## 3 Results  
### Differences in Anthropometric Variables Based on Maturity Status and Gender  
Based on the maturity status classification, 36.17% of both boy and girl players were classified as \"on-time-maturing\", 23.61% as \"early-maturing\", and 40.21% as \"late-maturing\" (Figures 1 and 2). The means and standard deviations of the body composition parameters in the Tunisian basketball players are presented in Table 1. All players were categorized as early-, on-time-, and late-maturing. Regardless of gender, an increase in anthropometric parameters was observed across the early-, on-time-, and late-maturity status groups. Additionally, there were significant differences in most anthropometric parameters between the sexes (\(p<0.05\)) across the different maturity status groups, except for body mass index. Boys were significantly taller and heavier compared to girls (see Table 1). For example,  
Figure 1: Distribution of Tunisian basketball players according to maturity status and gender. post hoc analysis indicated that anthropometric variables were significantly higher in late-maturing players compared to early- and on-time-maturing players. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l l l l l} \hline \hline
**Maturity Status** & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Early-Maturing**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(p\) **Values ***} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\
\begin{tabular}{c} **On-Time-** \\ **Maturing** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(p\) **Values ***} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Late-Maturing**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(p\) **Values ***} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(p\) **Values ***} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(p\) **Values * b**} \\ \hline
\begin{tabular}{l} Chronological age \\ (years) \\ \end{tabular} & Boys & \(\star\) 12.58 \(\pm\) 1.48 & 0.049 & \(\star\) 13.96 \(\pm\) 0.90 & 0.001 & \(\star\) 17.34 \(\pm\) 1.75 \(\pm\) & 0.043 & 0.001 \\  & Girls & 12.90 \(\pm\) 1.02 & & 14.79 \(\pm\) 1.07 & & 17.86 \(\pm\) 1.73 \(\pm\) & & 0.001 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Body mass (kg)} & Boys & \(\star\) 49.02 \(\pm\) 9.35 & 0.043 & \(\star\) 62.30 \(\pm\) 10.53 & 0.006 & \(\star\) 78.61 \(\pm\) 11.54 \(\pm\) & 0.001 & 0.001 \\  & Girls & 49.85 \(\pm\) 8.51 & & 57.97 \(\pm\) 9.61 & & 65.36 \(\pm\) 10.49 \(\pm\) & 0.001 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Standing height (cm)} & Boys & \(\star\) 15.52 \(\pm\) 6.98 & 0.038 & \(\star\) 170.85 \(\pm\) 7.48 & 0.001 & \(\star\) 187.56 \(\pm\) 8.51 \(\pm\) & 0.001 & 0.001 \\  & Girls & 157.25 \(\pm\) 5.95 & & 163.79 \(\pm\) 5.29 & & 168.22 \(\pm\) 6.31 \(\pm\) & 0.001 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Sitting height (cm)} & Boys & \(\star\) 74.66 \(\pm\) 4.49 & 0.034 & \(\star\) 83.21 \(\pm\) 2.71 & 0.016 & \(\star\) 91.37 \(\pm\) 4.46 \(\pm\) & 0.001 & 0.001 \\  & Girls & 76.44 \(\pm\) 3.50 & & 82.20 \(\pm\) 2.70 & & 86.33 \(\pm\) 2.93 \(\pm\) & & 0.001 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Leg length (cm)} & Boys & \(\star\) 80.60 \(\pm\) 8.30 & 0.048 & \(\star\) 87.63 \(\pm\) 6.22 & 0.001 & \(\star\) 96.19 \(\pm\) 6.00 \(\pm\) & 0.001 & 0.001 \\  & Girls & 81.46 \(\pm\) 7.58 & & 81.59 \(\pm\) 4.89 & & 82.10 \(\pm\) 4.98 & & 0.764 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Body mass index (kg-m\({}^{2}\))} & Boys & 20.25 \(\pm\) 3.22 \(\star\) & 0.044 & 21.34 \(\pm\) 3.47 & 0.654 & 22.32 \(\pm\) 2.92 \(\pm\) & 0.118 & 0.001 \\  & Girls & 20.08 \(\pm\) 2.61 & & 21.57 \(\pm\) 3.11 & & 23.07 \(\pm\) 3.24 \(\pm\) & & 0.001 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Fat mass (kg)} & Boys & \(\star\) 9.44 \(\pm\) 4.27 & 0.413 & \(\star\) 9.44 \(\pm\) 3.75 & 0.028 & 12.77 \(\pm\) 4.86 \(\pm\) & 0.406 & 0.001 \\  & Girls & 8.39 \(\pm\) 2.74 & & 10.58 \(\pm\) 2.89 & & 12.05 \(\pm\) 5.95 \(\pm\) & & 0.001 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Fat-free mass (kg)} & Boys & \(\star\) 40.08 \(\pm\) 6.56 & 0.042 & \(\star\) 52.86 \(\pm\) 8.18 & 0.001 & \(\star\) 65.84 \(\pm\) 8.80 \(\pm\) & 0.001 & 0.001 \\  & Girls & 41.46 \(\pm\) 6.43 & & 47.39 \(\pm\) 7.32 & & 53.30 \(\pm\) 6.75 \(\pm\) & & 0.001 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Anthropometric parameters in Tunisian basketball players categorized by maturity status and gender.