I'm analysing data from a field experiment (let's say a varietal comparison), and testing the hypothesis of differences between and within groups of cultivars. I'm testing this hypothesis through ANOVA with a set of orthogonal linear contrasts.

However, it is also worth presenting the means of each cultivar and the least significant differences that allow us to discriminate which cultivars are different from which others (which is what you currently find in published works).

Are the approach of "a priori comparisons" -with contrasts- and "post hoc comparison" -with the estimate of an LSD- compatible in results presentation? Or would it be more correct to consider them as mutually exclusive?