Skip to main content
. 2022 Aug 4;12:13372. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-17342-5

Table 5.

Effects of different fertilizer treatments on reproductive growth of Pear-jujube.

Treatment Flower No. (No./plant) Fruit No. (No./plant) Fruit setting rate (%) Yield (kg/hm2)
CK 14,790 ± 1061 c 383 ± 19 c 2.54 ± 0.20 c 8040 ± 568 d
CF 21,564 ± 1660 b 748 ± 81 b 3.50 ± 0.65 b 11,797 ± 741 c
SC 27,629 ± 4552 a 985 ± 121 a 3.58 ± 0.20 b 19,177 ± 836 a
SM 18,246 ± 2044 bc 646 ± 51 b 3.58 ± 0.58 b 12,025 ± 891 c
BM 21,232 ± 5072 bc 951 ± 132 a 4.57 ± 0.61 a 14,142 ± 812 b

The data are the mean ± standard deviation of the parameters in this group. At different levels, each population mean follows a normal distribution with the same variance. The LSD least significant difference method was selected for analysis of variance in DPS software. Different lowercase letters in the same column indicate significant difference between treatments (P < 0.05).