Abstract
The in vitro effects of an aqueous leachate (1%) of Callicarpa acuminata Kunth. (Verbenaceae) on radicle growth, protein expression, catalase activity, free radical production and membrane lipid peroxidation in roots of bean, maize, and tomato were examined. Aqueous extract of C. acuminata inhibited the radicle growth of tomato by 47%, but had no effect on root growth of maize and beans. 2D-PAGE and densitometry analysis showed that C. acuminata aqueous leachate modified the expression of various proteins in the roots of all treated plants. In treated bean roots, microsequencing analysis of an 11.3-kDa protein, whose expression was enhanced by leachate treatment, revealed a 99% similarity with subunits of alpha-amylase inhibitor of other beans. A 27.5-kDa protein induced in treated tomato showed 69-95% similarity to glutathione-S-transferases (GST) of other Solanaceae. Spectrophotometric analysis and native gels revealed that catalase activity was increased by 2.2-fold in tomato roots and 1.4-fold in bean roots. No significant changes were observed in treated maize roots. Luminol chemiluminescence levels, a measure of free radicals, increased 3.8-fold in treated tomato roots and 2.1-fold in treated bean roots. Oxidative membrane damage in treated roots was measured by lipid peroxidation rates. In tomato we observed a 2.4-fold increase in peroxidation, however, no effect was observed in maize or beans.
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 14
Claim · model-written summary
Callicarpa leachate inhibited tomato radicle growth by 47%.
- Taxon
- tomato
Solanum lycopersicume0 - Treatment
- Aqueous extract of C. acuminatae0
- Interactor
- C. acuminata
Callicarpa acuminatae0other - Outcome
- radicle growthe0
- Direction
- inhibitede0
- Value
- 47%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Aqueous extract of C. acuminata inhibited the radicle growth of tomato by 47%”
Claim · model-written summary
Callicarpa leachate did not affect maize root growth.
- Treatment
- Aqueous extract of C. acuminatae1
- Interactor
- C. acuminataCallicarpa acuminatae1other
- Outcome
- root growthe0
- Direction
- no effecte0
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“had no effect on root growth of maize and beans”
e1“Aqueous extract of C. acuminata”
Claim · model-written summary
Callicarpa leachate did not affect bean root growth.
- Taxon
- beanse0
- Treatment
- Aqueous extract of C. acuminatae1
- Interactor
- C. acuminataCallicarpa acuminatae1other
- Outcome
- root growthe0
- Direction
- no effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“had no effect on root growth of maize and beans”
e1“Aqueous extract of C. acuminata”
Claim · model-written summary
Leachate modified root protein expression in all three plants.
- Taxon
- bean, maize, and tomatot0
- Treatment
- C. acuminata aqueous leachatee0
- Interactor
- C. acuminataCallicarpa acuminatae0other
- Outcome
- expression of various proteinse0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“C. acuminata aqueous leachate modified the expression of various proteins in the roots of all treated plants”
t0“bean, maize, and tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
An 11.3-kDa bean root protein enhanced by leachate was 99% similar to alpha-amylase inhibitor subunits.
Verbatim
e0“In treated bean roots, microsequencing analysis of an 11.3-kDa protein, whose expression was enhanced by leachate treatment, revealed a 99% similarity with subunits of alpha-amylase inhibitor of other beans”
Claim · model-written summary
A 27.5-kDa tomato protein induced by leachate showed 69-95% similarity to glutathione-S-transferases.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Gene
- glutathione-S-transferasese0
- Outcome
- similarity to glutathione-S-transferasese0
- Value
- 69-95%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A 27.5-kDa protein induced in treated tomato showed 69-95% similarity to glutathione-S-transferases (GST) of other Solanaceae”
Claim · model-written summary
Tomato root catalase activity rose 2.2-fold.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Outcome
- catalase activitye0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 2.2-folde0
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“catalase activity was increased by 2.2-fold in tomato roots”
t0“Callicarpa acuminata”
Claim · model-written summary
Bean root catalase activity rose 1.4-fold.
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Verbatim
e0“catalase activity was increased by 2.2-fold in tomato roots and 1.4-fold in bean roots”
t0“Callicarpa acuminata”
Claim · model-written summary
Treated maize roots showed no significant catalase change.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No significant changes were observed in treated maize roots”
e1“catalase activity was increased by 2.2-fold in tomato roots and 1.4-fold in bean roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Free radical signal rose 3.8-fold in treated tomato roots.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- treatede0
- Outcome
- Luminol chemiluminescence levelse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 3.8-folde0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Luminol chemiluminescence levels, a measure of free radicals, increased 3.8-fold in treated tomato roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Free radical signal rose 2.1-fold in treated bean roots.
- Taxon
- beane0
- Treatment
- treatede0
- Outcome
- Luminol chemiluminescence levelse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 2.1-folde0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Luminol chemiluminescence levels, a measure of free radicals, increased 3.8-fold in treated tomato roots and 2.1-fold in treated bean roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Tomato root lipid peroxidation increased 2.4-fold.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Outcome
- peroxidatione0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 2.4-folde0
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In tomato we observed a 2.4-fold increase in peroxidation”
e1“lipid peroxidation rates”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize root lipid peroxidation was unaffected.
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no effect was observed in maize or beans”
e1“lipid peroxidation rates”
Claim · model-written summary
Bean root lipid peroxidation was unaffected.
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Verbatim
e0“no effect was observed in maize or beans”
e1“lipid peroxidation rates”
The same questions in other papers
botanical · growth · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results
37 papers in the same direction as this paper · 50 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
84 papers more in this group
See all 88 papers →botanical · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
87 papers in the same direction as this paper · 203 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
287 papers more in this group
See all 291 papers →botanical · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
141 papers in the same direction as this paper · 198 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
336 papers more in this group
See all 340 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.