Fig. 1: Agronomic yield of nontransgenic, VIT1 and IRT1 + FER1 transgenic cassava plants. | Nature Biotechnology

Fig. 1: Agronomic yield of nontransgenic, VIT1 and IRT1 + FER1 transgenic cassava plants.

From: Biofortification of field-grown cassava by engineering expression of an iron transporter and ferritin

Fig. 1

a–e, Shoot phenotypes of 12-month-old nontransgenic control TME 204 (a), VIT1 (b) and IRT1 + FER1 (c) plants. Waxed storage roots of nontransgenic control and transgenic VIT1 (d) and IRT1 + FER1 (e) plants. f,g, Storage-root yields for VIT1 (f) and IRT1 + FER1 (g) transgenic plants, along with nontransgenic control. Box-and-whisker plots were constructed with the R package ggplot2. The upper whisker extends from the hinge to the largest value, no further than 1.5× the interquartile range (IQR, distance between the first and third quartiles) from the hinge. The lower whisker extends from the hinge to the smallest value, at most 1.5× the IQR of the hinge. Data beyond the ends of the whiskers are considered outlying points and are plotted individually. For VIT1, n = 9 biologically independent plants (3 plants/replicate); for IRT1 + FER1, n = 4 biologically independent plants. Statistical tests were performed with two-sided Student’s t test, relative to nontransgenic control. *P ≤ 0.05; **P ≤ 0.01; ***P ≤ 0.001. WT, wild-type plants; EV control, empty-vector control plants.

Back to article page