. 2020 Jan 27;10:1209. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-58170-9

Table 2.

Alterations in cytogenetic parameters induced by Phy-Et.

Cytogenetic parameter	Group I	Group II	Group III	Group IV
MI (%)	8.79	8.30	7.48	6.26
Divided cell Number	879.20 ± 46.54^a	830.10 ± 27.58^b	748.00 ± 61.47^c	626.80 ± 38.88^d
MN Frequency	0.20 ± 0.42^d	7.00 ± 1.83^c	16.60 ± 2.67^b	45.80 ± 3.58^a
Fragment	0.00 ± 0.00^d	10.10 ± 2.88^c	24.60 ± 4.62^b	52.70 ± 4.19^a
Vagrant chromosome	0.20 ± 0.42^d	8.80 ± 2.04^c	17.10 ± 3.18^b	38.20 ± 3.74^a
Chromosome bridge	0.00 ± 0.00^d	6.80 ± 1.81^c	12.00 ± 3.40^b	31.40 ± 4.35^a
C-mitosis	0.30 ± 0.48^d	3.50 ± 1.58^c	9.30 ± 3.50^b	16.90 ± 3.14^a
Nucleus damage	0.00 ± 0.00^d	3.00 ± 1.76^c	6.80 ± 1.87^b	12.00 ± 2.83^a
Reverse polarization	0.00 ± 0.00^d	2.90 ± 1.37^c	5.10 ± 1.52^b	10.40 ± 2.72^a
Spindle abnormality	0.20 ± 0.42^d	2.10 ± 1.10^c	4.10 ± 1.66^b	8.30 ± 2.45^a
Unequal distribution of chromatin	0.00 ± 0.00^d	5.70 ± 2.06^c	11.00 ± 2.36^b	24.20 ± 3.39^a

*Group I: Control, Group II: 2.5 mM Phy-Et, Group III: 5.0 mM Phy-Et, Group IV: 10 mM Phy-Et. Data were shown as mean ± SD (standard deviation) (n = 10). Data were analyzed with SPSS computer program using Duncan test and ANOVA variance analysis. The averages indicated by different letters ^(a,b,c,d) in the same line are important at p < 0.05.