## 4 Discussion and Conclusions  
The results of our study neglected our hypothesis of the smaller radial increment of female individuals compared to the male ones in Lithuanian populations. Although other studies [37] showed that female juniper plants had a smaller radial increment than \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Stand Type**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Sex**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Mean Annual Increment, mm**} \\ \cline{3-4}  & & **Maximal** & **Minimal** \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Pure stand (top of the slope)} & F & 1.66 & 1.26 \\ \cline{2-4}  & M & 1.59 & 1.02 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Pure stand (bottom of the slope)} & F & 1.89 & 1.50 \\ \cline{2-4}  & M & 3.12 & 1.22 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Undergrowth of the Scots pine stand} & F & 0.35 & 0.28 \\ \cline{2-4}  & M & 0.67 & 0.17 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Maximal and minimal mean annual increments of female and male _Juniperus communis_ individuals in pure stands and in the undergrowth of the _Pinus sylvestris_ stand. Figure 7: Average radial increment of female and male individuals on the different heights of the stem. Letters a and b indicate statistically significant differences at the level of 0.05 between male and female measurements completed at 0, 0.5, and 1.3 m.  
male ones, our study revealed that there were statistically significant differences between the radial increments of plants of different sex at 0 m as well as 0.5 m (Figure 7). In some juniper stands, we could notice the tendency, which is opposite to that stated by the above-mentioned authors: the average increment of the female plants was slightly higher than that of the male ones, although the biggest individuals were usually male. Still, the sex of _Juniperus communis_ plants was not the main factor affecting their radial increment. The different radial increment and differences between the increments on the different heights of the stem show that the increment differences were more dependent on other environmental factors. The hypothesis that the growth conditions of _Juniperus communis_ populations have an effect on their sensitivity to the environmental factors was approved. The climatic conditions (temperature and precipitation) affected the individuals indirectly through the lithological composition and humidity of the soil, which resulted in favorable or unfavorable growth conditions. Thus, the growth of the individuals growing in analogical conditions was similar, irrespective of the geographical region of Lithuania. A similar finding was described in the study of juniperys in Polar, Alpine, and Mediterranean regions, where they expressed the growth variability in all three biomes, depending on their growth form: shrub or tree [12]. Moreover, the same authors state a bigger precipitation role for the increment of juniperys than temperature, which also corresponds to our conclusions. However, excess precipitation was also a limiting factor for the juniperys growing on the Tibetan plateau [38]. Juniperys' sensitivity to soil humidity and droughts was described in another study from the Mediterranean region [39], which describes the dieback after the period of hot and dry weather, which affected the growth conditions. Moreover, the study on juniperys growing in the Arctics [40] also revealed the correlation between their sensitivity to precipitation, especially in summer. Similar to our study, juniperys in the Arctics also reacted positively to the summer temperatures, which could be a sign that moderate conditions are the best for juniperys' maximal radial increment. The eccentricity of the juniper stems can be explained by the fact that they were often bended to the northern, north-west, and western sides. Usually, coniferous plants form wider annual rings on that side, where they are bended most often, which helps them to keep vertical [41; 42]. Bigger annual rings can form in inclined trees as well.