Abstract
Abstract A new modulated lamp system is described. This system has successfully provided an ultraviolet‐B (UV‐B) supplement in proportion to ambient UV‐B. The modulated system was used to simulate the UV‐B environment resulting from an annual mean reduction of 15% in the stratospheric ozone under UK field conditions, but taking account of seasonal variation in depletion. The effects of this enhanced level of UV‐B on the growth, physiology and yield of four cultivars of pea were assessed. Enhanced UV‐B resulted in small reductions in the number of stems and total stem length per plant (respectively 4.7 and 8.7%). There were also significant decreases in the dry weight of peas (10.1%), pods (10.3%) and stems (7.8%) per plant. UV‐B treatment had no effect on the number of peas per pod or average pea weight, but did significantly reduce (12.1%) the number of pods per plant. This decrease in pod number was partly due to enhanced abscission of pods during the final month of plant growth. UV‐B treatment had no significant effect on chlorophyll fluorescence characteristics or CO 2 assimilation rate per unit leaf area. These results are consistent with previous controlled environment experiments, and suggest that reduction in yield may be due to direct effects of UV‐B on plant growth rather than a decrease in photosynthetic capacity per unit leaf area.
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
Enhanced UV-B reduced number of stems by 4.7.
- Taxon
- pea
Lathyrus oleraceust0 - Treatment
- Enhanced UV‐Be0
- Outcome
- number of stemse0
- Direction
- reductionse0
- Value
- 4.7e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Enhanced UV‐B resulted in small reductions in the number of stems and total stem length per plant (respectively 4.7 and 8.7%).”
t0“Effects of enhanced UV‐B radiation on pea (Pisum sativum L.) grown under field conditions in the UK”
Claim · model-written summary
Enhanced UV-B reduced total stem length per plant by 8.7%.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- Enhanced UV‐Be0
- Outcome
- total stem length per plante0
- Direction
- reductionse0
- Value
- 8.7%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Enhanced UV‐B resulted in small reductions in the number of stems and total stem length per plant (respectively 4.7 and 8.7%).”
t0“Effects of enhanced UV‐B radiation on pea (Pisum sativum L.) grown under field conditions in the UK”
Claim · model-written summary
Enhanced UV-B decreased dry weight of peas dry weight by 10.1%.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- UV‐Bt0
- Outcome
- dry weight of pease0
- Direction
- decreasese0
- Value
- 10.1%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There were also significant decreases in the dry weight of peas (10.1%), pods (10.3%) and stems (7.8%) per plant.”
t0“Effects of enhanced UV‐B radiation on pea (Pisum sativum L.) grown under field conditions in the UK”
Claim · model-written summary
Enhanced UV-B decreased pods dry weight by 10.3%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There were also significant decreases in the dry weight of peas (10.1%), pods (10.3%) and stems (7.8%) per plant.”
t0“Effects of enhanced UV‐B radiation on pea (Pisum sativum L.) grown under field conditions in the UK”
Claim · model-written summary
Enhanced UV-B decreased stems dry weight by 7.8%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There were also significant decreases in the dry weight of peas (10.1%), pods (10.3%) and stems (7.8%) per plant.”
t0“Effects of enhanced UV‐B radiation on pea (Pisum sativum L.) grown under field conditions in the UK”
Claim · model-written summary
UV-B had no reported effect on peas per pod or average pea weight.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- UV‐B treatmente0
- Outcome
- number of peas per pod or average pea weighte0
- Direction
- no effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“UV‐B treatment had no effect on the number of peas per pod or average pea weight, but did significantly reduce (12.1%) the number of pods per plant.”
t0“Effects of enhanced UV‐B radiation on pea (Pisum sativum L.) grown under field conditions in the UK”
Claim · model-written summary
UV-B reduced the number of pods per plant by 12.1%.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- UV‐B treatmente0
- Outcome
- number of pods per plante0
- Direction
- reducee0
- Value
- 12.1%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“UV‐B treatment had no effect on the number of peas per pod or average pea weight, but did significantly reduce (12.1%) the number of pods per plant.”
t0“Effects of enhanced UV‐B radiation on pea (Pisum sativum L.) grown under field conditions in the UK”
Claim · model-written summary
Enhanced pod abscission partly explained the reduced pod count.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceust0
- Organ / stage
- podse0
- Outcome
- decrease in pod numbere0
- Qualifier
- enhanced abscission of pods during the final month of plant growthe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This decrease in pod number was partly due to enhanced abscission of pods during the final month of plant growth.”
t0“Effects of enhanced UV‐B radiation on pea (Pisum sativum L.) grown under field conditions in the UK”
Claim · model-written summary
UV-B had no significant effect on chlorophyll fluorescence or leaf-area CO2 assimilation.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- UV‐B treatmente0
- Outcome
- chlorophyll fluorescence characteristics or CO 2 assimilation rate per unit leaf areae0
- Direction
- no significant effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“UV‐B treatment had no significant effect on chlorophyll fluorescence characteristics or CO 2 assimilation rate per unit leaf area.”
t0“Effects of enhanced UV‐B radiation on pea (Pisum sativum L.) grown under field conditions in the UK”
Claim · model-written summary
Authors suggest that lower yield may arise from direct UV-B effects on growth.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- UV‐Be0
- Outcome
- reduction in yielde0
- Qualifier
- direct effects of UV‐B on plant growth rather than a decrease in photosynthetic capacity per unit leaf areae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“reduction in yield may be due to direct effects of UV‐B on plant growth rather than a decrease in photosynthetic capacity per unit leaf area”
t0“Effects of enhanced UV‐B radiation on pea (Pisum sativum L.) grown under field conditions in the UK”
The same questions in other papers
uv · yield · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Results differ
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →uv · physiology: photosynthesis · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Results differ
17 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
17 papers more in this group
See all 21 papers →uv · growth · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Results differ
20 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
22 papers more in this group
See all 26 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.