Table 2.
Effects of AMF status and inoculation method on the proline (Pro), soluble protein (SP), and soluble sugar (SS) contents in the leaves of C. migao seedlings.
| Inoculation Method | AMF Status | Pro (U·g−1) | SP (mg·g−1) | SS (mg·g−1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| M-seedling | G. etunicatum | 0.75 ± 0.07 b | 10.73 ± 0.31 a | 3.42 ± 0.20 a |
| F. mosseae | 0.61 ± 0.03 b | 10.31 ± 0.31 a | 3.11 ± 0.34 ab | |
| NM | 1.11 ± 0.08 a | 10.17 ± 0.67 a | 2.49 ± 0.23 bc | |
| M-seed | G. etunicatum | 0.70 ± 0.08 b | 11.77 ± 0.92 a | 3.00 ± 0.21 ab |
| F. mosseae | 0.65 ± 0.08 b | 10.23 ± 0.36 a | 3.13 ± 0.05 ab | |
| NM | 1.16 ± 0.06 a | 10.37 ± 0.34 a | 2.28 ± 0.36 c | |
| Two-way ANOVA (significance level) | ||||
| AMF | ** | ns | * | |
| Method | ns | ns | ns | |
| AMF × Method | ns | ns | ns | |
Different letters (a, b, c) indicate a significant difference of Tukey’s post hoc test (* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; ns, not significant) between all treatments. NM, non-AMF plants; G. etunicatum, plants inoculated with G. etunicatum; F. mosseae, plants inoculated with F. mosseae; M-seedling, inoculated by the seedling method; M-seed, inoculated by the seed method. Values are expressed as the mean ± SE (n = 6, which are treatment replicates).