Skip to main content
. 2018 Nov 22;18:74. doi: 10.1186/s12896-018-0484-4

Table 5.

ANOVA and t-Test table for comparison of nutrient removal by the hydroponic treatment units planted with T. latifolia and the control unit in terms of statistical significance

ANOVA
TKN
 Source of Variation SS df MS F Interference P-value
 Between (Inlet and control) and (Inlet and HUs) 1892.84 2 946.4 25.34 Sa P < 0.001
 Between (HU1 andHU2), (HU1 and HU3) and (HU2 and HU3) 16.6 2 8.3 0.36 P > 0.70
NH4 + -N
 Source of Variation SS df MS F Interference P-value
 Between (Inlet and control) and (Inlet and HUs) 578.99 2 289.5 31.61 S P < 0.001
 Between (HU1 andHU2), (HU1 and HU3) and (HU2 and HU3) 17.08 2 8.54 3.59 P > 0.05
NO3--N
 Source of Variation SS df MS F Interference P-value
 Between (Inlet and control) and (Inlet and HUs) 153.36 2 76.68 11.65 S P < 0.001
 Between (HU1 andHU2), (HU1 and HU3) and (HU2 and HU3) 6.06 2 3.03 0.61 P > 0.05
PO4–3-P
 Source of Variation SS df MS F Interference P-value
 Between (Inlet and control) and (Inlet and HUs) 261.05 2 130.5 9.97 S P < 0.001
 Between (HU1 andHU2), (HU1 and HU3) and (HU2 and HU3) 4.51 2 2.26 0.29 P > 0.05
t-Test
 nutrients treated TKN NH4+ − N NO3- - N PO4–3- P
 Treatment units CTRL
HUS
CTRL
HUS
CTRL
HUS
CTRL HUS
 Mean 19.77
10.13
18
11.14
9.64
6.39
9.86 6.25
 Variance 24.56
15.91
8.33
0.47
6.37
3.63
6.62 7.52
P value P < 0.01 P < 0.05 P < 0.05 P < 0.05
 Interference S S

Sa - significance