Abstract
Seeds of five maize inbred lines, including 3681-4, were treated with gibberellin A3 (GA3) and uniconazole (UCZ) under deep seeding and shallow seeding in order to elucidate the physiological mechanism of maize mesocotyl elongation under different seeding depths. GA3 was the most effective at 10-5 M and the mesocotyl elongation of 3681-4, 178, Zong 3, Huang C, Han 21 was promoted at this concentration by 60.4%, 44.6%, 42.5%, 24.2% and 44.2% under 20 cm seeding depth, respectively. Under 2 cm seeding depth, however, there were no significant differences between mesocotyl length of all inbred lines at any concentration. UCZ treatment at concentrations higher than 10-5 M, significantly inhibited mesocotyl elongation in all inbred lines under seeding depths of both 20 cm and 2 cm. Interestingly, mesocotyl elongation of only 3681-4 was significantly inhibited at the concentration of 10-7 M. These results suggested that mesocotyl elongation was more sensitive to gibberellin A (GA) under deep seeding than under shallow seeding, and that 3681-4 was more sensitive to GA than the other inbred lines. Endogenous gibberellin A1 (GA1) contents in the mesocotyls of 3681-4 and 178 treated with GA3 and UCZ were accordant with their morphological responses. GA3 promoted cell elongation rather than cell division, and that UCZ inhibited both cell elongation and cell division in 3681-4 and 178.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 10
Claim · model-written summary
3681-4 mesocotyl elongation rose 60.4% with GA3 at 20 cm seeding.
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize”
e0“GA3 was the most effective at 10-5 M and the mesocotyl elongation of 3681-4, 178, Zong 3, Huang C, Han 21 was promoted at this concentration by 60.4%, 44.6%, 42.5%, 24.2% and 44.2% under 20 cm seeding depth, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
178 mesocotyl elongation rose 44.6% with GA3 at 20 cm seeding.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize”
e0“GA3 was the most effective at 10-5 M and the mesocotyl elongation of 3681-4, 178, Zong 3, Huang C, Han 21 was promoted at this concentration by 60.4%, 44.6%, 42.5%, 24.2% and 44.2% under 20 cm seeding depth, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Zong 3 mesocotyl elongation rose 42.5% with GA3 at 20 cm seeding.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize”
e0“GA3 was the most effective at 10-5 M and the mesocotyl elongation of 3681-4, 178, Zong 3, Huang C, Han 21 was promoted at this concentration by 60.4%, 44.6%, 42.5%, 24.2% and 44.2% under 20 cm seeding depth, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Huang C mesocotyl elongation rose 24.2% with GA3 at 20 cm seeding.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize”
e0“GA3 was the most effective at 10-5 M and the mesocotyl elongation of 3681-4, 178, Zong 3, Huang C, Han 21 was promoted at this concentration by 60.4%, 44.6%, 42.5%, 24.2% and 44.2% under 20 cm seeding depth, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Han 21 mesocotyl elongation rose 44.2% with GA3 at 20 cm seeding.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize”
e0“GA3 was the most effective at 10-5 M and the mesocotyl elongation of 3681-4, 178, Zong 3, Huang C, Han 21 was promoted at this concentration by 60.4%, 44.6%, 42.5%, 24.2% and 44.2% under 20 cm seeding depth, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
At 2 cm seeding, mesocotyl length did not differ significantly at any concentration.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize”
e0“Under 2 cm seeding depth, however, there were no significant differences between mesocotyl length of all inbred lines at any concentration”
Claim · model-written summary
UCZ above 10-5 M inhibited elongation at both depths.
- Treatment
- UCZ treatment at concentrations higher than 10-5 Me0
- Outcome
- mesocotyl elongatione0
- Direction
- inhibitede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize”
e0“UCZ treatment at concentrations higher than 10-5 M, significantly inhibited mesocotyl elongation in all inbred lines under seeding depths of both 20 cm and 2 cm”
Claim · model-written summary
Only 3681-4 elongation was inhibited at 10-7 M.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize”
e0“mesocotyl elongation of only 3681-4 was significantly inhibited at the concentration of 10-7 M”
Claim · model-written summary
GA3 promoted cell elongation in 3681-4 and 178.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize”
e0“GA3 promoted cell elongation rather than cell division, and that UCZ inhibited both cell elongation and cell division in 3681-4 and 178”
Claim · model-written summary
UCZ inhibited cell elongation and division in 3681-4 and 178.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize”
e0“UCZ inhibited both cell elongation and cell division in 3681-4 and 178”
The same questions in other papers
uniconazole · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 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.