Skip to main content
. 2015 Nov 23;10(11):e0143290. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0143290

Fig 5. Effects of flowering and maturity induction practice and harvesting practice on the number of harvestings of the fruits in cvs Sugarloaf (Experiments 1 and 2) and Smooth Cayenne (Experiments 3 and 4).

Fig 5

AMI: Artificially maturity-induced fruits; NMI: Naturally maturity-induced fruits; FH: Farmers’ harvesting practice; OH: Optimum harvest. Similar small letters at the top of each bar indicate that differences between means of the flowering induction treatments are not significant based on the ANOVA results (consider P-values in bold in Table 2). Similar capital letters at the top of each bar indicate that differences between means of the maturity induction treatments are not significant based on the ANOVA results (consider P-values in bold in Table 2). Similar small letters in italic at the top of each bar indicate that differences between means of the harvesting practice treatments are not significant based on the ANOVA results (consider P-values in bold in Table 2). In case of interactions all means are compared at LSD0.05.