Paper · 2015 · Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences

Eliciting Plant Defense on Anthracnose Disease in Chili (Capsicum annuum Linn.) by Sodium Nitroprusside Solution

Vo Thi Thuong

10
claims
19
verbatim quotes
3
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

The study on the induction of plant defense against to anthracnose disease of chili by sodium nitroprusside solution was investigated during pre- and post-harvest. Pre-harvest treatment was conducted by spraying the chili plants with sodium nitroprusside (SNP, nitric oxide donor) solution at 0 (control), 0.05 and 0.1 mM every 3 days for 9 times before inoculating with the spore suspension of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides (the causal agent of anthracnose disease) and then sprayed with SNP again 1 time after inoculating. The results revealed that 0.1 mM SNP was the best concentration to suppress anthracnose disease by reducing disease incidence and disease index on chili leaves, and showing the lowest loss of yield caused by anthracnose disease. This founding also showed that either pathogenic inoculation or SNP treatment had ability to induce the activities of peroxidase (POD) and phenylalanine ammonia lyase (PAL) of chili leaves, particularly the chili plant inoculated with pathogenic fungi followed by treated with 0.1 mM SNP showed the highest POD and PAL activities. Post-harvest treatment was done by inoculating the mature chilli fruit with C. capcisi for 4 h and followed by dipping in 0 (control) and 4 mM SNP. All fruit samples were kept at 13C for 15 days. The results showed that chili fruit dipped with 4 mM SNP reduced disease incidence, disease index, delayed weight loss, respiration rate, ethylene production, and also maintained the changes of fruit color (ΔE) better than non-treated fruit (control). The activities of chitinase (CHI) and β-1,3-glucanase (GLU) in chili fruit were induced by SNP with the highest peak on day 6 of storage but they were not significant different with the control fruit. These results indicated that SNP might potential leading to the reduction of anthracnose disease in chili by eliciting plant defense related enzymes in both pre- and post-harvest periods.

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Preharvest 0.1 mM SNP reduced anthracnose disease incidence and index on chili leaves.

Taxon
chilie0
Treatment
0.1 mM SNPe0
Interactor
Colletotrichum gloeosporioidesColletotrichum gloeosporioidese1pathogen
Outcome
disease incidence and disease index on chili leavese0
Direction
reducinge0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Colletotrichum gloeosporioides
Colletotrichum gloeosporioides · InteractorRGimilio · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“0.1 mM SNP was the best concentration to suppress anthracnose disease by reducing disease incidence and disease index on chili leaves”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 552–685 · show in text ↑
e1

“Colletotrichum gloeosporioides (the causal agent of anthracnose disease)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 395–467 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Preharvest 0.1 mM SNP gave the lowest anthracnose related yield loss.

Taxon
chilit0
Treatment
0.1 mM SNPe1
Outcome
loss of yield caused by anthracnose diseasee0
Direction
loweste0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“showing the lowest loss of yield caused by anthracnose disease”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 691–753 · show in text ↑
t0

“chili”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 50–55 · show in text ↑
e1

“0.1 mM SNP was the best concentration”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 552–589 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pathogen inoculation induced POD and PAL activities in chili leaves.

Taxon
chilie0
Treatment
pathogenic inoculatione0
Outcome
activities of peroxidase (POD) and phenylalanine ammonia lyase (PAL) of chili leavese0
Direction
inducee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“either pathogenic inoculation or SNP treatment had ability to induce the activities of peroxidase (POD) and phenylalanine ammonia lyase (PAL) of chili leaves”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 786–943 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

SNP induced POD and PAL activities in chili leaves.

Taxon
chilie0
Treatment
SNP treatmente0
Outcome
activities of peroxidase (POD) and phenylalanine ammonia lyase (PAL) of chili leavese0
Direction
inducee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“either pathogenic inoculation or SNP treatment had ability to induce the activities of peroxidase (POD) and phenylalanine ammonia lyase (PAL) of chili leaves”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 786–943 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fungal inoculation followed by 0.1 mM SNP gave highest POD and PAL activities.

Taxon
chilie0
Treatment
inoculated with pathogenic fungi followed by treated with 0.1 mM SNPe0
Outcome
POD and PAL activitiese0
Direction
higheste0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“chili plant inoculated with pathogenic fungi followed by treated with 0.1 mM SNP showed the highest POD and PAL activities”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 962–1084 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Postharvest 4 mM SNP reduced fruit disease incidence and index.

Taxon
chilie0
Treatment
4 mM SNPe0
Interactor
C. capcisie2pathogen
Outcome
disease incidence, disease indexe0
Direction
reducede0
Comparator
controle1

Verbatim

e0

“chili fruit dipped with 4 mM SNP reduced disease incidence, disease index”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1307–1380 · show in text ↑
e1

“non-treated fruit (control)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1506–1533 · show in text ↑
e2

“C. capcisi for 4 h”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1162–1180 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Postharvest 4 mM SNP delayed fruit weight loss.

Taxon
chilie0
Treatment
4 mM SNPe0
Outcome
weight losse0
Direction
delayede0
Comparator
controle1

Verbatim

e0

“chili fruit dipped with 4 mM SNP reduced disease incidence, disease index, delayed weight loss”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1307–1401 · show in text ↑
e1

“non-treated fruit (control)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1506–1533 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Postharvest 4 mM SNP reduced fruit respiration and ethylene production.

Taxon
chilie0
Treatment
4 mM SNPe0
Outcome
respiration rate, ethylene productione0
Direction
reducede0
Comparator
controle1

Verbatim

e0

“chili fruit dipped with 4 mM SNP reduced disease incidence, disease index, delayed weight loss, respiration rate, ethylene production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1307–1440 · show in text ↑
e1

“non-treated fruit (control)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1506–1533 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Postharvest 4 mM SNP maintained fruit color changes better than control.

Taxon
chilit0
Treatment
4 mM SNPe1
Outcome
changes of fruit color (ΔE)e0
Direction
bettere0
Comparator
non-treated fruit (control)e0

Verbatim

e0

“maintained the changes of fruit color (ΔE) better than non-treated fruit (control)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1451–1533 · show in text ↑
t0

“chili”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 50–55 · show in text ↑
e1

“chili fruit dipped with 4 mM SNP”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1307–1339 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmixednot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

SNP induced fruit chitinase and glucanase activities, peaking on storage day six; differences from control were not significant.

Taxon
chilie0
Treatment
SNPe0
Outcome
activities of chitinase (CHI) and β-1,3-glucanase (GLU) in chili fruite0
Direction
inducede0
Qualifier
day 6 of storagee0
Comparator
control fruite0

Verbatim

e0

“The activities of chitinase (CHI) and β-1,3-glucanase (GLU) in chili fruit were induced by SNP with the highest peak on day 6 of storage but they were not significant different with the control fruit.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1535–1735 · show in text ↑

sodium nitroprusside · disease · Capsicum (peppers)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

inoculation · physiology: antioxidant enzymes · Capsicum (peppers)Positive and negative results

7 papers: 5 positive, 2 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. positive

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 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.