Skip to main content
. 2014 Aug 5;166(2):829–838. doi: 10.1104/pp.114.237503

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Testing the accuracy of LEAFGUI for measurements of VLA for cleared leaves of five species imaged at three magnifications. A, Values estimated by LEAFGUI plotted against values determined by digital tracing show a wide range of scatter around the 1:1 line (errors of up to 38%), with lower magnification images typically below the line and higher magnification images above the line. Values were significantly different at P = 0.01 (repeated-measures ANOVA; see text). The main plot shows mean values ± se across three users of each software; the inset plot shows the LEAFGUI values of Price et al. (2014). B, Values estimated by Price et al. (2014) using LEAFGUI and now corrected for artifacts of the software algorithms (Table II) are very similar to those determined by digital tracing. Values were statistically similar at P = 0.99 (repeated-measures ANOVA); measurements in 5× images remained different, as veins could not be resolved accurately in these images using either method. Species symbols are as follows: circles, B. victoriae; diamonds, Hardenbergia comptoniana; squares, P. alba; triangles, Pittosporum moluccanum; and inverted triangles, Wisteria floribunda. Black symbols, 5× images; gray symbols, 20× images; white symbols, 60× images.