Abstract
Sulphur dioxide (SO2) is one of the major atmospheric contaminant that induces negatively effects in the cellular biochemistry and physiology of the plants. However, Rhizobium inoculation can cause increas in plant resistance to abiotic and biotic stresses. In this study, effects of different concentrations of Sulphur dioxide gas (0, 0.5, 1, 1.5 and 2 ppm) on photosynthetic pigments, proline, protein, sulphur, potassium and phosphorus of inoculated alfalfa with Rhizobium (native and standard strains) were evaluated in Arak city. The Results showed that high concentrations of Sulphur dioxide (1, 1.5 and 2 ppm) caused a decline in photosynthetic pigments, protein, potassium and phosphorus and an increase in sulphur and proline content of alfalfa plant in compared to the controls. In low concentration of SO2 (0.5 ppm), the increase in photosynthetic pigments, protein, potassium and phosphorus were observed. Rhizobium inoculation itself caused an increase in photosynthetic pigments, protein, potassium and phosphorus contents but did not effect on the proline content and sulfur uptake. Inoculation of alfalfa with two strains of Rhizobium decreased induced effects of high concentrations of SO2 on these biochemical parameters significantly (at 0.01 level) in comparison with the control plants. Therefore, rhizobial inoculant be able to increase host plants resistance to SO2 pollution stress and have been applied as a biofertilizer.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
High sulfur dioxide reduced pigments, protein, potassium and phosphorus in alfalfa.
- Taxon
- alfalfa plant
Medicago sativae0 - Treatment
- high concentrations of Sulphur dioxide (1, 1.5 and 2 ppm)e0
- Outcome
- photosynthetic pigments, protein, potassium and phosphoruse0
- Direction
- a declinee0
- Comparator
- the controlse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“high concentrations of Sulphur dioxide (1, 1.5 and 2 ppm) caused a decline in photosynthetic pigments, protein, potassium and phosphorus and an increase in sulphur and proline content of alfalfa plant in compared to the controls”
Claim · model-written summary
High sulfur dioxide increased sulfur and proline content in alfalfa.
- Taxon
- alfalfa plantMedicago sativae0
- Treatment
- high concentrations of Sulphur dioxide (1, 1.5 and 2 ppm)e0
- Outcome
- sulphur and proline contente0
- Direction
- an increasee0
- Comparator
- the controlse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“high concentrations of Sulphur dioxide (1, 1.5 and 2 ppm) caused a decline in photosynthetic pigments, protein, potassium and phosphorus and an increase in sulphur and proline content of alfalfa plant in compared to the controls”
Claim · model-written summary
Low sulfur dioxide increased pigments, protein, potassium and phosphorus.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- low concentration of SO2 (0.5 ppm)e0
- Outcome
- photosynthetic pigments, protein, potassium and phosphoruse0
- Direction
- increasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In low concentration of SO2 (0.5 ppm), the increase in photosynthetic pigments, protein, potassium and phosphorus were observed”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobium inoculation increased pigments, protein, potassium and phosphorus.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- Rhizobium inoculatione0
- Outcome
- photosynthetic pigments, protein, potassium and phosphorus contentse0
- Direction
- increasee0
RhizobiumNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Rhizobium inoculation itself caused an increase in photosynthetic pigments, protein, potassium and phosphorus contents”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobium inoculation did not affect proline content or sulfur uptake.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- Rhizobium inoculatione0
- Outcome
- proline content and sulfur uptakee0
- Direction
- did not effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Rhizobium inoculation itself caused an increase in photosynthetic pigments, protein, potassium and phosphorus contents but did not effect on the proline content and sulfur uptake”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Two Rhizobium strains significantly reduced the effects of high sulfur dioxide concentrations on alfalfa biochemical parameters.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- Inoculation of alfalfa with two strains of Rhizobiume0
- Outcome
- these biochemical parameterse0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Qualifier
- high concentrations of SO2e0
- Comparator
- the control plantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Inoculation of alfalfa with two strains of Rhizobium decreased induced effects of high concentrations of SO2 on these biochemical parameters significantly (at 0.01 level) in comparison with the control plants”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend rhizobial inoculant as a biofertilizer to improve resistance to sulfur dioxide.
Verbatim
e0“Therefore, rhizobial inoculant be able to increase host plants resistance to SO2 pollution stress and have been applied as a biofertilizer”
The same questions in other papers
pollution · physiology: photosynthesis · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
inoculation · physiology: photosynthesis · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →inoculation · physiology: osmolytes · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results
12 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 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.