Table 1.
Genotype | N | TGW | Area | Width | Length |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
AABBDD | 12 | 28.79 ± 0.12 | 12.88 ± 0.04 | 3.15 ± 0.005 | 5.54 ± 0.011 |
aaBBDD | 4 | 30.2 ± 0.22 | 13.36 ± 0.1 | 3.22 ± 0.018 | 5.63 ± 0.019 |
4.89%* | 3.69%* | 2.22%* | 1.71% | ||
AAbbDD | 6 | 30.47 ± 0.34 | 13.49 ± 0.11 | 3.23 ± 0.01 | 5.67 ± 0.035 |
5.83%* | 4.73%* | 2.50%* | 2.34% | ||
AABBdd | 6 | 30.72 ± 0.56 | 13.64 ± 0.16 | 3.24 ± 0.024 | 5.71 ± 0.033 |
6.71% | 5.90%* | 2.91%* | 3.00%* | ||
aaBBdd | 3 | 31.18 ± 0.92 | 13.33 ± 0.15 | 3.3 ± 0.046 | 5.48 ± 0.051 |
8.29%* | 3.51% | 4.75%** | − 1.07% | ||
AAbbdd | 4 | 34.41 ± 0.36 | 14.39 ± 0.09 | 3.37 ± 0.014 | 5.78 ± 0.013 |
19.51%**** | 11.68%**** | 7.02%**** | 4.34%** | ||
aabbdd | 5 | 34.14 ± 0.25 | 14.51 ± 0.04 | 3.39 ± 0.005 | 5.84 ± 0.013 |
18.56%**** | 12.63%**** | 7.57%**** | 5.52%*** | ||
ANOVA (P value) | 0.000104 | 6.282e−05 | 9.372e−05 | 0.00347 |
All data are shown as mean ± standard error. The phenotype data of each genotype were compared to that of genotype AABBDD using the two-tailed Student’s t test; *significant at 0.01 < P < 0.05, **significant at 0.001 < P < 0.01, ***significant at 0.0001 < P < 0.001, ****significant at P < 0.0001. Since there were no phenotypic differences between regenerated plants with genotype AABBDD and wheat cultivar Bobwhite, the data from these plants were combined for analysis