Abstract
ABSTRACT Initial and adjusted osmotic potentials of separate leaf- and root-derived calli were assessed in vitro for two teparies (Phaseolus acutifolius A. Czray) and a common bean (P. vulgaris L.) cultivar differing in physiological and morpho-physiological reactions of intact plants to water stress. Unstressed leaf- and root-derived calli of common bean (CB) had higher preexisting osmotic potential (ψs) and relative growth rate (RGR) but lower dry-matter percent (DM) than those of tepary bean (TB) lines when grown on basal Murashige and Skoog medium (–0.30 MPa). Exposure to water stress (−0.58 MPa) imposed by adding polyethylene glycol (10% [w/v], PEG-10,000) did not affect these parameters for leaf-derived callus of CB and both leaf- and root-derived calli of TB. However, root-derived callus of CB showed decreased ψs that was maintained after transferring stressed callus onto medium lacking PEG for recovery from water stress. Nevertheless, its RGR decreased and DM increased. Stressed plants of both CB and TB grown in the greenhouse manifested significant reduction in leaf, stem, and root dry mass and leaf area. However, the magnitude of mass reduction was especially high for CB stem, leaf, and root. While TB root system penetrated deeper in the soil profile, CB root depth did not significantly change in response to drought. In addition, substantial CB root mass was detected in the top 10 to 20 cm of the soil profile. Stomata conductance and transpiration rate were higher for CB than TB under both well-watered and water-stress conditions. Significant relative water content reduction was detected only in CB. In spite of water stress, soil moisture was high around roots of CB compared with TB, suggesting lesser efficiency of CB root system to extract water. Stressed CB grown in the production field did not produce seed yield whereas TB gave 60 to 64% of its potential dry seed yield. In vitro assay for root osmotic potential should be useful in improving drought resistance in common bean.
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
Unstressed common bean calli had higher osmotic potential and relative growth rate than tepary calli.
- Taxon
- common bean
Phaseolus vulgarise0 - Material
- common bean (CB)e0
- Outcome
- preexisting osmotic potential (ψs) and relative growth rate (RGR)e0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- tepary bean (TB) linese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Unstressed leaf- and root-derived calli of common bean (CB) had higher preexisting osmotic potential (ψs) and relative growth rate (RGR) but lower dry-matter percent (DM) than those of tepary bean (TB) lines”
Claim · model-written summary
Unstressed common bean calli had lower dry matter percentage than tepary calli.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise0
- Outcome
- dry-matter percent (DM)e0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- tepary bean (TB) linese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Unstressed leaf- and root-derived calli of common bean (CB) had higher preexisting osmotic potential (ψs) and relative growth rate (RGR) but lower dry-matter percent (DM) than those of tepary bean (TB) lines”
Claim · model-written summary
Water stress did not affect measured parameters for common bean leaf callus or tepary leaf and root calli.
- Taxon
- Common BeanPhaseolus vulgarist0
- Treatment
- water stress (−0.58 MPa)e0
- Outcome
- these parameterse0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Exposure to water stress (−0.58 MPa) imposed by adding polyethylene glycol (10% [w/v], PEG-10,000) did not affect these parameters for leaf-derived callus of CB and both leaf- and root-derived calli of TB.”
t0“Common Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
Common bean root callus osmotic potential decreased under water stress and remained low after recovery.
- Taxon
- Common BeanPhaseolus vulgarist0
- Organ / stage
- root-derived calluse0
- Treatment
- water stresse0
- Outcome
- ψse0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“root-derived callus of CB showed decreased ψs that was maintained after transferring stressed callus onto medium lacking PEG for recovery from water stress.”
t0“Common Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
Common bean root callus relative growth rate decreased.
- Taxon
- Common BeanPhaseolus vulgarist0
- Outcome
- RGRe0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Nevertheless, its RGR decreased and DM increased.”
t0“Common Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
Common bean root callus dry matter increased.
- Taxon
- Common BeanPhaseolus vulgarist0
- Outcome
- DMe0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Nevertheless, its RGR decreased and DM increased.”
t0“Common Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
Stress significantly reduced leaf, stem and root dry mass and leaf area in both bean types.
- Taxon
- Common BeanPhaseolus vulgarist0
- Treatment
- Stressede0
- Outcome
- leaf, stem, and root dry mass and leaf areae0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Setting
- greenhousee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Stressed plants of both CB and TB grown in the greenhouse manifested significant reduction in leaf, stem, and root dry mass and leaf area.”
t0“Common Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
Mass reduction was especially high in common bean stem, leaf and root.
- Taxon
- Common BeanPhaseolus vulgarist0
- Organ / stage
- stem, leaf, and roote0
- Outcome
- mass reductione0
- Direction
- especially highe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the magnitude of mass reduction was especially high for CB stem, leaf, and root.”
t0“Common Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
Tepary roots penetrated deeper in soil.
Verbatim
e0“TB root system penetrated deeper in the soil profile”
t0“two teparies (Phaseolus acutifolius A. Czray)”
Claim · model-written summary
Common bean root depth did not significantly change with drought.
- Taxon
- Common BeanPhaseolus vulgarist0
- Treatment
- droughte0
- Outcome
- root depthe0
- Direction
- did not significantly changee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“CB root depth did not significantly change in response to drought.”
t0“Common Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
Substantial common bean root mass occurred in the upper 10 to 20 cm of soil.
- Taxon
- Common BeanPhaseolus vulgarist0
- Organ / stage
- roote0
- Outcome
- root masse0
- Value
- 10 to 20 cme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“substantial CB root mass was detected in the top 10 to 20 cm of the soil profile.”
t0“Common Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
Common bean had higher stomatal conductance and transpiration than tepary under both watering regimes.
- Taxon
- Common BeanPhaseolus vulgarist0
- Outcome
- Stomata conductance and transpiration ratee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- both well-watered and water-stress conditionse0
- Comparator
- TBe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Stomata conductance and transpiration rate were higher for CB than TB under both well-watered and water-stress conditions.”
t0“Common Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
Only common bean had a significant decrease in relative water content.
- Taxon
- Common BeanPhaseolus vulgarist0
- Outcome
- relative water contente0
- Direction
- reductione0
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Significant relative water content reduction was detected only in CB.”
t0“Common Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil moisture near common bean roots was higher than near tepary roots during stress.
- Taxon
- Common BeanPhaseolus vulgarist0
- Outcome
- soil moisturee0
- Direction
- highe0
- Comparator
- TBe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“soil moisture was high around roots of CB compared with TB”
t0“Common Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
Stressed common bean produced no seed yield in the production field.
- Taxon
- Common BeanPhaseolus vulgarist0
- Treatment
- Stressede0
- Outcome
- seed yielde0
- Direction
- did not producee0
- Setting
- production fielde0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Stressed CB grown in the production field did not produce seed yield”
t0“Common Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
Stressed tepary retained 60 to 64% of potential dry seed yield.
Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection
Verbatim
e0“TB gave 60 to 64% of its potential dry seed yield.”
t0“two teparies (Phaseolus acutifolius A. Czray)”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend the root osmotic potential assay for common bean drought resistance improvement.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise0
- Outcome
- In vitro assay for root osmotic potentiale0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In vitro assay for root osmotic potential should be useful in improving drought resistance in common bean.”
The same questions in other papers
drought · growth · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Results differ
58 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
61 papers more in this group
See all 65 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.