Abstract
Shading of maize plants ( Zea mays L. cv. Blizzard) reduced net H + extrusion by roots and increased K + release, whereas there was no significant effect on anion efflux in deionized water. With lower light intensity the concentrations of carbohydrates in the roots decreased, but ATP levels and energy charge remained unchanged. Also, shading raised the tissue pH of roots and made the cytoplasmic pH of root cells drop. There was a significant influence of light intensity on H + uptake by roots from an acidified test solution and CCCP (carbonylcyanide‐3‐chlorophenylhydrazone)‐in‐duced H + uptake was modified by shading. It is concluded that low light intensity does not limit active H + release by plasmalemma ATPase activity in the root cells, but that a reduced carbohydrate supply brings about a change in biochemical reactions which alter the membrane permeability for protons. An increased passive reflux of H + into the cells rather than a reduced H + ATPase activity explains the decrease of net H + release by roots of intact maize plants under low light intensity.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Shading reduced net root proton extrusion.
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Shading of maize plants ( Zea mays L. cv. Blizzard) reduced net H + extrusion by roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Shading increased potassium release.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Shading of maize plants ( Zea mays L. cv. Blizzard) reduced net H + extrusion by roots and increased K + release”
Claim · model-written summary
Shading had no significant effect on anion efflux.
Not reportedTaxonTreatmentComparator
Verbatim
e0“there was no significant effect on anion efflux in deionized water”
Claim · model-written summary
Lower light reduced root carbohydrate concentrations.
- Organ / stage
- rootse0
- Treatment
- lower light intensitye0
- Outcome
- concentrations of carbohydratese0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“With lower light intensity the concentrations of carbohydrates in the roots decreased”
Claim · model-written summary
Lower light left ATP levels and energy charge unchanged.
Not reportedTaxonTreatmentComparator
Verbatim
e0“but ATP levels and energy charge remained unchanged”
Claim · model-written summary
Shading raised root tissue pH.
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“shading raised the tissue pH of roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Shading lowered root cell cytoplasmic pH.
Not reportedTaxonTreatmentComparator
Verbatim
e0“made the cytoplasmic pH of root cells drop”
Claim · model-written summary
Light intensity significantly influenced root proton uptake from acidified solution.
Not reportedTaxonComparatorDirection
Verbatim
e0“There was a significant influence of light intensity on H + uptake by roots from an acidified test solution”
Claim · model-written summary
Shading modified CCCP-induced proton uptake.
Not reportedTaxonComparatorDirection
Verbatim
e0“CCCP (carbonylcyanide‐3‐chlorophenylhydrazone)‐in‐duced H + uptake was modified by shading”
Claim · model-written summary
Authors attributed reduced net proton release to increased passive proton reflux associated with reduced carbohydrate supply.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“An increased passive reflux of H + into the cells rather than a reduced H + ATPase activity explains the decrease of net H + release by roots of intact maize plants under low light intensity”
The same questions in other papers
light · quality: sugar starch · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 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.