Skip to main content
. 2018 Nov 30;8:17524. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-34656-5

Table 2.

Chlorophyll quantification in three genotypes of C. quinoa at different N supplies.

Pigments Faro UdeC9 BO78 G N G*N
HN LN HN LN HN LN
Chl a 3.7 ± 0.9 (a) 2.2 ± 0.5 (abc) 3.3 ± 0.9 (ab) 0.5 ± 0.1 (d) 1.7 ± 0.3 (bc) 1.0 ± 0.3 (c) n.s 0.005 n.s
Chl b 0.98 ± 0.25 (a) 0.54 ± 0.14 (abc) 0.75 ± 0.21 (ab) 0.08 ± 0.03 (d) 0.41 ± 0.09 (bc) 0.21 ± 0.08 (c) 0.05 0.005 n.s
Chl a + b 4.7 ± 1.2 (a) 2.7 ± 0.6 (abc) 4.0 ± 1.2 (ab) 0.5 ± 0.2 (d) 2.1 ± 0.4 (bc) 1.2 ± 0.4 (c) 0.05 0.005 n.s
Chl a/b 3.8 ± 0.1 (e) 4.0 ± 0.1 (ed) 4.4 ± 0.1 (c) 5.9 ± 0.1 (a) 4.2 ± 0.1 (cd) 4.9 ± 0.1 (b) 0.05 0.005 n.s

Leaf samples of three individual plants (n = 3) were collected from each genotype at midday. Absolute quantities of chlorophylls (Chl) are expressed in µmol g−1 per FW. Analysis using a two way ANOVA followed by Tukey test was used to compare genotypes (G) and nitrogen treatments (N). Different letters represent significant differences between G (Faro, UdeC9 and BO78) and N (HN (high nitrogen) and LN (low nitrogen)). The three last rows of the table show the significance levels (P) and interactions of the factors (G, N and G*N) for the parameters. n.s. = no significant.