Table 1.

Regeneration rate and transient GUS staining of explants infected by Agrobacterium

Genotype	Shoot regeneration		GUS staining
	n 1	Regeneration rate* (%)	n 2	Strong		Weak		None
				n 3	Ratio (%)	n 3	Ratio (%)	n 3	Ratio (%)
Heihe 06	539	13.4±3.4jk	40	1	2.5	17	42.5	22	55.0
Heihe 19	528	13.6±1.9jk	50	1	2.0	20	40.0	29	58.0
Heihe 25	613	23.8±4.3hi	55	0	0.0	19	34.5	36	65.5
Heihe 38	608	27.3±2.1gh	52	4	7.7	18	34.6	30	57.7
Heihe 43	553	25.7±3.8gh	40	4	10.0	25	62.5	11	27.5
Heihe 48	452	39.8±6.5f	59	0	0.0	24	40.7	35	59.3
Hefeng 25	289	21.1±7.1hi	37	9	24.3	16	43.2	12	32.4
Hefeng 35	370	13.5±2.6jk	40	11	27.5	13	32.5	16	40.0
Heinong 35	604	17.1±3.6ij	40	6	15.0	17	42.5	17	42.5
Heinong 37	12 102	52.2±1.1de	44	9	20.5	16	36.4	19	43.2
Heinong 44	884	31.8±7.2g	40	4	10.0	15	37.5	21	52.5
Heinong 48	374	10.2±3.6k	40	4	10.0	21	52.5	15	37.5
Heinong 51	557	8.4±3.2k	40	7	17.5	20	50.0	13	32.5
Heinong 58	2 027	58.7±1.9d	41	4	9.8	19	46.3	18	43.9
Ha 03-3	190	9.0±2.7k	40	0	0.0	6	15.0	34	85.0
Zhonghuang 30	400	20.8±5.1hi	39	0	0.0	22	56.4	17	43.6
Zhonghuang 39	340	24.1±4.4h	40	4	10.0	15	37.5	21	52.5
Tianlong 1	437	80.7±4.3ab	42	26	61.9	11	26.2	5	11.9
Yuechun 04-5	898	75.4±3.2b	40	16	40.0	18	45.0	6	15.0
Yuechun 03-3	355	51.5±4.7e	40	18	45.0	16	40.0	6	15.0
Jack	337	82.8±3.3a	41	24	58.5	15	36.6	2	4.9
Williams 82	356	67.7±4.7c	41	23	56.1	18	43.9	0	0.0
Average		34.9			19.5		40.7		39.8

^*Regeneration rate was expressed as mean±standard deviation; means were compared using Fisher’s least significant difference test, and different small letters showed significant difference (P<0.05)

n ₁: number of explants infected; n ₂: total number of explants for GUS staining; n ₃: number of explants