L.S.D.


Also found in: Idioms, Wikipedia.

L.S.D.

,

£.s.d.

or

l.s.d.

(in Britain, esp formerly) abbreviation for
(Currencies) librae, solidi, denarii
[Latin: pounds, shillings, pence]
Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged, 12th Edition 2014 © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014
References in periodicals archive ?
Water N Plant Root Leaves regime fertilizer height, length, weight, (W) source (F) cm cm gm 100% Without 13.67 12.33 3.03 Ammonium 26.00 23.67 6.00 Nitrate Urea 29.67 28.00 6.37 75% Without 13.00 9.67 2.07 Ammonium 29.00 28.33 6.17 Nitrate Urea 29.67 34.67 6.90 50% Without 10.67 8.67 1.50 Ammonium 17.67 18.33 3.47 Nitrate Urea 18.67 22.00 3.87 Water 100% 23.11 23.11 5.13 regime 75% 23.89 23.89 5.04 (W) 50% 15.67 15.67 2.94 N fertilizer Without 12.44 12.44 2.20 source(F) Ammonium 24.22 24.22 5.21 Nitrate Urea 26.00 26.00 5.71 L.S.D. at 5 % 2.30 5.49 0.75 level for W L.S.D.
Least significant difference (l.s.d.) at P=0.05 was used to determine significant differences from depth and depth x sampling date.
Oa, Pc, Sd, and the interaction terms of Oa x Pc, Oa x Sd, Pc x Sd and Oa x Pc x Sd were all fitted as fixed effects to enable use l.s.d. for treatment comparison.
When ANOVA indicated a significant F-value, multiple comparisons of annual mean values were made on the basis of the least significant difference (l.s.d.).
Leaf area index, plant height (cm), plant dry weight (g/plant) and root dry weight (g/plant) of spring maize for two treatments in the seedling stage during 2005, 2006, and 2007 RT, Ridge tillage; NT, no tillage; CT, conventional tillage Sujiatun, Liaoning RT NT CT Leaf area index Year 1 (2005) 0.39 0.32 0.35 Year 2 (2006) 0.37 0.30 0.27 Year 3 (2007) 0.43 0.41 0.28 l.s.d. [(0.05).sub.treatment] 0.021 l.s.d.
"It is as if he has had the L.S.D. drug and instead of experiencing the kicks, he has the hell and dank horror which can be its effect," the memo said.
The last section looks at the central role of L.S.D. in shaping the politics and culture of the 1960s.
Treatments Plant height (cm) 6 rows 8 rows Mean [F.sub.1] 116.80 118.24 117.52 [F.sub.2] 117.15 119.62 118.38 [F.sub.3] 88.33 90.76 89.54 [F.sub.4] 89.98 91.29 90.63 Average of mineral 103.06 104.97 104.02 N fertilizer rates L.S.D. 0.05 Mineral 3.71 N fertilizer rates L.S.D.
For significant effects, least significant difference (l.s.d.) was used for comparison between treatment means.
Comparison of total P, Colwell-P, and Ca[Cl.sub.2]-P concentrations (mg/kg) at 3 sampling depths in unfarmed reference and adjacent vegetable soils from the Sydney region, NSW, Australia Values in parentheses are the log-transformed means used for statistical comparison; l.s.d. at P = 0.05 to compare land use within each of the soil depths and mean soil depth Soil land use Sampling depth (m) 0-0.10 0.10-0.20 0.20-0.30 Ca[Cl.sub.2]-P Reference 0.07 (-1.185) 0.02 (-1.792) 0.01 (-1.896) Vegetable 6.77 (0.830) 4.78 (0.679) 1.23 (0.090) l.s.d.