UPDATED 09-30-11
Just using a simple population mean test, with the hypothesis that if the treatment had no effect, the mean difference between the control and treatment should be zero, I get the following p-values.

Miravalle 8 (2009): p~0
Miravalle 9 (2009): p=7.8E-5
Miravalle 25 (2009): p~0
Miravalle 32 (2009): p~1.0E-5
Miravalle 34 (2009): p~2.0E-6

Miravalle 8 (2010): p=0.000178
Miravalle 9 (2010): p~0
Miravalle 25 (2010): p=1.8E-5
Miravalle 32 (2010): p=5.2E-5
Miravalle 34 (2010): 0.058
La Perla 28 (2010): 0.12

Anything with a p<0.05 is statistically significant, so it appears that the treatments (whatever these consisted of) were all highly significant for reducing water stress with the exception of Miravalle 34 (2010) and La Perla 28 (2010).

Just a brief follow up the the 2010 numbers in Miravalle and La Perla; 2010 was a very wet spring and summer so we did not have the stresses we did in 2009.

had a lot of questions regarding the LaPerla readings being so different than the other blocks, meaning LP stress levels were high in both myco and control.

After soil reports, sun exposure, root stocks, etc. I finally figured out why.

LP was in its 11th leaf, where all the other blocks were 4-8 years old. We internally found out that our rate of inoculum was the same for all ages, so I increased that block by 30% the following fall with an additional application, so we are now seeing things even out and learn more regarding at what ages we need additional material to achieve the desired results.

BACK TO CAB STRESS EVAUL

BACK TO NEWS

In The News