Paper · 2013

INTERACTIVE EFFECT OF FOLIAR APPLICATION OF NITRIC OXIDE (NO) AND SALINITY ON WHEAT (TRITICUM AESTIVUM L.)

Farhana Kausar; Muhammad Shahbaz

8
claims
16
verbatim quotes
40
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The present experiment was conducted to assess the interactive effect of foliar application of nitric oxide (NO) and salinity on wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Wheat cv. S-24 was grown under non-stressed or salt stressed conditions (0 and 150 mM NaCl). Different levels of NO (water spray, 0.05, 0.10 and 0.15 mM) were applied as a foliar spray. Salinity applied through rooting medium significantly reduced growth attributes while foliar applied NO was found to be effective in amelioration of adverse effects of salt stress on growth parameters. Application of NO caused an increase in shoot fresh weight under non-saline or saline conditions. Photosynthetic rate of cultivar increased due to foliarly applied NO both under control and saline conditions. Furthermore, increase in growth due to exogenously applied NO may have been due to changes in photosynthesis. However, NO applied as a foliar spray did not change the sub-stomatal CO2 concentration suggesting that stomtal factors were not the major controlling factors for photosynthesis. However, photosystem-II activity in our experiment did not change by foliar spray of NO. Overall, the adverse effects of salt stress could be alleviated by exogenous application of NO.

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 8

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Salinity significantly reduced wheat growth attributes.

Treatment
Salinity applied through rooting mediume0
Outcome
growth attributese0
Direction
reducede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Salinity applied through rooting medium significantly reduced growth attributes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 345–424 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 129–157 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar nitric oxide ameliorated salt stress effects on growth parameters.

Treatment
foliar applied NOe0
Outcome
adverse effects of salt stress on growth parameterse0
Direction
amelioratione0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“foliar applied NO was found to be effective in amelioration of adverse effects of salt stress on growth parameters”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 431–545 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 129–157 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nitric oxide increased shoot fresh weight in saline and non-saline conditions.

Treatment
Application of NOe0
Outcome
shoot fresh weighte0
Direction
increasee0
Qualifier
under non-saline or saline conditionse0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Application of NO caused an increase in shoot fresh weight under non-saline or saline conditions.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 547–644 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 129–157 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar nitric oxide increased photosynthetic rate in saline and control conditions.

Treatment
foliarly applied NOe0
Outcome
Photosynthetic ratee0
Direction
increasede0
Qualifier
both under control and saline conditionse0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Photosynthetic rate of cultivar increased due to foliarly applied NO both under control and saline conditions.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 645–755 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 129–157 · show in text ↑
Mechanismhypothesisoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The authors proposed that photosynthesis changes may explain nitric oxide induced growth.

Treatment
exogenously applied NOe0
Outcome
increase in growthe0
Qualifier
changes in photosynthesise0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“increase in growth due to exogenously applied NO may have been due to changes in photosynthesis”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 769–864 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 129–157 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar nitric oxide did not change sub-stomatal CO2 concentration.

Treatment
NO applied as a foliar spraye0
Outcome
sub-stomatal CO2 concentratione0
Direction
did not changee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“NO applied as a foliar spray did not change the sub-stomatal CO2 concentration”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 875–953 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 129–157 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The authors inferred that stomatal factors were not major controls of photosynthesis.

Outcome
photosynthesise0
Qualifier
stomtal factors were not the major controlling factorse0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“stomtal factors were not the major controlling factors for photosynthesis”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 970–1043 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 129–157 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar nitric oxide did not change photosystem-II activity.

Treatment
foliar spray of NOe0
Outcome
photosystem-II activitye0
Direction
did not changee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“photosystem-II activity in our experiment did not change by foliar spray of NO”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1054–1132 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 129–157 · show in text ↑

nitric oxide · physiology: photosynthesis · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

9 papers: 8 positive, 1 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 papers →

nitric oxide · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

11 papers: 8 positive, 3 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

7 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

nitric oxide · molecular: metabolites · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

11 papers: 7 positive, 4 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

7 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

in vitro · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

106 papers: 73 positive, 33 negative or no effect

32 papers in the same direction as this paper · 73 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

102 papers more in this group

See all 106 papers →

application · molecular: metabolites · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

115 papers: 97 positive, 18 negative or no effect

17 papers in the same direction as this paper · 97 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

111 papers more in this group

See all 115 papers →

application · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

307 papers: 273 positive, 34 negative or no effect

272 papers in the same direction as this paper · 32 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

303 papers more in this group

See all 307 papers →

salinity · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

377 papers: 49 positive, 328 negative or no effect

327 papers in the same direction as this paper · 49 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

373 papers more in this group

See all 377 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.