000 * & 0.000 * & 0.000 * \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{_S. alba_} & 0 & \(85\pm 6.3\) a & \(214\pm 30.5\) a & \(94\pm 9.6\) a & \(4.7\pm 0.1\) a & \(29\pm 1.5\) a \\  & 2 & \(80\pm 9.4\) a & \(183\pm 11.4\) b & \(82\pm 3.5\) b & \(4.9\pm 0.1\) b & \(18\pm 2.6\) b \\  & 5 & \(80\pm 5.7\) a & \(141\pm 4.9\) c & \(67\pm 3.6\) c & \(5.1\pm 0.1\) c & \(18\pm 0.9\) b \\  & 10 & \(78\pm 3.5\) a & \(120\pm 9.0\) c & \(58\pm 2.5\) c & \(5.2\pm 0.1\) c & \(16\pm 0.9\) b \\  & 20 & \(72\pm 8.3\) a & \(84\pm 7.2\) d & \(50\pm 4.2\) d & \(5.7\pm 0.1\) d & \(15\pm 1.5\) b \\ \cline{2-6}  & _p_-value & 0.152 & 0.000 * & 0.000 * & 0.000 * & 0.000 * \\ \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{_P. abies_} \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{_L. multiformum_} & 0 & \(90\pm 6.5\) a & \(192\pm 22.6\) a & \(92\pm 14.1\) a & \(5.0\pm 0.0\) a & \(64\pm 3.1\) a \\  & 2 & \(78\pm 3.5\) ab & \(149\pm 18.8\) b & \(69\pm 9.6\) b & \(5.0\pm 0.0\) a & \(56\pm 1.4\) b \\ \cline{1-1}  & 5 & \(69\pm 8.3\) b & \(121\pm 11.2\) b & \(54\pm 7.6\) b & \(5.1\pm 0.0\) a & \(48\pm 4.6\) c \\ \cline{1-1}  & 10 & \(47\pm 7.4\) c & \(67\pm 23.1\) c & \(31\pm 10.0\) c & \(5.5\pm 0.2\) b & \(39\pm 3.9\) d \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-6}  & _p_-value & 0.152 & 0.000 * & 0.000 * & 0.000 * & 0.000 * \\ \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{_P. abies_} \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{_L. multiformum_} & 0 & \(90\pm 6.5\) a & \(192\pm 22.6\) a & \(92\pm 14.1\) a & \(5.0\pm 0.0\) a & \(64\pm 3.1\) a \\  & 2 & \(78\pm 3.5\) ab & \(149\pm 18.8\) b & \(69\pm 9.6\) b & \(5.0\pm 0.0\) a & \(56\pm 1.4\) b \\ \cline{1-1}  & 5 & \(69\pm 8.3\) b & \(121\pm 11.2\) b & \(54\pm 7.6\) b & \(5.1\pm 0.0\) a & \(48\pm 4.6\) c \\ \cline{1-1}  & 10 & \(47\pm 7.4\) c & \(67\pm 23.1\) c & \(31\pm 10.0\) c & \(5.5\pm 0.2\) b & \(39\pm 3.9\) d \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-6}  & \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{} \\ \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Germination and growth values of two target species under the phytotoxic effects of different concentrations of EOs (liquid phase) in pre-emergence conditions. In detail, _A. alba_ was able to decrease the germination of _L. multiform_ more than _P. abies_, _P. cembra_ and _P. mugo_ (up to \(-\)66%, \(-\)51%, \(-\)47% and \(-\)42%, respectively) while being active only at 20 and 10 \(\mu\)L/mL, unlike other EOs that were effective even at lower concentrations (2 and/or 5 \(\mu\)L/mL). In contrast, _A. alba_ did not significantly inhibit _S. alba_ germination, unlike _P. abies_, _P. cembra_ and _P.