Figure 1.
Effect of the experimental year and cultivar on the mean juice yield of all rhubarb cultivars. Abbreviations: PON, ‘Poncho’; CRE, ‘Canadian Red’; VAL, ‘Valentine’; RCH, ‘Red Champagne’; VIC, ‘Victoria’. LSD test with significance: significant at p ≤ 0.01 (**), or p = 0.0000 (****).
Figure 1.
Effect of the experimental year and cultivar on the mean juice yield of all rhubarb cultivars. Abbreviations: PON, ‘Poncho’; CRE, ‘Canadian Red’; VAL, ‘Valentine’; RCH, ‘Red Champagne’; VIC, ‘Victoria’. LSD test with significance: significant at p ≤ 0.01 (**), or p = 0.0000 (****).
Figure 2.
Average petiole yield for tested rhubarb cultivars. Values with different letters are significantly different at p < 0.05 by LSD test in ANOVA (Statgraphic XVII).
Figure 2.
Average petiole yield for tested rhubarb cultivars. Values with different letters are significantly different at p < 0.05 by LSD test in ANOVA (Statgraphic XVII).
Figure 3.
Effect of the experimental year, cultivar, and term of the harvest on the mean juice yield of all rhubarb cultivars. Abbreviations: PON, ‘Poncho’; CRE, ‘Canadian Red’; VAL, ‘Valentine’; RCH, ‘Red Champagne’; VIC, ‘Victoria’. LSD test with significance: p ≤ 0.001 (***).
Figure 3.
Effect of the experimental year, cultivar, and term of the harvest on the mean juice yield of all rhubarb cultivars. Abbreviations: PON, ‘Poncho’; CRE, ‘Canadian Red’; VAL, ‘Valentine’; RCH, ‘Red Champagne’; VIC, ‘Victoria’. LSD test with significance: p ≤ 0.001 (***).
Figure 4.
Effect of the experimental year, cultivar, and term of the harvest on the mean fructose content of all rhubarb cultivars. Abbreviations: PON, ‘Poncho’; CRE, ‘Canadian Red’; VAL, ‘Valentine’; RCH, ‘Red Champagne’; VIC, ‘Victoria’. LSD test with significance p ≤ 0.001 (***).
Figure 4.
Effect of the experimental year, cultivar, and term of the harvest on the mean fructose content of all rhubarb cultivars. Abbreviations: PON, ‘Poncho’; CRE, ‘Canadian Red’; VAL, ‘Valentine’; RCH, ‘Red Champagne’; VIC, ‘Victoria’. LSD test with significance p ≤ 0.001 (***).
Figure 5.
Share of fructose, glucose, and malic acid in total sugar and total acid content in the evaluated rhubarb cultivars. TS, total sugars and TA, total acid. Values are average from both harvests and years 2018–2019.
Figure 5.
Share of fructose, glucose, and malic acid in total sugar and total acid content in the evaluated rhubarb cultivars. TS, total sugars and TA, total acid. Values are average from both harvests and years 2018–2019.
Figure 6.
Effect of the experimental year, cultivar, and term of the harvest on the mean glucose content of all rhubarb cultivars. Abbreviations: PON, ‘Poncho’; CRE, ‘Canadian Red’; VAL, ‘Valentine’; RCH, ‘Red Champagne’; VIC, ‘Victoria’. LSD test with significance: p ≤ 0.01 (**), or p ≤ 0.001 (***).
Figure 6.
Effect of the experimental year, cultivar, and term of the harvest on the mean glucose content of all rhubarb cultivars. Abbreviations: PON, ‘Poncho’; CRE, ‘Canadian Red’; VAL, ‘Valentine’; RCH, ‘Red Champagne’; VIC, ‘Victoria’. LSD test with significance: p ≤ 0.01 (**), or p ≤ 0.001 (***).
Figure 7.
Effect of the experimental year, cultivar, and term of the harvest on the mean total soluble solid content of all rhubarb cultivars. Abbreviations: PON, ‘Poncho’; CRE, ‘Canadian Red’; VAL, ‘Valentine’; RCH, ‘Red Champagne’; VIC, ‘Victoria’. LSD test with significance: significant at p ≤ 0.05 (*) or p ≤ 0.001 (***).
Figure 7.
Effect of the experimental year, cultivar, and term of the harvest on the mean total soluble solid content of all rhubarb cultivars. Abbreviations: PON, ‘Poncho’; CRE, ‘Canadian Red’; VAL, ‘Valentine’; RCH, ‘Red Champagne’; VIC, ‘Victoria’. LSD test with significance: significant at p ≤ 0.05 (*) or p ≤ 0.001 (***).
Figure 8.
Effect of the experimental year, cultivar, and term of the harvest on the total sugar content of all rhubarb cultivars. Abbreviations: PON, ‘Poncho’; CRE, ‘Canadian Red’; VAL, ‘Valentine’; RCH, ‘Red Champagne’; VIC, ‘Victoria’. LSD test with significance: non-significant (NS) or significant at p ≤ 0.05 (*), p ≤ 0.01 (**), or p ≤ 0.001 (***).
Figure 8.
Effect of the experimental year, cultivar, and term of the harvest on the total sugar content of all rhubarb cultivars. Abbreviations: PON, ‘Poncho’; CRE, ‘Canadian Red’; VAL, ‘Valentine’; RCH, ‘Red Champagne’; VIC, ‘Victoria’. LSD test with significance: non-significant (NS) or significant at p ≤ 0.05 (*), p ≤ 0.01 (**), or p ≤ 0.001 (***).
Figure 9.
Effect of the experimental year, cultivar, and term of the harvest on the malic acid content in rhubarb cultivars. Abbreviations: PON, ‘Poncho’; CRE, ‘Canadian Red’; VAL, ‘Valentine’; RCH, ‘Red Champagne’; VIC, ‘Victoria’. LSD test with significance: p ≤ 0.001 (***).
Figure 9.
Effect of the experimental year, cultivar, and term of the harvest on the malic acid content in rhubarb cultivars. Abbreviations: PON, ‘Poncho’; CRE, ‘Canadian Red’; VAL, ‘Valentine’; RCH, ‘Red Champagne’; VIC, ‘Victoria’. LSD test with significance: p ≤ 0.001 (***).
Figure 10.
Effect of the experimental year, cultivar, and term of the harvest on the total acid content in rhubarb cultivars. Abbreviations: PON, ‘Poncho’; CRE, ‘Canadian Red’; VAL, ‘Valentine’; RCH, ‘Red Champagne’; VIC, ‘Victoria’. LSD test with significance: p ≤ 0.01 (**) or p ≤ 0.001 (***).
Figure 10.
Effect of the experimental year, cultivar, and term of the harvest on the total acid content in rhubarb cultivars. Abbreviations: PON, ‘Poncho’; CRE, ‘Canadian Red’; VAL, ‘Valentine’; RCH, ‘Red Champagne’; VIC, ‘Victoria’. LSD test with significance: p ≤ 0.01 (**) or p ≤ 0.001 (***).
Figure 11.
Effect of the experimental year, cultivar, and term of the harvest on the sugar/acid ratio in the rhubarb cultivars. Abbreviations: PON, ‘Poncho’; CRE, ‘Canadian Red’; VAL, ‘Valentine’; RCH, ‘Red Champagne’; VIC, ‘Victoria’. LSD test with significance: p ≤ 0.001 (***).
Figure 11.
Effect of the experimental year, cultivar, and term of the harvest on the sugar/acid ratio in the rhubarb cultivars. Abbreviations: PON, ‘Poncho’; CRE, ‘Canadian Red’; VAL, ‘Valentine’; RCH, ‘Red Champagne’; VIC, ‘Victoria’. LSD test with significance: p ≤ 0.001 (***).
Figure 12.
Effect of the experimental year, cultivar, and term of the harvest on the pH in the rhubarb cultivars. Abbreviations: PON, ‘Poncho’; CRE, ‘Canadian Red’; VAL, ‘Valentine’; RCH, ‘Red Champagne’; VIC, ‘Victoria’. LSD test with significance: p ≤ 0.001 (***).
Figure 12.
Effect of the experimental year, cultivar, and term of the harvest on the pH in the rhubarb cultivars. Abbreviations: PON, ‘Poncho’; CRE, ‘Canadian Red’; VAL, ‘Valentine’; RCH, ‘Red Champagne’; VIC, ‘Victoria’. LSD test with significance: p ≤ 0.001 (***).
Table 1.
Rhubarb cultivars’ characterization (morphological description according to UPOV (1999)) [
18].
Table 1.
Rhubarb cultivars’ characterization (morphological description according to UPOV (1999)) [
18].
| Morphological Description of Petiole | Picture of the Petioles * |
---|
‘Poncho’ | Semi-erect attitude, type of cross-section 1, green ground color of skin, entire distribution of skin superimposed color at base, absent distribution of skin superimposed color at middle, absent distribution of skin superimposed color just below leaf blade, present hairiness just below leaf blade, absent or very weak ribbing of dorsal side, green color of flesh | |
‘Victoria’ | Erect attitude, type of cross-section 2, green ground color of skin, entire distribution of skin superimposed color at base, speckled distribution of skin superimposed color at middle, absent distribution of skin superimposed color just below leaf blade, present hairiness just below leaf blade, weak ribbing of dorsal side, green color of flesh | |
‘Valentine’ | Erect attitude, type of cross-section 3, red ground color of skin, entire distribution of skin superimposed color at base, speckled distribution of skin superimposed color at middle, speckled distribution of skin superimposed color just below leaf blade, absent hairiness just below leaf blade, medium ribbing of dorsal side, pink color of flesh | |
‘Red Champagne’ | Erect attitude, type of cross-section 2, red ground color of skin, entire distribution of skin superimposed color at base, speckled distribution of skin superimposed color at middle, speckled distribution of skin superimposed color just below leaf blade, present hairiness just below leaf blade, weak ribbing of dorsal side, green color of flesh | |
‘Canadian Red’ | Semi-erect attitude, type of cross-section 7, red ground color of skin, entire distribution of skin superimposed color at base, entire distribution of skin superimposed color at middle, speckled distribution of skin superimposed color just below leaf blade, present hairiness just below leaf blade, strong ribbing of dorsal side, green color of flesh | |
Table 2.
Quantitative parameters of Rheum rhabarbarum L. petioles (n = 100).
Table 2.
Quantitative parameters of Rheum rhabarbarum L. petioles (n = 100).
Cultivar | Length (cm) | Width (cm) | Thickness (cm) | Weight (g) |
---|
‘Poncho’ | 29.42 ± 6.21 a | 1.79 ± 0.33 a | 1.16 ± 0.29 cd | 49.35 ± 21.88 a |
‘Victoria’ | 33.99 ± 6.39 b | 1.78 ± 0.28 a | 0.97 ± 0.19 a | 54.38 ± 15.80 a |
‘Valentine’ | 33.38 ± 6.64 b | 2.31 ± 0.34 c | 1.29 ± 0.30 d | 77.61 ± 33.60 c |
‘Red Champagne’ | 37.03 ± 7.14 c | 1.96 ± 0.48 b | 1.02 ± 0.22 ab | 63.04 ± 25.58 b |
‘Canadian Red’ | 29.55 ± 4.09 a | 2.27 ± 0.30 c | 1.07 ± 0.28 bc | 62.47 ± 20.43 b |
Table 3.
Evaluation of months according to air temperature climate normals 1961–1990.
Table 3.
Evaluation of months according to air temperature climate normals 1961–1990.
Month | Normal 1961–1990 (°C) | T (°C) 2018 | Characteristic—2018 | T (°C) 2019 | Characteristic—2019 |
---|
III | 5.0 | 3.4 | cold | 8.1 | very hot |
IV | 10.4 | 15.4 | extremely hot | 9.4 | normal |
V | 15.1 | 18.8 | very hot | 9.3 | very cold |
VI | 18.0 | 20.7 | hot | 18.7 | normal |
VII | 19.8 | 21.7 | hot | 21.9 | hot |
Table 4.
Evaluation of months according to annual precipitation climate normals 1961–1990.
Table 4.
Evaluation of months according to annual precipitation climate normals 1961–1990.
Month | Normal 1961–1990 (mm) | PRC (mm) 2018 | Characteristic—2018 | PRC (mm) 2019 | Characteristic—2019 |
---|
III | 30 | 36 | normal | 16 | very dry |
IV | 39 | 16 | very dry | 21 | dry |
V | 58 | 29 | very dry | 135 | extremely wet |
VI | 66 | 44 | dry | 29 | very dry |
VII | 52 | 13 | very dry | 21 | very dry |
Table 5.
The yields of rhubarb petioles.
Table 5.
The yields of rhubarb petioles.
Cultivar | Yield (t/ha) |
---|
2018 | 2019 | 2018–2019 |
---|
PON | 30.48 ± 4.22 a | 28.40 ± 1.10 ab | 29.44 ± 1.47 a |
CRE | 29.87 ± 1.12 a | 27.66 ± 3.20 a | 28.77 ± 1.56 a |
VAL | 36.61 ± 0.36 b | 32.35 ± 3.32 b | 34.48 ± 3.01 b |
RCH | 47.46 ± 3.60 c | 43.70 ± 1.24 c | 45.58 ± 2.65 c |
VIC | 32.70 ± 4.14 ab | 29.26 ± 2.36 ab | 30.98 ± 2.43 ab |
Table 6.
Influence of cultivar and term of harvest on juice yield of rhubarb petioles.
Table 6.
Influence of cultivar and term of harvest on juice yield of rhubarb petioles.
Cultivar | 2018 (HTA) | 2019 (HTA) | 2018–2019 (HTA) |
---|
JY (%) | JY (%) | JY (%) |
---|
PON | 77 ± 2 a | 74 ± 3 abc | 75 ± 1 a |
CRE | 79 ± 2 ab | 80 ± 3 cd | 79 ± 2 abc |
VAL | 88 ± 2 c | 72 ± 2 ab | 80 ± 3 abc |
RCH | 90 ± 3 c | 79 ± 3 bcd | 84 ± 2 c |
VIC | 87 ± 3 c | 78 ± 2 bcd | 82 ± 2 bc |
| 2018 (HTB) | 2019 (HTB) | 2018–2019 (HTB) |
PON | 84 ± 2 bc | 76 ± 2 abc | 80 ± 3 abc |
CRE | 83 ± 3 abc | 70 ± 2 a | 77 ± 2 ab |
VAL | 84 ± 3 bc | 80 ± 2 cd | 82 ± 2 bc |
RCH | 87 ± 1 c | 84 ± 3 d | 85 ± 1 c |
VIC | 84 ± 2 abc | 75 ± 1 abc | 79 ± 2 abc |
Table 7.
Effect of cultivar on fructose and glucose content in rhubarb juice.
Table 7.
Effect of cultivar on fructose and glucose content in rhubarb juice.
Cultivar | 2018 (term HTA) | 2019 (HTA) | 2018–2019 (HTA) |
---|
Fructose (g/L) | Glucose (g/L) | Fructose (g/L) | Glucose (g/L) | Fructose (g/L) | Glucose (g/L) |
---|
PON | 35.40 ± 0.34 cd | 7.88 ± 0.19 d | 35.03 ± 0.27 c | 7.77 ± 0.18 e | 35.22 ± 0.26 abc | 7.83 ± 0.08 cde |
CRE | 34.58 ± 0.20 b | 7.47 ± 0.16 c | 34.40 ± 0.36 bc | 5.69 ± 0.21 c | 34.49 ± 0.13 ab | 6.58 ± 1.26 ab |
VAL | 33.35 ± 0.45 a | 6.34 ± 0.28 a | 34.50 ± 0.21 bc | 6.65 ± 0.12 d | 33.93 ± 0.82 ab | 6.50 ± 0.22 ab |
RCH | 35.50 ± 0.80 cd | 9.48 ± 0.08 f | 34.05 ± 0.71 b | 5.33 ± 0.14 b | 34.78 ± 1.03 ab | 7.40 ± 2.93 bcd |
VIC | 36.03 ± 0.43 d | 7.78 ± 0.07 d | 32.80 ± 0.53 a | 4.74 ± 0.07 a | 34.41 ± 2.28 a | 6.26 ± 2.15 a |
| 2018 (HTB) | 2019 (HTB) | 2018–2019 (HTB) |
PON | 33.58 ± 0.49 a | 6.86 ± 0.10 b | 38.18 ± 0.58 e | 7.81 ± 0.15 e | 35.88 ± 3.25 bc | 7.34 ± 0.67 abcd |
CRE | 38.20 ± 0.41 ef | 6.90 ± 0.21 b | 36.63 ± 0.50 d | 6.82 ± 0.15 d | 37.42 ± 1.11 de | 6.86 ± 0.05 abc |
VAL | 38.46 ± 0.30 f | 8.71 ± 0.12 e | 37.40 ± 0.27 de | 8.89 ± 0.18 g | 37.93 ± 0.75 e | 8.80 ± 0.12 e |
RCH | 37.56 ± 0.09 e | 11.74 ± 0.13 g | 34.87 ± 1.00 bc | 8.20 ± 0.21 f | 36.21 ± 1.90 cd | 9.97 ± 2.51 f |
VIC | 34.89 ± 0.44 bc | 8.48 ± 0.13 e | 33.99 ± 0.19 b | 8.19 ± 0.10 f | 34.44 ± 0.64 a | 8.33 ± 0.21 de |
Table 8.
Effect of cultivar on total soluble solid content and total sugar content in rhubarb juice.
Table 8.
Effect of cultivar on total soluble solid content and total sugar content in rhubarb juice.
Cultivar | 2018 (HTA) | 2019 (HTA) | 2018–2019 (HTA) |
---|
TSS | Total sugar | TSS | Total sugar | TSS | Total sugar |
---|
°BRIX | (g/L) | °BRIX | (g/L) | °BRIX | (g/L) |
---|
PON | 3.98 ± 0.03 d | 44.89 ± 0.40 c | 4.22 ± 0.02 h | 52.82 ± 0.80 f | 4.10 ± 0.17 cd | 48.86 ± 5.61 bc |
CRE | 3.74 ± 0.02 b | 45.35 ± 0.14 c | 3.44 ± 0.04 b | 43.22 ± 0.11 a | 3.59 ± 0.21 ab | 44.29 ± 1.50 a |
VAL | 3.48 ± 0.03 a | 43.32 ± 0.12 a | 3.60 ± 0.02 c | 45.06 ± 0.15 b | 3.54 ± 0.08 a | 44.19 ± 1.23 a |
RCH | 4.15 ± 0.02 f | 52.59 ± 0.10 ef | 3.25 ± 0.01 a | 50.14 ± 0.37 e | 3.70 ± 0.63 ab | 51.36 ± 1.73 c |
VIC | 3.87 ± 0.04 c | 50.69 ± 0.22 d | 3.23 ± 0.01 a | 47.90 ± 0.48 d | 3.55 ± 0.45 a | 49.30 ± 1.91 c |
| 2018 (HTB) | 2019 (HTB) | 2018–2019 (HTB) |
PON | 3.76 ± 0.03 b | 43.99 ± 0.16 b | 3.95 ± 0.02 f | 46.82 ± 0.11 c | 3.86 ± 0.13 abc | 45.40 ± 2.00 ab |
CRE | 4.04 ± 0.05 e | 52.12 ± 0.57 e | 3.60 ± 0.03 c | 45.25 ± 0.19 b | 3.82 ± 0.32 abc | 48.69 ± 4.86 bc |
VAL | 4.50 ± 0.08 g | 54.43 ± 0.59 h | 4.12 ± 0.02 g | 48.20 ± 0.23 d | 4.31 ± 0.27 d | 51.31 ± 4.41 c |
RCH | 4.86 ± 0.06 h | 60.14 ± 0.43 i | 3.88 ± 0.03 e | 49.78 ± 0.26 e | 4.37 ± 0.70 d | 54.96 ± 7.33 d |
VIC | 4.03 ± 0.12 e | 52.85 ± 0.33 g | 3.76 ± 0.03 d | 48.51 ± 0.43 d | 3.90 ± 0.20 bc | 50.68 ± 3.07 c |
Table 9.
Effect of cultivar on malic acid and total acid content in rhubarb juice.
Table 9.
Effect of cultivar on malic acid and total acid content in rhubarb juice.
Cultivar | 2018 (HTA) | 2019 (HTA) | 2018–2019 (HTA) |
---|
Malic Acid | Total Acids | Malic Acid | Total Acids | MALIC ACID | Total Acids |
---|
(g/L) | (g/L) | (g/L) | (g/L) | (g/L) | (g/L) |
---|
PON | 21.62 ± 0.16 h | 24.73 ± 2.23 i | 15.34 ± 0.59 d | 17.43 ± 0.55 e | 18.48 ± 4.45 c | 21.08 ± 5.16 c |
CRE | 16.47 ± 1.06 e | 18.49 ± 0.10 e | 16.99 ± 1.04 g | 18.42 ± 1.04 f | 16.73 ± 0.37 b | 18.46 ± 0.25 b |
VAL | 19.40 ± 2.03 f | 21.92 ± 1.05 f | 20.19 ± 2.06 j | 21.84 ± 0.88 h | 19.80 ± 0.56 cd | 21.88 ± 0.46 cd |
RCH | 14.43 ± 1.07 a | 15.17 ± 0.03 a | 13.69 ± 0.16 c | 15.72 ± 1.06 b | 14.06 ± 0.52 a | 15.45 ± 0.39 a |
VIC | 15.49 ± 0.94 c | 16.14 ± 0.65 c | 12.13 ± 0.17 a | 15.89 ± 2.14 c | 13.81 ± 2.38 a | 16.01 ± 0.17 a |
| 2018 (HTB) | 2019 (HTB) | 2018–2019 (HTB) |
PON | 19.79 ± 1.03 g | 22.39 ± 1.06 g | 18.03 ± 1.05 h | 19.44 ± 2.07 g | 18.91 ± 1.25 c | 20.92 ± 2.08 c |
CRE | 15.08 ± 0.25 b | 16.16 ± 1.03 c | 13.44 ± 1.09 b | 14.42 ± 0.22 a | 14.26 ± 1.16 a | 15.29 ± 1.23 a |
VAL | 22.63 ± 2.08 i | 24.16 ± 2.13 h | 19.43 ± 1.06 i | 21.74 ± 0.83 h | 21.03 ± 2.27 d | 22.95 ± 1.71 d |
RCH | 14.97 ± 1.06 b | 15.90 ± 1.09 b | 15.81 ± 0.25 e | 17.10 ± 1.05 d | 15.39 ± 0.60 ab | 16.50 ± 0.85 a |
VIC | 15.71 ± 1.12 d | 16.75 ± 0.14 d | 16.21 ± 0.39 f | 17.06 ± 2.08 d | 15.96 ± 0.35 b | 16.90 ± 0.22 ab |
Table 10.
Effect of cultivar on pH level and the S/A ratio in rhubarb juice.
Table 10.
Effect of cultivar on pH level and the S/A ratio in rhubarb juice.
Cultivar | 2018 (HTA) | 2019 (HTA) | 2018–2019 (HTA) |
---|
pH | S/A Ratio | pH | S/A Ratio | pH | S/A Ratio |
---|
PON | 2.60 ± 0.02 a | 1.82 ± 0.03 a | 2.95 ± 0.04 d | 3.03 ± 0.05 g | 2.77 ± 0.08 b | 2.42 ± 0.86 b |
CRE | 2.86 ± 0.22 bc | 2.45 ± 0.01 d | 2.93 ± 0.12 d | 2.35 ± 0.00 c | 2.90 ± 0.24 b | 2.40 ± 0.07 b |
VAL | 2.73 ± 0.13 ab | 1.98 ± 0.00 b | 2.76 ± 0.14 a | 2.06 ± 0.00 a | 2.74 ± 0.25 a | 2.02 ± 0.06 a |
RCH | 2.99 ± 0.21 c | 3.47 ± 0.01 g | 3.18 ± 0.18 g | 3.19 ± 0.03 i | 3.09 ± 0.06 cd | 3.33 ± 0.20 cd |
VIC | 3.00 ± 0.32 c | 3.14 ± 0.00 e | 3.31 ± 0.11 h | 3.01 ± 0.05 g | 3.16 ± 0.04 de | 3.08 ± 0.09 cd |
| 2018 (B) | 2019 (B) | 2018–2019 (B) |
PON | 2.66 ± 0.04 a | 1.96 ± 0.01 b | 3.08 ± 0.18 e | 2.41 ± 0.00 d | 2.87 ± 0.29 b | 2.19 ± 0.31 ab |
CRE | 3.39 ± 0.28 d | 3.23 ± 0.04 f | 3.11 ± 0.16 f | 3.14 ± 0.02 h | 3.25 ± 0.20 e | 3.18 ± 0.06 cd |
VAL | 2.88 ± 0.03 c | 2.25 ± 0.03 c | 2.80 ± 0.06 b | 2.22 ± 0.01 b | 2.84 ± 0.09 b | 2.24 ± 0.03 ab |
RCH | 2.99 ± 0.02 c | 3.78 ± 0.05 h | 2.88 ± 0.09 c | 2.91 ± 0.02 f | 2.93 ± 0.06 bc | 3.35 ± 0.62 d |
VIC | 2.93 ± 0.01 c | 3.16 ± 0.04 e | 2.90 ± 0.06 c | 2.84 ± 0.03 e | 2.92 ± 0.11 b | 3.00 ± 0.22 c |