. 2020 Feb 19;8(1):3. doi: 10.3390/proteomes8010003

Table 1.

Effects of drought treatments on physiological properties of switchgrass plants.

Levels of Drought Condition	Treatment	Leaf Photosynthetic Rate (μmol CO₂ /m²/s)	Stomatal Conductance (mol H₂O /m²/s)	Transpiration (mmol H₂O/m²/s)	Water Use Efficiency (μmol CO₂ /mmol H₂O)
Level 1 (Before drought treatment)	Control	23.31 ± 4.59 ^A	0.14 ± 0.03 ^A	4.44 ± 1.13 ^A	5.40 ± 0.99 ^A
Level 1 (Before drought treatment)	Drought	22.54 ± 3.97 ^A	0.14 ± 0.03 ^A	4.25 ± 1.03 ^A	5.46 ± 0.99 ^A
Level 2 (28 days drought)	Control	22.02 ± 4.06 ^A	0.15 ± 0.03 ^A	5.38 ± 1.23 ^A	4.16 ± 0.56 ^A
Level 2 (28 days drought)	Drought	16.62 ± 5.82 ^B	0.12 ± 0.05 ^B	4.51 ± 1.54 ^B	3.77 ± 0.75 ^B
Level 3 (28 days drought + 1 day re-watering)	Control	18.98 ± 4.93 ^A	0.12 ± 0.03 ^A	3.64 ± 0.87 ^A	5.21 ± 0.64 ^A
Level 3 (28 days drought + 1 day re-watering)	Drought	15.10 ± 4.99 ^B	0.10 ± 0.03 ^B	2.67 ± 0.93 ^B	5.83 ± 1.33 ^B
Level 4 (28 days drought + 3 days re-watering)	Control	12.48 ± 2.91 ^A	0.18 ± 0.06 ^A	2.21 ± 0.64 ^A	5.80 ± 0.82 ^A
Level 4 (28 days drought + 3 days re-watering)	Drought	11.54 ± 4.2 ^A	0.15 ± 0.05 ^B	2.0 ± 0.67 ^A	5.80 ± 0.86 ^A

Data are represented by the means of all the replicate plants. Within the same level of drought treatments, the means in the same column followed with the same number (A, or B) are not significantly different between drought-treated and control groups (p < 0.01) when tested using ANOVA.