## 3 Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **Peroxides (meq.** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Acidity**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**K232**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**K270**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**\(\Delta\)K**} \\  & **O\({}_{2}\)/kg oil)** & **(g Oleic Acid/100 g oil)** & **K232** & **K270** & \(\Delta\)K \\ \hline Treatment & & & & & & \\ C (Control) & 14.5 a & 0.40 a & 1.10 b & 0.11 b & 0.00 \\ A (_Ailanthus_) & 15.7 a & 0.39 a & 1.60 a & 0.17 a & 0.00 \\ Irrigation regime & & & & & \\ F (Full) & 16.7 a & 0.47 a & 1.39 a & 0.14 a & 0.00 \\ D (Deficit) & 13.5 a & 0.32 b & 1.31 a & 0.25 a & 0.00 \\ Treatment \(\times\) Irrigation regime & & & & & \\ C \(\times\) F & 12.7 a & 0.48 a & 1.05 b & 0.10 c & 0.00 \\ C \(\times\) D & 11.9 a & 0.32 b & 1.16 b & 0.13 bc & 0.00 \\ A \(\times\) F & 16.2 a & 0.45 ab & 1.73 a & 0.18 a & 0.01 \\ A \(\times\) D & 15.1 a & 0.33 b & 1.47 a & 0.16 ab & 0.00 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* Means within the same column followed by the same letter are not significantly different according to Student’s _t_-test (for _Ailanthus_ treatment and irrigation regime) and [PERSON]’s multiple range test (interaction) at a significance level of \(\alpha=0.05\).  
\end{table} 
Table 4: Effects of treatments on quality characteristics of olive oil over a period of 3 years. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **Total** & **Total o-** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Total**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**FRAP**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**ABTS**} \\  & **Phenols (mg** & **Diphenols** & **Favonoids (mg** & **DPPH (\(\mu\)mol** & **(\(\mu\)mol** & **(\(\mu\)mol** \\  & **Gallic** & **(mg Caffeeic** & **Cate-** & **Trolox/kg oil)** & **Trolox/kg oil)** & **Trolox/kg oil)** \\ \hline Treatment & & & & & & \\ C (Control) & 227.47 a & 34.54 b & 164.60 a & 850.53 a & 1005.45 a & 1041.97 a \\ A (_Ailanthus_) & 209.93 a & 52.04 a & 141.16 a & 696.92 a & 934.60 a & 983.27 a \\ Irrigation regime & & & & & & \\ F (Full) & 187.00 a & 36.43 a & 121.91 b & 598.51 b & 728.85 b & 865.73 b \\ D (Deficit) & 250.40 a & 50.15 a & 183.84 a & 948.95 a & 1211.20 a & 1159.52 a \\ Treatment \(\times\) Irrigation regime & & & & & \\ C \(\times\) F & 157.79 b & 33.91 b & 107.48 b & 522.99 b & 649.17 b & 799.18 b \\ C \(\times\) D & 297.16 a & 35.17 b & 221.71 a & 1178.07 a & 1361.74 a & 1284.76 a \\ A \(\times\) F & 216.22 ab & 38.94 ab & 136.35 ab & 674.02 b & 808.54 b & 932.27 b \\ A \(\times\) D & 203.65 ab & 65.13 a & 145.97 ab & 719.82 ab & 1060.66 ab & 1034.28 ab \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* Means within the same column followed by the same letter are not significantly different according to Student’s _t_-test (for _Ailanthus_ treatment and irrigation regime) and [PERSON]’s multiple range test (interaction) at a significance level of \(\alpha=0.05\).  
\end{table} 
Table 5: Effects on total phenolics, total o-diphenylons, and total flavonoids content and on antioxidant capacity of olive oil according to the DPPH, FRAP, and ABTS methods over a period of 3 years. Regarding the free fatty acid content (Table 6), the presence of _Ailanthus_ (irrespective of irrigation regime) resulted in oils rich in C16:1, C18:3, and C24:0. Deficit irrigation (irrespective of _Ailanthus_ presence) increased the percentages of C17:1, C18:3, C20:1, and C22:0 in olive oils produced, while it reduced the percentage of C18:0. Furthermore, oils produced under deficit irrigation in the presence of _Ailanthus_ were found to be rich in C16:1 (compared to control deficit irrigation), C17:1 (compared to control full irrigation), C18:3, and C20:1 (compared to _Ailanthus_ presence under deficit irrigation). Olive oil produced under deficit irrigation in the absence of _Ailanthus_ exhibited a low C18:0 percentage. Overall, deficit irrigation when applied resulted in oils low in SFAs and with a low SFAs:UFAs ratio (Table 6). No other statistically significant differences in fatty acids and squalene concentrations were observed.