Table 4.
Correlation analysis among various physio-biochemical and growth parameters.
| Pn | SC | TR | TCC | PRO | MDA | RWC | WP | SL | RL | RB | SB | PW | HI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pn | 1.00 | |||||||||||||
| SC | 0.73* | 1.00 | ||||||||||||
| TR | 0.92** | 0.75* | 1.00 | |||||||||||
| TCC | 0.75* | 0.67* | 0.62* | 1.00 | ||||||||||
| PRO | 0.68* | 0.39 | 0.72* | 0.54 | 1.00 | |||||||||
| MDA | −0.79** | −0.64* | −0.64* | −0.89** | −0.60* | 1.00 | ||||||||
| RWC | 0.90** | 0.72* | 0.85** | 0.65* | 0.71** | −0.91** | 1.00 | |||||||
| WP | 0.86** | 0.61* | 0.78** | 0.52 | 0.83** | −0.83** | 0.88** | 1.00 | ||||||
| SL | 0.67* | 0.51* | 0.55* | 0.38 | 0.19 | −0.46 | 0.40 | 0.35 | 1.00 | |||||
| RL | 0.61* | 0.75* | 0.80* | 0.47 | 0.58* | −0.65* | 0.83** | 0.66* | 0.58* | 1.00 | ||||
| RB | 0.50* | 0.62* | 0.60* | 0.47 | 0.49 | −0.55 | 0.63* | 0.53* | 0.31 | 0.77** | 1.00 | |||
| SB | 0.77** | 0.64* | 0.85** | 0.84** | 0.72* | −0.81** | 0.89** | 0.61* | 0.46 | 0.76** | 0.70* | 1.00 | ||
| PW | 0.75* | 0.82** | 0.79* | 0.86** | 0.68* | −0.71 | 0.77** | 0.40 | 0.34 | 0.84** | 0.83** | 0.59* | 1.00 | |
| HI | 0.65* | 0.56* | 0.66 | 0.71* | 0.20 | −0.66 | 0.57* | 0.56* | 0.33 | 0.80** | 0.76** | 0.40 | 0.94** | 1.00 |
Asterisks represent significant correlation at
*
P ≤ 0.05 and
**
P ≤ 0.01.
For each parameter, average values of four T lines along with WT were used. Where, Pn, photosynthetic rate; SC, Stomatal conductance; TR, transpiration rate; TCC, total chlorophyll content; PRO, proline; MDA, malondialdehyde; RWC, relative water content; WP, water potential; SL, shoot length; RL, root length; SB, shoot biomass; RB, root biomass; PW, pod weight; HI, harvest index.