## 3 Results and Discussion
### HCA, PCA, and Correlation Analysis
Conversely, GPP demonstrated a negative correlation with SL (\(r=-0.47\)) and AL (\(r=-0.47\)) while displaying a positive association with CL (\(r=0.23\)), each except the latter being significant (\(p<0.001\)). TGW showed positive correlations with AL (\(r=0.62\)) and SL (\(r=0.24\)) but displayed a negative correlation with GPP (\(r=-0.37\)) and a weak correlation with CL (\(r=0.04\)). Many of these correlations were in agreement with previous studies [3; 18; 45]. Among the biochemical traits, \(\beta\)-glucan content demonstrated a strong and positive association with TGW (\(r=0.35\), \(p<0.01\)), both showing negative \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Variables**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**PC1**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**PC2**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**PC3**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**PC4**} \\ \cline{2-9}  & **FL** & **\%** & **FL** & **\%** & **FL** & **\%** & **FL** & **\%** \\ \hline DH & 0.39 & 3.86 & 0.77 & 22.67 & \(-\)0.33 & 5.46 & \(-\)0.32 & 8.65 \\ DM & 0.46 & 5.21 & 0.62 & 14.59 & \(-\)0.44 & 9.79 & \(-\)0.01 & 0.00 \\ DHM & \(-\)0.03 & 0.03 & \(-\)0.55 & 11.59 & \(-\)0.07 & 0.26 & 0.66 & 37.41 \\ CL & \(-\)0.21 & 1.13 & \(-\)0.01 & 0.01 & 0.71 & 25.60 & \(-\)0.41 & 14.67 \\ SL & 0.23 & 1.32 & 0.60 & 13.60 & 0.47 & 11.17 & 0.17 & 2.50 \\ AL & \(-\)0.39 & 3.82 & 0.61 & 14.23 & 0.42 & 8.89 & 0.24 & 5.02 \\ GPP & \(-\)0.15 & 0.54 & \(-\)0.65 & 15.84 & \(-\)0.05 & 0.13 & \(-\)0.57 & 27.97 \\ TGW & \(-\)0.74 & 13.79 & 0.36 & 5.06 & 0.28 & 4.05 & 0.03 & 0.06 \\ ABTS & 0.86 & 18.52 & \(-\)0.16 & 1.00 & 0.21 & 2.31 & 0.08 & 0.62 \\ DPPH & 0.74 & 13.69 & \(-\)0.12 & 0.54 & 0.52 & 13.95 & \(-\)0.05 & 0.19 \\ RP & 0.79 & 15.81 & \(-\)0.12 & 0.53 & 0.48 & 11.63 & \(-\)0.04 & 0.11 \\ TPC & 0.68 & 11.50 & \(-\)0.07 & 0.19 & 0.03 & 0.06 & 0.15 & 2.02 \\ \(\beta\)-GL & \(-\)0.66 & 10.78 & \(-\)0.06 & 0.14 & 0.36 & 6.71 & 0.09 & 0.77 \\ \hline Eigenvalue & 4.00 & & 2.63 & & 1.96 & & 1.16 \\ Variability (\%) & 30.75 & & 20.21 & & 15.08 & & 8.93 \\ Cumulative (\%) & 30.75 & & 50.96 & & 66.04 & & 74.96 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{ABTS\({}^{\bullet\bullet}\) scavenging activity, AL: Awn length, CL: Culn length, DH: Days to heading, DM: days to maturity, DHM: Days from heading to maturity, DPPH: DPPH\({}^{\bullet}\) scavenging activity, FL: Loading factor, GPP: Number of grains per paniole, RP: Reducing power, SL: Spike length, TGW: One-thousand grains weight, TPC: Total phenolic content, \(\beta\)-CL: \(\beta\)-glucan content.} \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Eigenvalues and variability of the first four principal components and contribution of agronomical and biochemical traits in the PCA. and significant correlations with the other biochemical traits. In contrast, TPC displayed positive and significant associations with each of the antioxidant activities, including DPPH, ABTS, and RP (\(r\geq 0.43\)). These findings are in line with previous studies, which strengthen the role of phenolic compounds in controlling reactive radicals [55; 58; 60].