Table 3.
WUE and effecta | Maize | Pea | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |
Mean WUE (kg ha−1 mm−1) | ||||||
Plastic barrier | 10.9 | 11.7 | 11.7 | 5.5 | 5.7 | 5.8 |
No barrier | 13.9 | 14.2 | 14.1 | 5.4 | 5.7 | 5.8 |
Deficit | 10.9 | 11.6 | 11.2 | 5.4 | 5.5 | 5.8 |
Sub-optimal | 13.4 | 14.1 | 13.8 | 5.6 | 5.9 | 5.9 |
Optimal | 12.8 | 13.1 | 13.7 | 5.3 | 5.7 | 5.7 |
Significance at P < 0.05 | ||||||
Root barrier effect | ||||||
P-value | 0.018 | 0.013 | 0.008 | 0.834 | 0.798 | 0.818 |
LSD (0.05) | 1.4 | 1.3 | 1.1 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.4 |
Water availability effect | ||||||
P-value | 0.021 | 0.011 | 0.016 | 0.704 | 0.601 | 0.792 |
LSD (0.05) | 1.3 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.4 |
R × W | NSb | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS |
Two contrasting root barrier treatments were compared under three water availability levels at Wuwei Experimental Station, 2009–2011.
aNo significant interaction was found between root barrier treatment and water availabilities for the trait at the p = 0.05 level.
bNS refers to no significant differences between treatments at 0.05 levels.