. 2019 Aug 9;10:1840. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.01840

TABLE 3.

Distribution of fungi of Aspergillus section Flavi on non-cultivated fruits purchased from local markets in Zambia.

Wild fruit species	Samples (#)	%L^a,b	%S	%P	%T	CFU/g^c
Adansonia digitata	9	81.9^AB	9.8^A	8.3^BC	0^A	8
Parinari curatellifolia	17	87.5^AB	12.5^A	0^C	0^A	56
Schinziophyton rautanenii	24	97.1^A	2.9^A	0^C	0^A	13
Tamarindus indica	25	88.4^AB	3.6^A	8^BC	0^A	3
Thespesia garckeana	20	45.3^C	13.9^A	38.2^A	2.7^A	10
Vangueriopsis lanciflora	7	51.2^BC	0^A	44.8^A	0^A	5
Ziziphus spp.	12	91.3^AB	8.7^A	0^C	0^A	38
Average		77.5^X	7.3^Y	14.2^Y	0.4^Y	19

^aL, S, P, and T represent A. flavus L morphotype, S morphotype fungi, A. parasiticus and A. tamarii, respectively. ^bPercent data were arcsine transformed and CFU/g data were log transformed prior to analyses but actual means are presented. Means followed by a common letter (A/B/C) do not differ significantly among fruits (columns) by Tukey’s HSD test (α = 0.05). Average frequencies of fungi across all fruit species followed by a common letter (X/Y) do not differ significantly by Tukey’s HSD test (α = 0.05). ^cAverage Colony Forming Units of Aspergillus section Flavi per gram. T. indica is significantly lower (by Tukey’s HSD test, α = 0.05) than T. garckeana, P. curatellifolia, and Ziziphus spp. There are no other significant differences.