Skip to main content

Table 3 Statistical analysis of morphological data

From: Description of olive morphological parameters by using open access software

  Morphological parameter ANOVA (p-values) Multiple comparison Tukey–Kramer
Fruit Area-A < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)2\(\ne\)3\(\ne\)4\(\ne\)5
Perim-A < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)2\(\ne\)3\(\ne\)4\(\ne\)7
Hght-A < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)2\(\ne\)3\(\ne\)4\(\ne\)5\(\ne\)6\(\ne\)7
MaxTrDiam-A < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)2\(\ne\)3\(\ne\)4\(\ne\)5\(\ne\)7
minCntTr-A < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)2\(\ne\)3\(\ne\)4\(\ne\)5\(\ne\)7
TrSym-A < 0.0001 5\(\ne\)6\(\ne\)7
ShIdx-A < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)2\(\ne\)3\(\ne\)4\(\ne\)5\(\ne\)6
Circ-A < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)2\(\ne\)3\(\ne\)4\(\ne\)5\(\ne\)6
ApCur-A < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)3\(\ne\)5\(\ne\)6\(\ne\)7
BasCur-A < 0.0001 2\(\ne\)3\(\ne\)4
NippleIdx-A < 0.0001
ShIdx-B < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)2\(\ne\)3\(\ne\)7
VerSym-B < 0.0001 3\(\ne\)5
Leaf Area < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)2\(\ne\)7
Perimeter < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)2\(\ne\)4\(\ne\)5\(\ne\)6
ShIdx < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)2\(\ne\)6\(\ne\)7
MaxTrDiam < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)3\(\ne\)6
VerSym < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)3\(\ne\)6
TipCur < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)2\(\ne\)4\(\ne\)5
Circ < 0.0001 3\(\ne\)5\(\ne\)6
Endocarp Area-A < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)2\(\ne\)3\(\ne\)4\(\ne\)6\(\ne\)7
Perim-A < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)2\(\ne\)3\(\ne\)5\(\ne\)6
TrSym-A < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)2\(\ne\)4\(\ne\)5
ShIdx-A < 0.0001 2\(\ne\)3\(\ne\)5
ApCur-A < 0.0001 2\(\ne\)3\(\ne\)6\(\ne\)7
BasCur-A < 0.0001 3\(\ne\)4\(\ne\)5\(\ne\)7
Circ-A < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)2\(\ne\)3\(\ne\)4\(\ne\)6
VerSym-B < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)3\(\ne\)5
ShIdx-B < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)2\(\ne\)4\(\ne\)5\(\ne\)6
StArConv-C < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)2\(\ne\)3
DiamIncrCir-C < 0.0001 1\(\ne\)2\(\ne\)5\(\ne\)6\(\ne\)7
  1. The one-way ANOVA showed that all the morphological parameters of the seven cultivars were statistically different (p-values \(<\,0.0001\)). The morphological parameters discriminated either all or some of the seven olive cultivars as revealed by the Tukey–Kramer multiple comparisons