Abstract
The influence of ionizing radiation on growth in summer barley and summer wheat was examined in laboratory and pot experiments. Irradiation was carried out in the research reactor in Munich. One sample was hung directly over the reactor core in the swimming pool; the other was hung four meters higher. Exposure lasted one hour. The gamma dose 0 meter above the core was 10/sup 4/ r, the neutron flux was 2 x 10/sup 15/ n/cm/sup 2/. Four m above the core the gamma dose was only 400 mr. The laboratory and pot experiments showed greater radiation sensitivity in summer barley than in summer wheat. Bud tests showed that double irradiation (0 meters above the core) produced marked bud damage and retardation in both wheat and barley; the greater effect was found in barley. Fourteen-day sprout-length measurements in young plants showed a stimulative effect on both growth length and dry-weight yield in the plants exposed to simple irradiation. The weight dryweight yield was 6.1% and that of barley 5.4% higher than in the non-irradiated samples. Pot experiments in which growth was observed during the entire vegetation time are also described. During the time of observation no difference was found between themore » untreated series and those exposed to simple irradiation in regard to growth, bushing, and earing. The barley sample exposed to double irradiation suffered total damage and died after three weeks. The similarly treated wheat sample (0 meter above the core) at first showed slight radiation damage (marbling), but this disappeared during the further course of growth. During the entire vegetation time these plants had a malnourished appearance. The wheat plants remained stunted during the whole period, grew at various rates, and showed greater bushing, spiral-shaped rolls on the upper blades, and 37% abnormal ear forms. The stimulative effect in the wheat samples exposed to simple irradiation continued up to harvest. The straw yield was increased by 4.4%, the grain yield by 5.5%. The barley sample in the same series showed no definite change in yield. (auth)« less
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 17
Claim · model-written summary
Summer barley showed greater radiation sensitivity than summer wheat in laboratory and pot experiments.
- Taxon
- summer barley
.jpg?width=60)
Hordeum vulgaree1 - Treatment
- ionizing radiatione0
- Outcome
- radiation sensitivitye1
- Direction
- greatere1
- Comparator
- summer wheate1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“The influence of ionizing radiation on growth in summer barley and summer wheat was examined in laboratory and pot experiments”
e1“The laboratory and pot experiments showed greater radiation sensitivity in summer barley than in summer wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Double irradiation produced marked bud damage and retardation in wheat.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume2 - Treatment
- double irradiatione2
- Outcome
- bud damage and retardatione2
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“Bud tests showed that double irradiation (0 meters above the core) produced marked bud damage and retardation in both wheat and barley”
Claim · model-written summary
Bud damage from double irradiation was greater in barley than in wheat.
- Taxon
- barleyHordeum vulgaree3
- Treatment
- double irradiatione2
- Outcome
- bud damagee2
- Direction
- greatere3
- Comparator
- wheate2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“Bud tests showed that double irradiation (0 meters above the core) produced marked bud damage and retardation in both wheat and barley”
e3“the greater effect was found in barley”
Claim · model-written summary
Simple irradiation had a stimulative effect on growth length and dry-weight yield of young summer barley and summer wheat plants.
- Taxon
- summer barley and summer wheatHordeum vulgareTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- simple irradiatione4
- Outcome
- growth length and dry-weight yielde4
- Direction
- stimulative effecte4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The influence of ionizing radiation on growth in summer barley and summer wheat was examined in laboratory and pot experiments”
e4“Fourteen-day sprout-length measurements in young plants showed a stimulative effect on both growth length and dry-weight yield in the plants exposed to simple irradiation”
Claim · model-written summary
Dry-weight yield of wheat was 6.1% higher than in non-irradiated samples after simple irradiation.
- Taxon
- summer wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- simple irradiatione4
- Outcome
- dryweight yielde5
- Direction
- highere5
- Value
- 6.1%e5
- Comparator
- non-irradiated samplese5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The influence of ionizing radiation on growth in summer barley and summer wheat was examined in laboratory and pot experiments”
e4“the plants exposed to simple irradiation”
e5“The weight dryweight yield was 6.1% and that of barley 5.4% higher than in the non-irradiated samples”
Claim · model-written summary
Dry-weight yield of barley was 5.4% higher than in non-irradiated samples after simple irradiation.
- Taxon
- barleyHordeum vulgaree5
- Treatment
- simple irradiatione4
- Outcome
- dryweight yielde5
- Direction
- highere5
- Value
- 5.4%e5
- Comparator
- non-irradiated samplese5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The influence of ionizing radiation on growth in summer barley and summer wheat was examined in laboratory and pot experiments”
e4“the plants exposed to simple irradiation”
e5“The weight dryweight yield was 6.1% and that of barley 5.4% higher than in the non-irradiated samples”
Claim · model-written summary
In pot experiments, simple irradiation caused no difference from untreated series in growth, bushing and earing.
- Taxon
- summer barley and summer wheatHordeum vulgareTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- simple irradiatione6
- Outcome
- growth, bushing, and earinge6
- Direction
- no differencee6
- Comparator
- untreated seriese6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The influence of ionizing radiation on growth in summer barley and summer wheat was examined in laboratory and pot experiments”
e6“During the time of observation no difference was found between themore » untreated series and those exposed to simple irradiation in regard to growth, bushing, and earing”
Claim · model-written summary
Double irradiation caused total damage and death of barley after three weeks.
- Taxon
- barleyHordeum vulgaree7
- Treatment
- double irradiatione7
- Outcome
- total damagee7
- Qualifier
- died after three weekse7
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e7“The barley sample exposed to double irradiation suffered total damage and died after three weeks”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat treated at 0 m above the core showed slight radiation damage (marbling) at first, which disappeared during growth.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Treatment
- 0 meter above the coree1
- Outcome
- slight radiation damage (marbling)e1
- Qualifier
- disappeared during the further course of growthe1
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The similarly treated wheat sample (0 meter above the core) at first showed slight radiation damage (marbling), but this disappeared during the further course of growth”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat plants treated at 0 m above the core remained stunted during the whole period.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- stuntede0
- Qualifier
- during the whole periode0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The wheat plants remained stunted during the whole period, grew at various rates, and showed greater bushing, spiral-shaped rolls on the upper blades, and 37% abnormal ear forms”
Claim · model-written summary
37% of wheat ears were abnormal after double irradiation at 0 m above the core.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- abnormal ear formse0
- Value
- 37%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The wheat plants remained stunted during the whole period, grew at various rates, and showed greater bushing, spiral-shaped rolls on the upper blades, and 37% abnormal ear forms”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat plants showed greater bushing after irradiation at 0 m above the core.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- bushinge0
- Direction
- greatere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The wheat plants remained stunted during the whole period, grew at various rates, and showed greater bushing, spiral-shaped rolls on the upper blades, and 37% abnormal ear forms”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat plants showed spiral-shaped rolls on the upper blades after irradiation at 0 m above the core.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- spiral-shaped rolls on the upper bladese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The wheat plants remained stunted during the whole period, grew at various rates, and showed greater bushing, spiral-shaped rolls on the upper blades, and 37% abnormal ear forms”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat plants had a malnourished appearance throughout the vegetation period after irradiation at 0 m above the core.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- malnourished appearancee1
- Qualifier
- During the entire vegetation timee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The wheat plants remained stunted during the whole period, grew at various rates, and showed greater bushing, spiral-shaped rolls on the upper blades, and 37% abnormal ear forms”
e1“During the entire vegetation time these plants had a malnourished appearance”
Claim · model-written summary
Straw yield of wheat increased by 4.4% after simple irradiation, and the stimulative effect continued up to harvest.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- simple irradiatione0
- Outcome
- straw yielde1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 4.4%e1
- Qualifier
- continued up to harveste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The stimulative effect in the wheat samples exposed to simple irradiation continued up to harvest”
e1“The straw yield was increased by 4.4%, the grain yield by 5.5%”
Claim · model-written summary
Grain yield of wheat increased by 5.5% after simple irradiation.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- simple irradiatione0
- Outcome
- grain yielde1
- Direction
- increaseinferrede1
- Value
- 5.5%e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The stimulative effect in the wheat samples exposed to simple irradiation continued up to harvest”
e1“The straw yield was increased by 4.4%, the grain yield by 5.5%”
Claim · model-written summary
Yield of barley showed no definite change after simple irradiation.
- Taxon
- barleyHordeum vulgaree0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- no definite changee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The barley sample in the same series showed no definite change in yield”
The same questions in other papers
radiation · growth · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Results differ
22 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
32 papers more in this group
See all 36 papers →radiation · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
22 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
35 papers more in this group
See all 39 papers →radiation · pest · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →radiation · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 papers →radiation · pest · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 papers →radiation · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
53 papers in the same direction as this paper · 35 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
85 papers more in this group
See all 89 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.