Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link].

com

Analysis of the Split Plot design for trait Yield for Y1

Particulars Values

Main 6 levels
Sub 3 levels
Replications 4
Total observations 72

Ho1: The means of all the replication are equal

Ho2: The means of all the levels of the Main are equal

Ho3: The means of all the levels of the Sub are equal

Ho4: The means of all the levels of the interaction between Main & Sub are equal

Source of Var. DF Sum of Sq. Mean Sq. F value P value Result

Rep 3 1627.8333 542.6111 2.1434 0.13747 NS

Main 5 263.4444 52.6889 0.2081 0.95388 NS
Error a 15 3797.3333 253.1556
Sub 2 226.8611 113.4306 0.4296 0.65406 NS
MainxSub 10 2238.8056 223.8806 0.8478 0.5876 NS
Errror b 36 9506.3333 264.0648
Total 71 17660.6111

Other Statistics

Statistic Main Sub MainxSub

SEm 4.5931 3.317 8.125

SEd 6.4956 4.6909 11.4905
CD (LSD) 5% 13.8451 9.5137 23.3038
CD (LSD) 1% 19.1407 12.757 31.2482
C.V. (a) 49.1666 CV (b) 50.2148

Interpretation of the ANOVA results:

1) The replication component p-value was 0.13747, results were found non-significant and we fail to reject the null hypothesis
(Ho1: The means of all the replication are equal).

2) The manin factor component p-value was 0.95388, results were found non-significant and we fail to reject the null hypothesis
(Ho2: The means of all the levels of the Main are equal) and we should not go for mean comparison of different levels of Main

3) The sub-plot factor component p-value was 0.65406, results were found non-significant and reject the null hypothesis (Ho3:
The means of all the levels of the Sub are equal) and we should not go for mean comparison of different levels of Sub

4) The interaction component p-value was 0.5876, results were found non-significant and reject the null hypothesis (Ho4: The
means of all the levels of the interaction between Main & Sub are equal) and we should not go for mean comparison of different
 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

levels of interactions between Main & Sub.

Supplementary Information:

LSD test for mean comparison of Main

Main Yield Standard Error Standard Dev Group

T1 36.0 6.2716 21.7256 a

T2 32.417 3.9012 13.514 a
T3 32.417 5.3491 18.5299 a
T5 32.167 4.2548 14.7391 a
T6 31.667 4.0458 14.0151 a
T4 29.5 3.7629 13.0349 a

For the Yield, highest value was observed for T1 and T2 ,T3 ,T5 ,T6 ,T4 were found statistically at par
with it.

LSD test for mean comparison of Sub

Sub Yield Standard Error Standard Dev Group

V3 34.708 4.3136 21.132 a

V1 31.958 2.4171 11.8413 a
V2 30.417 2.6709 13.0847 a

For the Yield, highest value was observed for V3 and V1 ,V2 were found statistically at par with it.

LSD test for mean comparison of interaction between Main & Sub

SubxMain Yield Standard Error Standard Dev Group

V3xT3 42.5 11.8427 23.6854 a

V3xT1 42.0 18.3439 36.6879 a
V3xT6 38.5 8.9489 17.8979 a
V2xT4 38.0 9.4251 18.8503 a
V2xT2 37.25 6.2633 12.5266 a
V1xT1 35.25 6.1288 12.2577 a
V1xT5 35.0 7.0711 14.1421 a
V1xT3 34.5 9.2511 18.5023 a
V3xT2 32.75 9.8011 19.6023 a
V3xT5 32.25 8.9011 17.8022 a
 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

V2xT1 30.75 6.1016 12.2031 a

V1xT4 30.25 2.4622 4.9244 a
V1xT6 29.5 7.4106 14.8212 a
V2xT5 29.25 8.0247 16.0494 a
V1xT2 27.25 3.9238 7.8475 a
V2xT6 27.0 4.5461 9.0921 a
V2xT3 20.25 2.0565 4.113 a
V3xT4 20.25 2.8395 5.6789 a

For the Yield, highest value was observed for V3xT3 and V3xT1 ,V3xT6 ,V2xT4 ,V2xT2 ,V1xT1 ,V1xT5
,V1xT3 ,V3xT2 ,V3xT5 ,V2xT1 ,V1xT4 ,V1xT6 ,V2xT5 ,V1xT2 ,V2xT6 ,V2xT3 ,V3xT4 were found
statistically at par with it.

Analysis of the Split Plot design for trait Yield for Y2

Particulars Values

Main 6 levels
Sub 3 levels
Replications 4
Total observations 72

Ho1: The means of all the replication are equal

Ho2: The means of all the levels of the Main are equal

Ho3: The means of all the levels of the Sub are equal

Ho4: The means of all the levels of the interaction between Main & Sub are equal

Source of Var. DF Sum of Sq. Mean Sq. F value P value Result

Rep 3 297.0 99.0 0.525 0.67173 NS

Main 5 122.2778 24.4556 0.1297 0.98319 NS
Error a 15 2828.5 188.5667
Sub 2 6.8611 3.4306 0.0286 0.97183 NS
MainxSub 10 1121.6389 112.1639 0.9335 0.51496 NS
Errror b 36 4325.5 120.1528
Total 71 8701.7778

Other Statistics
 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

Statistic Main Sub MainxSub

SEm 3.9641 2.2375 5.4807

SEd 5.6061 3.1643 7.7509
CD (LSD) 5% 11.9491 6.4175 15.7195
CD (LSD) 1% 16.5195 8.6053 21.0784
C.V. (a) 44.9409 CV (b) 35.8737

Interpretation of the ANOVA results:

1) The replication component p-value was 0.67173, results were found non-significant and we fail to
reject the null hypothesis (Ho1: The means of all the replication are equal).

2) The manin factor component p-value was 0.98319, results were found non-significant and we fail to
reject the null hypothesis (Ho2: The means of all the levels of the Main are equal) and we should not go
for mean comparison of different levels of Main

3) The sub-plot factor component p-value was 0.97183, results were found non-significant and reject
the null hypothesis (Ho3: The means of all the levels of the Sub are equal) and we should not go for
mean comparison of different levels of Sub

4) The interaction component p-value was 0.51496, results were found non-significant and reject the
null hypothesis (Ho4: The means of all the levels of the interaction between Main & Sub are equal) and
we should not go for mean comparison of different levels of interactions between Main & Sub.

Supplementary Information:

LSD test for mean comparison of Main

Main Yield Standard Error Standard Dev Group

T5 33.333 4.5048 15.605 a

T6 30.667 2.9499 10.2188 a
T2 30.167 3.7149 12.8688 a
T3 30.083 2.4198 8.3824 a
T1 29.667 3.1026 10.7478 a
T4 29.417 2.5921 8.9794 a

For the Yield, highest value was observed for T5 and T6 ,T2 ,T3 ,T1 ,T4 were found statistically at par
with it.

LSD test for mean comparison of Sub

Sub Yield Standard Error Standard Dev Group

V2 30.833 2.0015 9.8054 a

 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

V1 30.708 2.4253 11.8816 a

V3 30.125 2.4215 11.8627 a

For the Yield, highest value was observed for V2 and V1 ,V3 were found statistically at par with it.

LSD test for mean comparison of interaction between Main & Sub

SubxMain Yield Standard Error Standard Dev Group

V2xT5 40.5 7.2169 14.4338 a

V1xT5 35.75 10.8272 21.6545 ab
V2xT2 34.5 3.9686 7.9373 ab
V3xT3 34.25 4.8883 9.7767 ab
V3xT6 33.25 4.8023 9.6047 ab
V1xT6 33.0 7.0711 14.1421 ab
V3xT2 31.5 9.1697 18.3394 ab
V1xT3 30.5 3.7749 7.5498 ab
V1xT4 30.5 4.0311 8.0623 ab
V3xT1 30.25 8.6446 17.2892 ab
V1xT1 30.0 3.8944 7.7889 ab
V2xT4 30.0 4.6368 9.2736 ab
V2xT1 28.75 3.9449 7.8899 ab
V3xT4 27.75 5.8931 11.7863 ab
V2xT6 25.75 3.25 6.5 ab
V2xT3 25.5 3.6629 7.3258 ab
V1xT2 24.5 5.8666 11.7331 b
V3xT5 23.75 2.0565 4.113 b

For the Yield, highest value was observed for V2xT5 and V1xT5 ,V2xT2 ,V3xT3 ,V3xT6 ,V1xT6 ,V3xT2
,V1xT3 ,V1xT4 ,V3xT1 ,V1xT1 ,V2xT4 ,V2xT1 ,V3xT4 ,V2xT6 ,V2xT3 were found statistically at par
with it.

Testing homogenity of the variance for the error a

F test for checking homogenity of the variance

Ho: The error variance of the two years/seasons are homogenous

Statistic Vlaues

Variance 1 188.5667
 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

Variance 2 253.1556
F statistic 1.3425
P value 0.3657
Result NS

The p value of the F test reveals that the results are non-significant and we can conclude that the error
MS of both the years are [Link] significant result indicate that we fail to reject null
hypothesis. The variances are homogenous, tha data can be combined and run a combined analysis of
variance.

Testing homogenity of the variance for the error b

F test for checking homogenity of the variance

Ho: The error variance of the two years/seasons are homogenous

Statistic Vlaues

Variance 1 120.1528
Variance 2 264.0648
F statistic 2.1977
P value 0.2957
Result NS

The p value of the F test reveals that the results are non-significant and we can conclude that the error
MS of both the years are [Link] significant result indicate that we fail to reject null
hypothesis. The variances are homogenous, tha data can be combined and run a combined analysis of
variance.

Combined Analysis of Split Plot design for trait Yield

Particulars Values

Year 2 levels
Main 6 levels
Sub 3 levels
Rep 4
Total observations 144
Overall Mean 31.4583

Ho1: The means of all the levels of interaction between Rep and Year are equal.

Ho2: The means of all the levels of the Year are equal.

Ho3: The means of all the levels of the Main are equal.
 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

Ho4: The means of all the levels of the interaction between Year & Main are equal.

Ho5: The means of all the levels of the Sub are equal.

Ho6: The means of all the levels of the interaction between Year & Sub are equal.

Ho7: The means of all the levels of the interaction between Main & Sub are equal.

Ho8: The means of all the levels of the interactions between Year, Main & Sub are equal.

Analysis of Variance ANOVA

Source of Var. DF Sum of Sq. Mean Sq. F value P value Result

RepxYear 6 1924.8333 320.8056 1.4525 0.22806 NS

Year 1 117.3611 117.3611 0.5314 0.47167 NS
Main 5 185.1667 37.0333 0.1677 0.97253 NS
Main x Year 5 200.5556 40.1111 0.1816 0.96739 NS
error_a 30 6625.8333 220.8611
Sub 2 78.1667 39.0833 0.2034 0.81642 NS
Sub x Year 2 155.5556 77.7778 0.4049 0.66855 NS
Main x Sub 10 2515.9167 251.5917 1.3096 0.24197 NS
Main x Sub x Year 10 844.5278 84.4528 0.4396 0.922 NS
error_b 72 13831.8333 192.1088
Total 143 26479.75

Other Statistics

Particular SEm SEd CD 5% CD 1%

Year 1.7514 2.4769 5.0584 6.8113

Main 3.0336 4.2902 8.7617 11.7979
Main x Year 4.2901 6.0671 12.3907 16.6845
Sub 2.0006 2.8293 5.7782 7.7805
Sub x Year 2.8292 4.0011 8.1713 11.003
Main x Sub 4.9004 6.9302 14.1534 19.0581
Main x Sub x Year 6.9302 9.8008 20.0159 26.9521

Interpretation of the ANOVA results:

1) The p-value for the interaction component between Rep & Year was 0.22806, results were found
non-significant and we fail to reject the null hypothesis (Ho1: The means of all the levels of interaction
 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

between Rep and Year are equal.).

2) The Year component p-value was 0.47167, results were found non-significant and we fail to reject
the null hypothesis (Ho2: The means of all the levels of the Year are equal.) and we should not go for
mean comparison of different levels of Year

3) The Main factor component p-value was 0.97253, results were found non-significant and reject the
null hypothesis (Ho3: The means of all the levels of the Main are equal.) and we should not go for mean
comparison of different levels of Main

4) The Year and Main interaction component p-value was 0.96739, results were found non-significant
and reject the null hypothesis (Ho4: The means of all the levels of the interaction between Year & Main
are equal.) and we should not go for mean comparison of different levels of interactions between Year
& Main.

5) The Sub component p-value was 0.81642, results were found non-significant and we fail to reject the
null hypothesis (Ho5: The means of all the levels of the Sub are equal.) and we should not go for mean
comparison of different levels of Sub

6) The Year and Sub interaction component p-value was 0.66855, results were found non-significant
and reject the null hypothesis (Ho6: The means of all the levels of the interaction between Year & Sub
are equal.) and we should not go for mean comparison of different levels of interactions between Year
& Sub.

7) The Main and Sub interaction component p-value was 0.24197, results were found non-significant
and reject the null hypothesis (Ho7: The means of all the levels of the interaction between Main & Sub
are equal.) and we should not go for mean comparison of different levels of interactions between Main
& Sub.

8) The Year, Main & Sub interaction component p-value was 0.922, results were found non-significant
and reject the null hypothesis (Ho8: The means of all the levels of the interactions between Year, Main
& Sub are equal.) and mean comparison of different levels of interactions between Year, Main & Sub
should be avoided.

Supplementary Information:

LSD test for mean comparison for different levels of the Year

Year Yield Standard Error Standard Dev Group

Y1 32.361 1.8587 15.7715 a

Y2 30.556 1.3047 11.0707 a

For the Yield, highest value was observed for Y1 and Y2 were found statistically at par with it.

LSD test for mean comparison for different levels of the Main

Main Yield Standard Error Standard Dev Group

T1 32.833 3.4848 17.0719 a

 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

T5 32.75 3.0326 14.8566 a

T2 31.292 2.6447 12.9564 a
T3 31.25 2.8813 14.1152 a
T6 31.167 2.4507 12.006 a
T4 29.458 2.2344 10.9464 a

For the Yield, highest value was observed for T1 and T5 ,T2 ,T3 ,T6 ,T4 were found statistically at par
with it.

LSD test for mean comparison for different levels of the interaction between Main & Year

YearxMain Yield Standard Error Standard Dev Group

Y1xT1 36.0 6.2716 21.7256 a

Y2xT5 33.333 4.5048 15.605 a
Y1xT2 32.417 3.9012 13.514 a
Y1xT3 32.417 5.3491 18.5299 a
Y1xT5 32.167 4.2548 14.7391 a
Y1xT6 31.667 4.0458 14.0151 a
Y2xT6 30.667 2.9499 10.2188 a
Y2xT2 30.167 3.7149 12.8688 a
Y2xT3 30.083 2.4198 8.3824 a
Y2xT1 29.667 3.1026 10.7478 a
Y1xT4 29.5 3.7629 13.0349 a
Y2xT4 29.417 2.5921 8.9794 a

For the Yield, highest value was observed for Y1xT1 and Y2xT5 ,Y1xT2 ,Y1xT3 ,Y1xT5 ,Y1xT6 ,Y2xT6
,Y2xT2 ,Y2xT3 ,Y2xT1 ,Y1xT4 ,Y2xT4 were found statistically at par with it.

LSD test for mean comparison for different levels of the Sub

Sub Yield Standard Error Standard Dev Group

V3 32.417 2.4696 17.1102 a

V1 31.333 1.6962 11.7516 a
V2 30.625 1.6512 11.4402 a

For the Yield, highest value was observed for V3 and V1 ,V2 were found statistically at par with it.

LSD test for mean comparison for different levels of the interaction between Sub & Year
 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

YearxSub Yield Standard Error Standard Dev Group

Y1xV3 34.708 4.3136 21.132 a

Y1xV1 31.958 2.4171 11.8413 a
Y2xV2 30.833 2.0015 9.8054 a
Y2xV1 30.708 2.4253 11.8816 a
Y1xV2 30.417 2.6709 13.0847 a
Y2xV3 30.125 2.4215 11.8627 a

For the Yield, highest value was observed for Y1xV3 and Y1xV1 ,Y2xV2 ,Y2xV1 ,Y1xV2 ,Y2xV3 were
found statistically at par with it.

LSD test for mean comparison for different levels of the interaction between Main & Sub

MainxSub Yield Standard Error Standard Dev Group

T3xV3 38.375 6.1323 17.3447 a

T1xV3 36.125 9.6463 27.2839 ab
T6xV3 35.875 4.8049 13.5903 ab
T2xV2 35.875 3.4715 9.8189 ab
T5xV1 35.375 5.9879 16.9363 ab
T5xV2 34.875 5.4295 15.3571 ab
T4xV2 34.0 5.092 14.4024 ab
T1xV1 32.625 3.5048 9.913 ab
T3xV1 32.5 4.6866 13.2557 ab
T2xV3 32.125 6.2176 17.586 ab
T6xV1 31.25 4.7874 13.5409 ab
T4xV1 30.375 2.1871 6.1861 ab
T1xV2 29.75 3.3846 9.573 ab
T5xV3 28.0 4.5237 12.7951 ab
T6xV2 26.375 2.5976 7.3473 ab
T2xV1 25.875 3.3082 9.357 ab
T4xV3 24.0 3.3434 9.4567 b
T3xV2 22.875 2.183 6.1745 b

For the Yield, highest value was observed for T3xV3 and T1xV3 ,T6xV3 ,T2xV2 ,T5xV1 ,T5xV2 ,T4xV2
,T1xV1 ,T3xV1 ,T2xV3 ,T6xV1 ,T4xV1 ,T1xV2 ,T5xV3 ,T6xV2 ,T2xV1 were found statistically at par
with it.

LSD test for mean comparison for different levels of the interaction between Main, Sub & Year
 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

YearxMainxSub Yield Standard Error Standard Dev Group

Y1xT3xV3 42.5 11.8427 23.6854 a

Y1xT1xV3 42.0 18.3439 36.6879 a
Y2xT5xV2 40.5 7.2169 14.4338 a
Y1xT6xV3 38.5 8.9489 17.8979 ab
Y1xT4xV2 38.0 9.4251 18.8503 ab
Y1xT2xV2 37.25 6.2633 12.5266 ab
Y2xT5xV1 35.75 10.8272 21.6545 ab
Y1xT1xV1 35.25 6.1288 12.2577 ab
Y1xT5xV1 35.0 7.0711 14.1421 ab
Y1xT3xV1 34.5 9.2511 18.5023 ab
Y2xT2xV2 34.5 3.9686 7.9373 ab
Y2xT3xV3 34.25 4.8883 9.7767 ab
Y2xT6xV3 33.25 4.8023 9.6047 ab
Y2xT6xV1 33.0 7.0711 14.1421 ab
Y1xT2xV3 32.75 9.8011 19.6023 ab
Y1xT5xV3 32.25 8.9011 17.8022 ab
Y2xT2xV3 31.5 9.1697 18.3394 ab
Y1xT1xV2 30.75 6.1016 12.2031 ab
Y2xT3xV1 30.5 3.7749 7.5498 ab
Y2xT4xV1 30.5 4.0311 8.0623 ab
Y2xT1xV3 30.25 8.6446 17.2892 ab
Y1xT4xV1 30.25 2.4622 4.9244 ab
Y2xT4xV2 30.0 4.6368 9.2736 ab
Y2xT1xV1 30.0 3.8944 7.7889 ab
Y1xT6xV1 29.5 7.4106 14.8212 ab
Y1xT5xV2 29.25 8.0247 16.0494 ab
Y2xT1xV2 28.75 3.9449 7.8899 ab
Y2xT4xV3 27.75 5.8931 11.7863 ab
Y1xT2xV1 27.25 3.9238 7.8475 ab
Y1xT6xV2 27.0 4.5461 9.0921 ab
Y2xT6xV2 25.75 3.25 6.5 ab
Y2xT3xV2 25.5 3.6629 7.3258 ab
Y2xT2xV1 24.5 5.8666 11.7331 ab
 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

Y2xT5xV3 23.75 2.0565 4.113 ab

Y1xT3xV2 20.25 2.0565 4.113 b
Y1xT4xV3 20.25 2.8395 5.6789 b

For the Yield, highest value was observed for Y1xT3xV3 and Y1xT1xV3 ,Y2xT5xV2 ,Y1xT6xV3
,Y1xT4xV2 ,Y1xT2xV2 ,Y2xT5xV1 ,Y1xT1xV1 ,Y1xT5xV1 ,Y1xT3xV1 ,Y2xT2xV2 ,Y2xT3xV3
,Y2xT6xV3 ,Y2xT6xV1 ,Y1xT2xV3 ,Y1xT5xV3 ,Y2xT2xV3 ,Y1xT1xV2 ,Y2xT3xV1 ,Y2xT4xV1
,Y2xT1xV3 ,Y1xT4xV1 ,Y2xT4xV2 ,Y2xT1xV1 ,Y1xT6xV1 ,Y1xT5xV2 ,Y2xT1xV2 ,Y2xT4xV3
,Y1xT2xV1 ,Y1xT6xV2 ,Y2xT6xV2 ,Y2xT3xV2 ,Y2xT2xV1 ,Y2xT5xV3 were found statistically at par
with it.

Analysis of the Split Plot design for trait Plant Height for Y1

Particulars Values

Main 6 levels
Sub 3 levels
Replications 4
Total observations 72

Ho1: The means of all the replication are equal

Ho2: The means of all the levels of the Main are equal

Ho3: The means of all the levels of the Sub are equal

Ho4: The means of all the levels of the interaction between Main & Sub are equal

Source of Var. DF Sum of Sq. Mean Sq. F value P value Result

Rep 3 3010.8405 1003.6135 2.1434 0.13747 NS

Main 5 487.2668 97.4534 0.2081 0.95388 NS
Error a 15 7023.5477 468.2365
Sub 2 419.6023 209.8012 0.4296 0.65406 NS
MainxSub 10 4140.8948 414.0895 0.8478 0.5876 NS
Errror b 36 17582.9141 488.4143
Total 71 32665.0663

Other Statistics

Statistic Main Sub MainxSub

SEm 6.2466 4.5112 11.05

SEd 8.834 6.3798 15.6271
 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

CD (LSD) 5% 18.8293 12.9388 31.6931

CD (LSD) 1% 26.0313 17.3498 42.4975
C.V. (a) 49.1666 CV (b) 50.2148

Interpretation of the ANOVA results:

1) The replication component p-value was 0.13747, results were found non-significant and we fail to
reject the null hypothesis (Ho1: The means of all the replication are equal).

2) The manin factor component p-value was 0.95388, results were found non-significant and we fail to
reject the null hypothesis (Ho2: The means of all the levels of the Main are equal) and we should not go
for mean comparison of different levels of Main

3) The sub-plot factor component p-value was 0.65406, results were found non-significant and reject
the null hypothesis (Ho3: The means of all the levels of the Sub are equal) and we should not go for
mean comparison of different levels of Sub

4) The interaction component p-value was 0.5876, results were found non-significant and reject the null
hypothesis (Ho4: The means of all the levels of the interaction between Main & Sub are equal) and we
should not go for mean comparison of different levels of interactions between Main & Sub.

Supplementary Information:

LSD test for mean comparison of Main

Main Plant Height Standard Error Standard Dev Group

T1 48.96 8.5294 29.5468 a

T2 44.087 5.3056 18.3791 a
T3 44.087 7.2748 25.2006 a
T5 43.747 5.7866 20.0452 a
T6 43.067 5.5023 19.0606 a
T4 40.12 5.1175 17.7275 a

For the Plant Height, highest value was observed for T1 and T2 ,T3 ,T5 ,T6 ,T4 were found statistically
at par with it.

LSD test for mean comparison of Sub

Sub Plant Height Standard Error Standard Dev Group

V3 47.203 5.8664 28.7396 a

V1 43.463 3.2872 16.1041 a
V2 41.367 3.6324 17.7952 a
 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

For the Plant Height, highest value was observed for V3 and V1 ,V2 were found statistically at par with
it.

LSD test for mean comparison of interaction between Main & Sub

SubxMain Plant Height Standard Error Standard Dev Group

V3xT3 57.8 16.1061 32.2122 a

V3xT1 57.12 24.9478 49.8955 a
V3xT6 52.36 12.1705 24.3411 a
V2xT4 51.68 12.8182 25.6364 a
V2xT2 50.66 8.5181 17.0362 a
V1xT1 47.94 8.3352 16.6704 a
V1xT5 47.6 9.6167 19.2333 a
V1xT3 46.92 12.5815 25.1631 a
V3xT2 44.54 13.3296 26.6591 a
V3xT5 43.86 12.1055 24.2109 a
V2xT1 41.82 8.2981 16.5963 a
V1xT4 41.14 3.3486 6.6972 a
V1xT6 40.12 10.0784 20.1568 a
V2xT5 39.78 10.9136 21.8272 a
V1xT2 37.06 5.3363 10.6726 a
V2xT6 36.72 6.1826 12.3653 a
V2xT3 27.54 2.7968 5.5937 a
V3xT4 27.54 3.8617 7.7233 a

For the Plant Height, highest value was observed for V3xT3 and V3xT1 ,V3xT6 ,V2xT4 ,V2xT2 ,V1xT1
,V1xT5 ,V1xT3 ,V3xT2 ,V3xT5 ,V2xT1 ,V1xT4 ,V1xT6 ,V2xT5 ,V1xT2 ,V2xT6 ,V2xT3 ,V3xT4 were
found statistically at par with it.

Analysis of the Split Plot design for trait Plant Height for Y2

Particulars Values

Main 6 levels
Sub 3 levels
Replications 4
Total observations 72

Ho1: The means of all the replication are equal

 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

Ho2: The means of all the levels of the Main are equal

Ho3: The means of all the levels of the Sub are equal

Ho4: The means of all the levels of the interaction between Main & Sub are equal

Source of Var. DF Sum of Sq. Mean Sq. F value P value Result

Rep 3 549.3312 183.1104 0.525 0.67173 NS

Main 5 226.165 45.233 0.1297 0.98319 NS
Error a 15 5231.5936 348.7729
Sub 2 12.6903 6.3452 0.0286 0.97183 NS
MainxSub 10 2074.5833 207.4583 0.9335 0.51496 NS
Errror b 36 8000.4448 222.2346
Total 71 16094.8082

Other Statistics

Statistic Main Sub MainxSub

SEm 5.3911 3.043 7.4538

SEd 7.6242 4.3035 10.5413
CD (LSD) 5% 16.2505 8.7278 21.3787
CD (LSD) 1% 22.4662 11.7032 28.6668
C.V. (a) 44.9409 CV (b) 35.8737

Interpretation of the ANOVA results:

1) The replication component p-value was 0.67173, results were found non-significant and we fail to
reject the null hypothesis (Ho1: The means of all the replication are equal).

2) The manin factor component p-value was 0.98319, results were found non-significant and we fail to
reject the null hypothesis (Ho2: The means of all the levels of the Main are equal) and we should not go
for mean comparison of different levels of Main

3) The sub-plot factor component p-value was 0.97183, results were found non-significant and reject
the null hypothesis (Ho3: The means of all the levels of the Sub are equal) and we should not go for
mean comparison of different levels of Sub

4) The interaction component p-value was 0.51496, results were found non-significant and reject the
null hypothesis (Ho4: The means of all the levels of the interaction between Main & Sub are equal) and
we should not go for mean comparison of different levels of interactions between Main & Sub.

Supplementary Information:

LSD test for mean comparison of Main

 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

Main Plant Height Standard Error Standard Dev Group

T5 45.333 6.1265 21.2228 a

T6 41.707 4.0119 13.8976 a
T2 41.027 5.0523 17.5016 a
T3 40.913 3.2909 11.4001 a
T1 40.347 4.2196 14.617 a
T4 40.007 3.5253 12.2119 a

For the Plant Height, highest value was observed for T5 and T6 ,T2 ,T3 ,T1 ,T4 were found statistically
at par with it.

LSD test for mean comparison of Sub

Sub Plant Height Standard Error Standard Dev Group

V2 41.933 2.7221 13.3353 a

V1 41.763 3.2984 16.159 a
V3 40.97 3.2932 16.1332 a

For the Plant Height, highest value was observed for V2 and V1 ,V3 were found statistically at par with
it.

LSD test for mean comparison of interaction between Main & Sub

SubxMain Plant Height Standard Error Standard Dev Group

V2xT5 55.08 9.815 19.6299 a

V1xT5 48.62 14.725 29.4501 ab
V2xT2 46.92 5.3973 10.7947 ab
V3xT3 46.58 6.6481 13.2963 ab
V3xT6 45.22 6.5312 13.0624 ab
V1xT6 44.88 9.6167 19.2333 ab
V3xT2 42.84 12.4708 24.9416 ab
V1xT3 41.48 5.1339 10.2678 ab
V1xT4 41.48 5.4823 10.9647 ab
V3xT1 41.14 11.7567 23.5133 ab
V1xT1 40.8 5.2964 10.5929 ab
V2xT4 40.8 6.3061 12.6121 ab
V2xT1 39.1 5.3651 10.7302 ab
 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

V3xT4 37.74 8.0147 16.0294 ab

V2xT6 35.02 4.42 8.84 ab
V2xT3 34.68 4.9815 9.963 ab
V1xT2 33.32 7.9785 15.9571 b
V3xT5 32.3 2.7968 5.5937 b

For the Plant Height, highest value was observed for V2xT5 and V1xT5 ,V2xT2 ,V3xT3 ,V3xT6 ,V1xT6
,V3xT2 ,V1xT3 ,V1xT4 ,V3xT1 ,V1xT1 ,V2xT4 ,V2xT1 ,V3xT4 ,V2xT6 ,V2xT3 were found statistically at
par with it.

Testing homogenity of the variance for the error a

F test for checking homogenity of the variance

Ho: The error variance of the two years/seasons are homogenous

Statistic Vlaues

Variance 1 348.7729
Variance 2 468.2365
F statistic 1.3425
P value 0.3657
Result NS

The p value of the F test reveals that the results are non-significant and we can conclude that the error
MS of both the years are [Link] significant result indicate that we fail to reject null
hypothesis. The variances are homogenous, tha data can be combined and run a combined analysis of
variance.

Testing homogenity of the variance for the error b

F test for checking homogenity of the variance

Ho: The error variance of the two years/seasons are homogenous

Statistic Vlaues

Variance 1 222.2346
Variance 2 488.4143
F statistic 2.1977
P value 0.2957
Result NS

The p value of the F test reveals that the results are non-significant and we can conclude that the error
MS of both the years are [Link] significant result indicate that we fail to reject null
 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

hypothesis. The variances are homogenous, tha data can be combined and run a combined analysis of
variance.

Combined Analysis of Split Plot design for trait Plant Height

Particulars Values

Year 2 levels
Main 6 levels
Sub 3 levels
Rep 4
Total observations 144
Overall Mean 42.7833

Ho1: The means of all the levels of interaction between Rep and Year are equal.

Ho2: The means of all the levels of the Year are equal.

Ho3: The means of all the levels of the Main are equal.

Ho4: The means of all the levels of the interaction between Year & Main are equal.

Ho5: The means of all the levels of the Sub are equal.

Ho6: The means of all the levels of the interaction between Year & Sub are equal.

Ho7: The means of all the levels of the interaction between Main & Sub are equal.

Ho8: The means of all the levels of the interactions between Year, Main & Sub are equal.

Analysis of Variance ANOVA

Source of Var. DF Sum of Sq. Mean Sq. F value P value Result

RepxYear 6 3560.1717 593.362 1.4525 0.22806 NS

Year 1 217.0711 217.0711 0.5314 0.47167 NS
Main 5 342.4843 68.4969 0.1677 0.97253 NS
Main x Year 5 370.9476 74.1895 0.1816 0.96739 NS
error_a 30 12255.1413 408.5047
Sub 2 144.5771 72.2885 0.2034 0.81642 NS
Sub x Year 2 287.7156 143.8578 0.4049 0.66855 NS
Main x Sub 10 4653.4395 465.3439 1.3096 0.24197 NS
Main x Sub x Year 10 1562.0386 156.2039 0.4396 0.922 NS
error_b 72 25583.3589 355.3244
 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

Total 143 48976.9456

Other Statistics

Particular SEm SEd CD 5% CD 1%

Year 2.3819 3.3685 6.8794 9.2634

Main 4.1257 5.8346 11.9159 16.0452
Main x Year 5.8346 8.2514 16.8515 22.6912
Sub 2.7208 3.8478 7.8582 10.5814
Sub x Year 3.8478 5.4416 11.1133 14.9644
Main x Sub 6.6645 9.425 19.2485 25.9188
Main x Sub x Year 9.425 13.329 27.2214 36.6546

Interpretation of the ANOVA results:

1) The p-value for the interaction component between Rep & Year was 0.22806, results were found
non-significant and we fail to reject the null hypothesis (Ho1: The means of all the levels of interaction
between Rep and Year are equal.).

2) The Year component p-value was 0.47167, results were found non-significant and we fail to reject
the null hypothesis (Ho2: The means of all the levels of the Year are equal.) and we should not go for
mean comparison of different levels of Year

3) The Main factor component p-value was 0.97253, results were found non-significant and reject the
null hypothesis (Ho3: The means of all the levels of the Main are equal.) and we should not go for mean
comparison of different levels of Main

4) The Year and Main interaction component p-value was 0.96739, results were found non-significant
and reject the null hypothesis (Ho4: The means of all the levels of the interaction between Year & Main
are equal.) and we should not go for mean comparison of different levels of interactions between Year
& Main.

5) The Sub component p-value was 0.81642, results were found non-significant and we fail to reject the
null hypothesis (Ho5: The means of all the levels of the Sub are equal.) and we should not go for mean
comparison of different levels of Sub

6) The Year and Sub interaction component p-value was 0.66855, results were found non-significant
and reject the null hypothesis (Ho6: The means of all the levels of the interaction between Year & Sub
are equal.) and we should not go for mean comparison of different levels of interactions between Year
& Sub.

7) The Main and Sub interaction component p-value was 0.24197, results were found non-significant
and reject the null hypothesis (Ho7: The means of all the levels of the interaction between Main & Sub
are equal.) and we should not go for mean comparison of different levels of interactions between Main
& Sub.
 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

8) The Year, Main & Sub interaction component p-value was 0.922, results were found non-significant
and reject the null hypothesis (Ho8: The means of all the levels of the interactions between Year, Main
& Sub are equal.) and mean comparison of different levels of interactions between Year, Main & Sub
should be avoided.

Supplementary Information:

LSD test for mean comparison for different levels of the Year

Year Plant Height Standard Error Standard Dev Group

Y1 44.011 2.5278 21.4493 a

Y2 41.556 1.7744 15.0561 a

For the Plant Height, highest value was observed for Y1 and Y2 were found statistically at par with it.

LSD test for mean comparison for different levels of the Main

Main Plant Height Standard Error Standard Dev Group

T1 44.653 4.7393 23.2178 a

T5 44.54 4.1243 20.2049 a
T2 42.557 3.5968 17.6207 a
T3 42.5 3.9185 19.1967 a
T6 42.387 3.333 16.3282 a
T4 40.063 3.0388 14.8871 a

For the Plant Height, highest value was observed for T1 and T5 ,T2 ,T3 ,T6 ,T4 were found statistically
at par with it.

LSD test for mean comparison for different levels of the interaction between Main & Year

YearxMain Plant Height Standard Error Standard Dev Group

Y1xT1 48.96 8.5294 29.5468 a

Y2xT5 45.333 6.1265 21.2228 a
Y1xT2 44.087 5.3056 18.3791 a
Y1xT3 44.087 7.2748 25.2006 a
Y1xT5 43.747 5.7866 20.0452 a
Y1xT6 43.067 5.5023 19.0606 a
Y2xT6 41.707 4.0119 13.8976 a
Y2xT2 41.027 5.0523 17.5016 a
Y2xT3 40.913 3.2909 11.4001 a
 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

Y2xT1 40.347 4.2196 14.617 a

Y1xT4 40.12 5.1175 17.7275 a
Y2xT4 40.007 3.5253 12.2119 a

For the Plant Height, highest value was observed for Y1xT1 and Y2xT5 ,Y1xT2 ,Y1xT3 ,Y1xT5 ,Y1xT6
,Y2xT6 ,Y2xT2 ,Y2xT3 ,Y2xT1 ,Y1xT4 ,Y2xT4 were found statistically at par with it.

LSD test for mean comparison for different levels of the Sub

Sub Plant Height Standard Error Standard Dev Group

V3 44.087 3.3587 23.2699 a

V1 42.613 2.3068 15.9821 a
V2 41.65 2.2457 15.5586 a

For the Plant Height, highest value was observed for V3 and V1 ,V2 were found statistically at par with
it.

LSD test for mean comparison for different levels of the interaction between Sub & Year

YearxSub Plant Height Standard Error Standard Dev Group

Y1xV3 47.203 5.8664 28.7396 a

Y1xV1 43.463 3.2872 16.1041 a
Y2xV2 41.933 2.7221 13.3353 a
Y2xV1 41.763 3.2984 16.159 a
Y1xV2 41.367 3.6324 17.7952 a
Y2xV3 40.97 3.2932 16.1332 a

For the Plant Height, highest value was observed for Y1xV3 and Y1xV1 ,Y2xV2 ,Y2xV1 ,Y1xV2 ,Y2xV3
were found statistically at par with it.

LSD test for mean comparison for different levels of the interaction between Main & Sub

MainxSub Plant Height Standard Error Standard Dev Group

T3xV3 52.19 8.3399 23.5888 a

T1xV3 49.13 13.119 37.1061 ab
T6xV3 48.79 6.5347 18.4828 ab
T2xV2 48.79 4.7212 13.3537 ab
T5xV1 48.11 8.1435 23.0334 ab
T5xV2 47.43 7.3842 20.8856 ab
 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

T4xV2 46.24 6.9251 19.5872 ab

T1xV1 44.37 4.7665 13.4817 ab
T3xV1 44.2 6.3738 18.0278 ab
T2xV3 43.69 8.4559 23.917 ab
T6xV1 42.5 6.5109 18.4157 ab
T4xV1 41.31 2.9745 8.4131 ab
T1xV2 40.46 4.603 13.0193 ab
T5xV3 38.08 6.1523 17.4013 ab
T6xV2 35.87 3.5328 9.9923 ab
T2xV1 35.19 4.4992 12.7255 ab
T4xV3 32.64 4.5471 12.8611 b
T3xV2 31.11 2.9689 8.3974 b

For the Plant Height, highest value was observed for T3xV3 and T1xV3 ,T6xV3 ,T2xV2 ,T5xV1 ,T5xV2
,T4xV2 ,T1xV1 ,T3xV1 ,T2xV3 ,T6xV1 ,T4xV1 ,T1xV2 ,T5xV3 ,T6xV2 ,T2xV1 were found statistically at
par with it.

LSD test for mean comparison for different levels of the interaction between Main, Sub & Year

YearxMainxSub Plant Height Standard Error Standard Dev Group

Y1xT3xV3 57.8 16.1061 32.2122 a

Y1xT1xV3 57.12 24.9478 49.8955 a
Y2xT5xV2 55.08 9.815 19.6299 a
Y1xT6xV3 52.36 12.1705 24.3411 ab
Y1xT4xV2 51.68 12.8182 25.6364 ab
Y1xT2xV2 50.66 8.5181 17.0362 ab
Y2xT5xV1 48.62 14.725 29.4501 ab
Y1xT1xV1 47.94 8.3352 16.6704 ab
Y1xT5xV1 47.6 9.6167 19.2333 ab
Y1xT3xV1 46.92 12.5815 25.1631 ab
Y2xT2xV2 46.92 5.3973 10.7947 ab
Y2xT3xV3 46.58 6.6481 13.2963 ab
Y2xT6xV3 45.22 6.5312 13.0624 ab
Y2xT6xV1 44.88 9.6167 19.2333 ab
Y1xT2xV3 44.54 13.3296 26.6591 ab
Y1xT5xV3 43.86 12.1055 24.2109 ab
Y2xT2xV3 42.84 12.4708 24.9416 ab
 Elevating Your Research with Our Statistical Expertise [Link]

Y1xT1xV2 41.82 8.2981 16.5963 ab

Y2xT3xV1 41.48 5.1339 10.2678 ab
Y2xT4xV1 41.48 5.4823 10.9647 ab
Y2xT1xV3 41.14 11.7567 23.5133 ab
Y1xT4xV1 41.14 3.3486 6.6972 ab
Y2xT4xV2 40.8 6.3061 12.6121 ab
Y2xT1xV1 40.8 5.2964 10.5929 ab
Y1xT6xV1 40.12 10.0784 20.1568 ab
Y1xT5xV2 39.78 10.9136 21.8272 ab
Y2xT1xV2 39.1 5.3651 10.7302 ab
Y2xT4xV3 37.74 8.0147 16.0294 ab
Y1xT2xV1 37.06 5.3363 10.6726 ab
Y1xT6xV2 36.72 6.1826 12.3653 ab
Y2xT6xV2 35.02 4.42 8.84 ab
Y2xT3xV2 34.68 4.9815 9.963 ab
Y2xT2xV1 33.32 7.9785 15.9571 ab
Y2xT5xV3 32.3 2.7968 5.5937 ab
Y1xT3xV2 27.54 2.7968 5.5937 b
Y1xT4xV3 27.54 3.8617 7.7233 b

For the Plant Height, highest value was observed for Y1xT3xV3 and Y1xT1xV3 ,Y2xT5xV2 ,Y1xT6xV3
,Y1xT4xV2 ,Y1xT2xV2 ,Y2xT5xV1 ,Y1xT1xV1 ,Y1xT5xV1 ,Y1xT3xV1 ,Y2xT2xV2 ,Y2xT3xV3
,Y2xT6xV3 ,Y2xT6xV1 ,Y1xT2xV3 ,Y1xT5xV3 ,Y2xT2xV3 ,Y1xT1xV2 ,Y2xT3xV1 ,Y2xT4xV1
,Y2xT1xV3 ,Y1xT4xV1 ,Y2xT4xV2 ,Y2xT1xV1 ,Y1xT6xV1 ,Y1xT5xV2 ,Y2xT1xV2 ,Y2xT4xV3
,Y1xT2xV1 ,Y1xT6xV2 ,Y2xT6xV2 ,Y2xT3xV2 ,Y2xT2xV1 ,Y2xT5xV3 were found statistically at par
with it.