Đặc điểm sinh trưởng và mối tương quan đa hình gen POU1F1 với tính trạng sinh trưởng của dê địa phương Định Hóa

One-way ANOVA: 2-3TT versus Tinh biet

Method

Null hypothesis All means are equal Alternative hypothesis At least one mean is different Significance level α = 0.05

Equal variances were assumed for the analysis.

Factor Information

Factor Levels Values TT 2 C, D

Analysis of Variance

Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F-Value P-Value TT 1 296.3 296.3 1.67 0.201

Error 58 10265.9 177.0

Total 59 10562.2

Model Summary

S R-sq R-sq(adj) R-sq(pred) 13.3041 2.81% 1.13% 0.00%

Means

TT N Mean StDev 95% CI

C 30 46.78 12.27 (41.92, 51.64)

D 30 51.22 14.26 (46.36, 56.08)

Pooled StDev = 13.3041

Tukey Pairwise Comparisons

Grouping Information Using the Tukey Method and 95% Confidence TT N Mean Grouping

D 30 51.22 A

C 30 46.78 A

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.

One-way ANOVA: 3 - 4TT versus Tinh biet

Method

Null hypothesis All means are equal Alternative hypothesis At least one mean is different Significance level α = 0.05

Equal variances were assumed for the analysis.

Factor Information

Factor Levels Values TT 2 C, D

Analysis of Variance

Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F-Value P-Value TT 1 18.5 18.52 0.07 0.789

Error 58 14874.1 256.45

Total 59 14892.6

Model Summary

S R-sq R-sq(adj) R-sq(pred) 16.0140 0.12% 0.00% 0.00%

Means

TT N Mean StDev 95% CI

C 30 46.67 15.26 (40.81, 52.52)

D 30 47.78 16.73 (41.93, 53.63)

Pooled StDev = 16.0140

Tukey Pairwise Comparisons

Grouping Information Using the Tukey Method and 95% Confidence TT N Mean Grouping

D 30 47.78 A

C 30 46.67 A

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.

One-way ANOVA: 4 - 5TT versus Tinh biet

Method

Null hypothesis All means are equal Alternative hypothesis At least one mean is different Significance level α = 0.05

Equal variances were assumed for the analysis.

Factor Information

Factor Levels Values TT 2 C, D

Analysis of Variance

Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F-Value P-Value TT 1 15.0 15.00 0.07 0.788

Error 58 11936.7 205.80

Total 59 11951.7

Model Summary

S R-sq R-sq(adj) R-sq(pred) 14.3459 0.13% 0.00% 0.00%

Means

TT N Mean StDev 95% CI

C 30 49.33 15.91 (44.09, 54.58)

D 30 48.33 12.59 (43.09, 53.58)

Pooled StDev = 14.3459

Tukey Pairwise Comparisons

Grouping Information Using the Tukey Method and 95% Confidence TT N Mean Grouping

C 30 49.33 A

D 30 48.33 A

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.

One-way ANOVA: 5 - 6TT versus Tinh biet

Method

Null hypothesis All means are equal Alternative hypothesis At least one mean is different Significance level α = 0.05

Equal variances were assumed for the analysis.

Factor Information

Factor Levels Values TT 2 C, D

Analysis of Variance

Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F-Value P-Value TT 1 2535 2535.0 14.02 0.000

Error 58 10489 180.8

Total 59 13024

Model Summary

S R-sq R-sq(adj) R-sq(pred) 13.4480 19.46% 18.08% 13.81%

Means

TT N Mean StDev 95% CI

C 30 37.56 10.21 (32.64, 42.47)

D 30 50.56 16.05 (45.64, 55.47)

Pooled StDev = 13.4480

Tukey Pairwise Comparisons

Grouping Information Using the Tukey Method and 95% Confidence TT N Mean Grouping

D 30 50.56 A

C 30 37.56 B

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.

One-way ANOVA: 6 - 7TT versus Tinh biet

Method

Null hypothesis All means are equal Alternative hypothesis At least one mean is different Significance level α = 0.05

Equal variances were assumed for the analysis.

Factor Information

Factor Levels Values TT 2 C, D

Analysis of Variance

Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F-Value P-Value TT 1 3178 3178.0 13.19 0.001

Error 58 13980 241.0

Total 59 17158

Model Summary

S R-sq R-sq(adj) R-sq(pred) 15.5251 18.52% 17.12% 12.81%

Means

TT N Mean StDev 95% CI

C 30 39.00 11.15 (33.33, 44.67)

D 30 53.56 18.92 (47.88, 59.23)

Pooled StDev = 15.5251

Tukey Pairwise Comparisons

Grouping Information Using the Tukey Method and 95% Confidence TT N Mean Grouping

D 30 53.56 A

C 30 39.00 B

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.

One-way ANOVA: 7 - 8TT versus Tinh biet

Method

Null hypothesis All means are equal Alternative hypothesis At least one mean is different Significance level α = 0.05

Equal variances were assumed for the analysis.

Factor Information

Factor Levels Values TT 2 C, D

Analysis of Variance

Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F-Value P-Value TT 1 27.6 27.56 0.12 0.733

Error 58 13610.5 234.66

Total 59 13638.1

Model Summary

S R-sq R-sq(adj) R-sq(pred) 15.3187 0.20% 0.00% 0.00%

Means

TT N Mean StDev 95% CI

C 30 42.22 15.98 (36.62, 47.82)

D 30 43.58 14.63 (37.98, 49.18)

Pooled StDev = 15.3187

Tukey Pairwise Comparisons

Grouping Information Using the Tukey Method and 95% Confidence TT N Mean Grouping

D 30 43.58 A

C 30 42.22 A

Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.

One-way ANOVA: 8 - 9TT versus Tinh biet

Method

Null hypothesis All means are equal Alternative hypothesis At least one mean is different Significance level α = 0.05

Equal variances were assumed for the analysis.

Factor Information

Factor Levels Values TT 2 C, D

Analysis of Variance

Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F-Value P-Value TT 1 89.6 89.63 0.43 0.514

Error 58 12063.0 207.98

Total 59 12152.6

Model Summary

R-sq	R-sq(adj) R-sq(pred)
14.4216	0.74%	0.00% 0.00%