Skip to main content

Table 3 Comparison of the clustering by STRUCTURE, PCA and UPGME

From: Genetic diversity and structure of tea plant in Qinba area in China by three types of molecular markers

Clustering method

Code of group1

Code of group2

STRUCTURE

1,3,4,5,6,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,22,40,42,43,48,49

2,7,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,41,44,45,46,47,50

PCA

1,3,4,5,6,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,22,40,42,43,48,49

2,7,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,41,44,45,46,47,50

UPGMA

1,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,22,25,27,32,35,37, 39,40,41, 42,43, 44,48,49

2,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,23,24,26,28,29,30,31,33,34,36,38,45,46,47,50

  1. Note: Bold numbers in group 1 by UPGMA method refer to the code that different from STRUCTURE and PC method
Back to article page

Hereditas

ISSN: 1601-5223

Contact us