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 6.293 6.2929 7.04 0.010
Error 58 51.828 0.8936
Total 59 58.121
Model Summary
S R-sq R-sq(adj) R-sq(pred) 0.945294 10.83% 9.29% 4.57%
Means
TT N Mean StDev 95% CI
2.924 | 0.782 (2.578, 3.269) | |
D 30 | 3.571 | 1.084 (3.226, 3.917) |
Pooled | StDev = | 0.945294 |
Có thể bạn quan tâm!
- Sinh Trưởng Tuyệt Đối Của Dê Định Hóa
- Đặc điểm sinh trưởng và mối tương quan đa hình gen POU1F1 với tính trạng sinh trưởng của dê địa phương Định Hóa - 20
- Sinh Trưởng Tương Đối Của Dê Định Hóa
- Kích Thước Một Số Chiều Đo Theo Tính Biệt
- Đặc điểm sinh trưởng và mối tương quan đa hình gen POU1F1 với tính trạng sinh trưởng của dê địa phương Định Hóa - 24
- Năng Suất Thịt Thời Điểm 9 Tháng Tuổi Theo Tính Biệt
Xem toàn bộ 306 trang tài liệu này.
Tukey Pairwise Comparisons
Grouping Information Using the Tukey Method and 95% Confidence TT N Mean Grouping
D 30 3.571 A
C 30 2.924 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 5.200 5.2002 5.30 0.025
Error 58 56.872 0.9806
Total 59 62.072
Model Summary
S R-sq R-sq(adj) R-sq(pred) 0.990228 8.38% 6.80% 1.95%
Means
TT N Mean StDev 95% CI
C 30 2.714 0.785 (2.352, 3.076)
D 30 3.302 1.160 (2.941, 3.664)
Pooled StDev = 0.990228
Tukey Pairwise Comparisons
Grouping Information Using the Tukey Method and 95% Confidence TT N Mean Grouping
D 30 3.302 A
C 30 2.714 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 0.4451 0.4451 0.54 0.464
Error 58 47.5013 0.8190
Total 59 47.9464
Model Summary
S R-sq R-sq(adj) R-sq(pred) 0.904980 0.93% 0.00% 0.00%
Means
TT N Mean StDev 95% CI
C 30 2.642 1.043 (2.312, 2.973)
D 30 2.470 0.742 (2.139, 2.801)
Pooled StDev = 0.904980
Tukey Pairwise Comparisons
Grouping Information Using the Tukey Method and 95% Confidence TT N Mean Grouping
C 30 2.642 A
D 30 2.470 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 0.4322 0.4322 0.79 0.377
Error 58 31.5796 0.5445
Total 59 32.0118
Model Summary
R-sq 1.35% | R-sq(adj) 0.00% | R-sq(pred) 0.00% | |
Means | |||
TT N | Mean | StDev 95% CI | |
C 30 | 2.5716 | 0.5306 (2.3020, 2.8413) | |
D 30 | 2.402 | 0.899 ( 2.132, 2.672) | |
Pooled | StDev = | 0.737887 |
Tukey Pairwise Comparisons
Grouping Information Using the Tukey Method and 95% Confidence TT N Mean Grouping
C 30 2.5716 A
D 30 2.402 A
Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.
One-way ANOVA: 9 - 10TT 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 0.6691 0.6691 0.96 0.331
Error 50 40.3374 0.6955
Total 51 41.0065
Model Summary
S R-sq R-sq(adj) R-sq(pred) 0.833950 1.63% 0.00% 0.00%
Means
TT N Mean StDev 95% CI
C 26 2.257 0.838 (1.952, 2.561)
D 26 2.045 0.830 (1.741, 2.350)
Pooled StDev = 0.833950
Tukey Pairwise Comparisons
Grouping Information Using the Tukey Method and 95% Confidence TT N Mean Grouping
C 26 2.257 A
D 26 2.045 A
Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.
One-way ANOVA: 10 - 11TT 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 0.8859 0.8859 1.35 0.249
Error 50 37.9230 0.6538
Total 51 38.8089
Model Summary
S R-sq R-sq(adj) R-sq(pred) 0.808607 2.28% 0.60% 0.00%
Means
TT N Mean StDev 95% CI
C 26 1.792 0.784 (1.497, 2.088)
D 26 2.035 0.833 (1.740, 2.331)
Pooled StDev = 0.808607
Tukey Pairwise Comparisons
Grouping Information Using the Tukey Method and 95% Confidence TT N Mean Grouping
D 26 2.035 A
C 26 1.792 A
Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.
One-way ANOVA: 11 - 12TT 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 21.13 21.1330 29.43 0.000
Error 50 41.65 0.7180
Total 51 62.78
Model Summary
R-sq R-sq(adj) | R-sq(pred) | |
0.847377 | 33.66% 32.52% | 29.01% |
TT N | Mean | StDev | 95% | CI |
C 26 | 1.536 | 0.903 | (1.226, | 1.846) |
D 26 | 2.723 | 0.788 | (2.413, | 3.033) |
Pooled StDev = 0.847377
Tukey Pairwise Comparisons
Grouping Information Using the Tukey Method and 95% Confidence TT N Mean Grouping
D 26 2.723 A
C 26 1.536 B
Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.
1.4.KÍCH THƯỚC MỘT SỐ CHIỀU ĐO CHÍNH CỦA DÊ ĐỊNH HÓA
1.4.1 KÍCH THƯỚC MỘT SỐ CHIỀU ĐO (TÍNH CHUNG ĐỰC VÀ CÁI)
1. CAO VÂY
Descriptive Statistics: 1TT, 3TT, 6TT, 9TT, 12TT
Variable N N* Mean SE Mean StDev CoefVar Minimum Maximum
60 | 0 | 32.998 | 0.198 1.533 | 4.64 | 29.800 | 37.000 | |
3TT | 60 | 0 | 38.927 | 0.213 1.650 | 4.24 | 35.700 | 42.400 |
6TT | 60 | 0 | 44.307 | 0.201 1.560 | 3.52 | 41.000 | 47.600 |
9TT | 60 | 0 | 48.918 | 0.247 1.911 | 3.91 | 44.800 | 53.600 |
12TT | 52 | 0 | 52.668 | 0.294 2.278 | 4.32 | 48.000 | 59.000 |
2. VÒNG NGỰC
Descriptive Statistics: 1TT, 3TT, 6TT, 9TT, 12TT
N | N* | Mean | SE Mean | StDev | CoefVar | Minimum | Maximum | |
1TT | 60 | 0 | 34.993 | 0.201 | 1.561 | 4.46 | 31.400 | 38.000 |
3TT | 60 | 0 | 42.332 | 0.365 | 2.830 | 6.68 | 37.000 | 50.500 |
6TT | 60 | 0 | 51.063 | 0.437 | 3.382 | 6.62 | 44.000 | 61.000 |
9TT | 60 | 0 | 58.498 | 0.477 | 3.694 | 6.31 | 50.500 | 71.000 |
12TT | 52 | 0 | 64.727 | 0.602 | 4.666 | 7.21 | 57.000 | 76.000 |
3. DÀI THÂN CHÉO
Descriptive Statistics: 1TT, 3TT, 6TT, 9TT, 12TT
Variable N N* Mean SE Mean StDev CoefVar Minimum Maximum
60 | 0 | 33.713 | 0.220 1.704 | 5.05 | 30.200 | 36.900 | |
3TT | 60 | 0 | 40.272 | 0.306 2.373 | 5.89 | 36.000 | 44.900 |
6TT | 60 | 0 | 45.793 | 0.362 2.803 | 6.12 | 40.500 | 50.600 |
9TT | 60 | 0 | 51.362 | 0.449 3.481 | 6.78 | 42.500 | 57.900 |
12TT | 52 | 0 | 57.765 | 0.536 4.154 | 7.19 | 49.800 | 62.900 |
4. VÒNG ỐNG
Descriptive Statistics: 1TT, 3TT, 6TT, 9TT, 12TT
N | N* | Mean | SE Mean | StDev | CoefVar | Minimum | Maximum | |
1TT | 60 | 0 | 5.0817 | 0.0225 | 0.1742 | 3.43 | 4.7000 | 5.5000 |
3TT | 60 | 0 | 5.3383 | 0.0308 | 0.2387 | 4.47 | 5.0000 | 5.8000 |
6TT | 60 | 0 | 5.9517 | 0.0431 | 0.3342 | 5.62 | 5.0000 | 6.5000 |
9TT | 60 | 0 | 6.4217 | 0.0610 | 0.4723 | 7.36 | 5.4000 | 7.2000 |
12TT | 52 | 0 | 6.6967 | 0.0760 | 0.5889 | 8.79 | 5.4000 | 7.6000 |