| Literature DB >> 29968765 |
Dagang Song1,2, Kaiwen Pan3, Aiping Zhang1,2, Xiaogang Wu1, Akash Tariq1,2, Wenkai Chen1,2, Zilong Li1,2, Feng Sun1,2, Xiaoming Sun1, Olusanya Abiodun Olatunji1,2, Lin Zhang1.
Abstract
Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29968765 PMCID: PMC6030184 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-28345-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Component score coefficient matrix.
| Component 1 | Component 2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Tree height of walnut | 0.402 | −0.161 |
| Net photosynthesis rate of walnut leaves | 0.379 | −0.026 |
| Crown width | 0.196 | −0.159 |
| Soil pH | 0.367 | 0.254 |
| Soil moisture content | −0.088 | 0.477 |
| Transpiration rate of walnut leaves | 0.113 | 0.484 |
Figure 1Principal component analysis of walnut saplings growth parameters.
ANOVA for response of tree height and net photosynthesis rate.
| Resource | Y1 tree height | Y2 net photosynthesis rate | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DF | Sum of squares | Mean square | F-value | Coefficient estimate | DF | Sum of squares | Mean square | F-value | Coefficient estimate | |
| Model | 9 | 6.59 | 0.73 | 12.33 | 3.10** | 9 | 5.14 | 0.57 | 9.26 | 5.25** |
| X1 | 1 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.01 | −0.01 | 1 | 0.31 | 0.31 | 5.06 | 0.20 |
| X2 | 1 | 1.36 | 1.36 | 22.93 | −0.41** | 1 | 0.37 | 0.37 | 5.93 | −0.21* |
| X3 | 1 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 3.29 | −0.16 | 1 | 2.28 | 2.28 | 36.97 | −0.53** |
| X1X2 | 1 | 0.33 | 0.33 | 5.57 | 0.29 | 1 | 0.40 | 0.40 | 6.44 | 0.31* |
| X1X3 | 1 | 2.40 | 2.40 | 40.46 | −0.78** | 1 | 0.79 | 0.79 | 12.85 | −0.45** |
| X2X3 | 1 | 0.60 | 0.60 | 10.12 | −0.39* | 1 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.82 | 0.11 |
| X12 | 1 | 1.64 | 1.64 | 27.70 | −0.63** | 1 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.06 | −0.029 |
| X22 | 1 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.90 | 0.11 | 1 | 0.64 | 0.64 | 10.32 | 0.39* |
| X32 | 1 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.18 | −0.050 | 1 | 0.26 | 0.26 | 4.23 | 0.25 |
| Residual | 7 | 0.42 | 0.06 | 7 | 0.43 | 0.06 | ||||
| Lack of fit | 3 | 0.42 | 0.14 | 3 | 0.43 | 0.14 | ||||
| Pure error | 4 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 4 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ||||
| Cor total | 16 | 7.00 | 16 | 5.57 | ||||||
X1 straw mulching quality, X2 straw mulching placement, X3 straw mulching quantity; Tree height (R2 = 0.9407, Adeq. Precision = 12.407, Std.dev. = 0.24, C.V. = 8.59, Mean = 2.84); Net photosynthesis rate (R2 = 0.9225, Adeq. Precision = 10.811, Std.dev. = 0.25, C.V. = 4.48, Mean = 5.54).
*Significant at 5% (P < 0.05); ** Significant at 1% (P < 0.01).
Figure 2Response surfaces showing the effect of quality, placement, and quantity on height and Pn onto walnut saplings.
Figure 3Optimized process condition.
Model Validation.
| Quality | Placement | Quantity | Tree height (m) | Pn (μmol·m−2·s−1) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predicted | Experimental | CK | Predicted | Experimental | CK | |||
| 0.915 | 0.978 | −0.904 | 3.616 | 3.43 | 2.7 | 6.806 | 6.32 | 2.82 |
Experimental range and level of independent variables
| Variables | levels | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| −1 | 0 | + 1 | |
|
| |||
| X1 = straw mulching quality | Rice straw | Rapeseed straw | Mixed rice straw and rapeseed straw |
| X2 = straw mulching placement(m) | n | 1.5n | all n |
| X3 = straw mulching quantity (kg/m2) | 3 | 6 | 9 |
| Dependent variables | |||
| Y1 = Tree height (m) | |||
| Y2 = Net photosynthesis rate (μmol·m−2·s−1) | |||
n = mean radius of crown width, all n: coverage the whole plots; mixed quality: equal quality mixing with 1:1.
Experimental design matrix and results.
| Run order | Independent variables | Dependent variables | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X1 | X2 | X3 | Y1 | Y2 | |
| 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2.45 | 5.3 |
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2.2 | 5.9 |
| 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3.1 | 5.25 |
| 4 | 0 | −1 | 1 | 3.6 | 5.2 |
| 5 | −1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 5.43 |
| 6 | −1 | −1 | 0 | 3.55 | 5.95 |
| 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3.1 | 5.25 |
| 8 | −1 | 0 | −1 | 1.8 | 5.4 |
| 9 | −1 | 1 | 0 | 1.7 | 4.59 |
| 10 | 0 | 1 | −1 | 3.5 | 6.35 |
| 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3.1 | 5.25 |
| 12 | 1 | 0 | −1 | 3.4 | 6.4 |
| 13 | 0 | −1 | −1 | 3.1 | 6.7 |
| 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3.1 | 5.25 |
| 15 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1.5 | 4.65 |
| 16 | 1 | −1 | 0 | 2.9 | 6 |
| 17 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3.1 | 5.25 |
Chemical characterization of the two straw materials.
| Material | Total C (%) | Total N (%) | Cellulose (%) | Hemicelluloses (%) | Lignin (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rice straw | 38.32 | 0.62 | 29.53 | 15.59 | 29.68 |
| Rapeseed straw | 46.21 | 0.45 | 52.36 | 20.56 | 11.63 |