Table 1.

Comparison of DTW for one-year-old droughtstressed, humectant-treated red maple and red oak seedlings representing different production types^{^z}.

Year	Species	Humectant^{^y}	Concn (mL/L)	DTW^{^x}		P-value
Year	Species	Humectant^{^y}	Concn (mL/L)	PPS^{^w}	BRS^{^v}	P-value
2007	Red maple	HydES	8	25.7	36.3	0.00**
			16	26.5	40.4	0.00**
			32	27.0	44.0	0.00**
	Red oak	HydES	8	29.8	31.7	0.39
			16	35.3	41.7	0.02*
			32	40.2	37.7	0.57
2008	Red maple	HydES	12	29.3	25.6	0.06
	Red maple	HydES	16	35.4	28.1	0.01**
	Red maple	EcoS	12	30.0	27.9	0.52
	Red maple	EcoS	16	30.4	28.1	0.52

↵^zOne-year-old seedlings grown in a greenhouse in 3.8 L plastic containers filled with soilless substrate. Each value represents the mean of six (2007) or seven (2008) replications. Comparisons between production types for each species and each level of humectant made using Tukey’s pairwise comparison test, P < 0.05 (*), P < 0.01 (**).
↵^yHumectant applied as a media drench at 350 mL per container.
↵^xNumber of days to wilt.
↵^wPeat plug system.
↵^vBare-root system.