Paper · 2007

Screening of UV-B Radiation Protective Agents in Wheat and Their Mechanism

Yuan Li

4
claims
7
verbatim quotes
0
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Using tolerant wheat 'Mianyang 26' and sensitive wheat' Huining 18' to UV-B radiation as materials,pot experiment was performed outdoors.5.00 KJ·m-2·d-1 UV-BBE was provided,simulating depletions of 20% stratospheric ozone at Kunming(25 °N,1 950 m),the effect of enhanced UV-B radiation on wheat and response of wheat to UV-B radiation under diferent protective agents treatments were researched.The protective agents and their concentrations were selected by the response index.The results showed that protective agents could change the response of wheat to UV-B radiation,and the protective effect was enhanced under enhanced UV-B radiation.0.075% of SA lessened the differences of response between 'Mianyang 26' and 'Huining 18' to UV-B radiation.0.75% CaCl2 was the best protective agent for the two cultivars.

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 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Protective agents changed wheat responses to UV-B.

Treatment
protective agentse0
Outcome
response of wheat to UV-B radiatione0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

“protective agents could change the response of wheat to UV-B radiation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 502–572 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The protective effect increased under enhanced UV-B.

Treatment
enhanced UV-B radiatione0
Outcome
protective effecte0
Direction
enhancede0

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

“protective effect was enhanced under enhanced UV-B radiation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 581–641 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–54 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A 0.075% SA treatment reduced differences in response between the two cultivars.

Material
'Mianyang 26' and 'Huining 18'e0
Treatment
0.075% of SAe0
Outcome
differences of responsee0
Direction
lessenede0

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

“0.075% of SA lessened the differences of response between 'Mianyang 26' and 'Huining 18' to UV-B radiation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 642–748 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–54 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A 0.75% CaCl2 treatment was the best protective agent for both cultivars.

Treatment
0.75% CaCl2e0
Outcome
protective agente0
Direction
beste0

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

“0.75% CaCl2 was the best protective agent for the two cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 749–812 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–54 · show in text ↑

calcium chloride dihydrate · molecular: metabolites · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 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.