Table 2:

Comparative trajectory analyses for the full dataset of the ORMV experiment (3–12 DPI), the reduced dataset (4–10 DPI), and the comparisons with TuMV experiments (4–10 DPI)

ORMV3–12 DPI(a)		P value
MDMock,ORMV	0.100	0.003
θMock,ORMV	18,34°	0.001
DShapeMock, ORMV	0.367	0.001
MPLMock	0.696	2.50E-04
MPLORMV	0.596
∑Var Mock	0.035	2.52E-06
∑VarORMV	0.023
D1(Mock)	20.21	2.89E-06
D1(ORMV)	26.93
Hyperellipse(IC95%)Mock	0.022	0.005 *
Hyperellipse(IC95%)ORMV	0.014
D2(Mock)	32.97	0.040 *
D2(ORMV)	41.87
ORMV4–10 DPI (a)
MDMock,ORMV	0.085	0.005
θMock,ORMV	16,46°	0.001
DShapeMock, ORMV	0.343	0.037
MPLMock	0.472	8.03E-04 *
MPLORMV	0.401
∑VarMock	0.022	2.21E-05 *
∑VarORMV	0.015
D1(Mock)	21.77	3.61E-05 *
D1(ORMV)	28.37
Hyperellipse(IC95%)Mock	0.012	0.075*
Hyperellipse(IC95%)ORMV	0.009
D2(Mock)	48.94	0.203*
D2(ORMV)	56.41
TuMV4–10 DPI 1st (b)
MDMock,TuMV	0.093	0.015
θMock,TuMV	34,41°	0.001
DShapeMock, TuMV	0.613	0.001
MPLMock	0.504	0.049 *
MPLTuMV	0.461
∑VarMock	0.030	0.007 *
∑VarTuMV	0.023
D1(Mock)	16.94	0.017 *
D1(TuMV)	21.83
Hyperellipse(IC95%)Mock	0.019	0.156*
Hyperellipse(IC95%)TuMV	0.017
D2(Mock)	32.51	0.277*
D2(TuMV)	46.05
TuMV4–10 DPI 2nd (c)
MDMock,TuMV	0.082	0.202
θMock,TuMV	35,05°	0.001
DShapeMock, TuMV	0.642	0.002

^*= First three PCs considered (>95% total variance).

Units: MD = D_Shape = MPL = D1 = D2 = Euclidean distance. θ = degrees. ∑Var = Hyperellipse_{(CI = 95%)} = dimensionless.

Statistically significant results in bold.

^(a)N = 23 (mock) and 17 (ORMV)

^(b)N = 27 (mock) and 14 (TuMV)

^(c)N = 14 (mock) and 8 (TuMV)