Quantifying the Effect of Soil Ameliorants on Soil Crusting by Means of Field Experiments in a Wildlife Protected Area, South Africa

Table 5

Statistical significance of differences between treatment means in regard to crust strength.

1	There is a trend for PAM 0.5 g/m^2 to be higher than the control
2	There is a trend for PAM 2.0 g/m^2 to be higher than the control
3	PAM 0.5 g/m^2 and molasses meal 500 g/m^2 combination do not differ significantly from any other treatment
4	There is a trend for PAM 0.5 g/m^2 and gypsum 250 g/m^2 combination to be lower than gypsum 250 g/m^2 and molasses meal 500 g/m^2 combination and brush packing
5	Gypsum 250 g/m^2 is significantly lower than brush packing and there is a trend to be lower than gypsum 250 g/m^2 and molasses meal 500 g/m^2 combination
6	Gypsum 250 g/m^2 and molasses meal 500 g/m^2 combination is significantly higher than molasses meal 500 g/m^2 and highly significantly higher than the control. There is also a trend for gypsum 250 g/m^2 and molasses meal 500 g/m^2 combination to be higher than PAM 0.5 g/m^2 and gypsum 250 g/m^2 combination and gypsum 250 g/m^2
7	Molasses meal 500 g/m^2 is significantly lower than gypsum 250 g/m^2 and molasses meal 500 g/m^2 combination and brush packing
8	Brush packing is significantly higher than gypsum 250 g/m^2 and molasses meal 500 g/m^2 and highly significantly higher than the control, with a trend to be higher than PAM 0.5 g/m^2 and gypsum 250 g/m^2 combination
9	The control is highly significantly lower than gypsum 250 g/m^2 and molasses meal 500 g/m^2 combination and brush packing, with a trend to be lower than PAM 0.5 g/m^2 and PAM 2.0 g/m^2