Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Slow drying sharply reduced viability at about 0.26 g g¹ dm.

A claim from Increasing the rate of drying reduces metabolic imbalance, lipid peroxidation and critical water content in radicles of garden pea (Pisum sativum L.) · 2013

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Slow drying sharply reduced viability at about 0.26 g g¹ dm.

Taxon
Pisum sativumLathyrus oleraceust0
Treatment
slow (c. 5 days) dryinge0
Outcome
Viabilitye0
Direction
declined sharplye0
Value
c. 0.26 g g¹ dme0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingQualifier

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lathyrus oleraceus
Lathyrus oleraceus · TaxonRenee Comet (photographer) AV Number: AV-9400-4164 · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Viability, as assessed by germination capacity and tetrazolium staining, remained at 100% during rapid (< 24 h) desiccation. However, it declined sharply at c. 0.26 g g¹ dm following slow (c. 5 days) drying.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 459–666
t0

“Pisum sativum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 132–145

Title

Increasing the rate of drying reduces metabolic imbalance, lipid peroxidation and critical water content in radicles of garden pea (Pisum sativum L.)

Tobias M Ntuli; Norman W Pammenter; Patricia Berjak Biological Research 2013. doi:10.4067/s0716-97602013000200002

Other claims from this paper (7)

Record rev-dc69c2fa2bf394aa2c202c8b65688b6ef640fb6a4624602def0571dce4b4c56e · schema claims-v0.9 · position 2 in the model’s answer

processing · growth · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 5 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this claim · 5 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
  4. positive
  5. positive
  6. no effect
  7. negative
See all 8 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.