Abstract
The electron transport chain was affected to varying degrees by high light intensity at low temperature in different crop plants. The PS II was found to be the sensitive site while PS I showed very little change in its activity. Photoinhibition affected the oxidizing side of PS II in all three plants. However, the site of inhibition was different in chilling-sensitive and chilling-resistant plants. In sorghum, the water splitting reaction was damaged while in barley and wheat the damage occurred in the reaction centre itself. It appears that photoinhibition may affect different sites within the PS II in chilling-resistant and sensitive plants.
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 5
Claim · model-written summary
High light at low temperature affected the electron transport chain to varying degrees among the crop plants.
SorghumNot reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The electron transport chain was affected to varying degrees by high light intensity at low temperature in different crop plants.”
t0“Different sites of photodamage in chilling-sensitive (sorghum) and chilling-resistant (barley and wheat) plants.”
Claim · model-written summary
PS II was sensitive to photodamage, while PS I activity changed little.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The PS II was found to be the sensitive site while PS I showed very little change in its activity.”
t0“Different sites of photodamage in chilling-sensitive (sorghum) and chilling-resistant (barley and wheat) plants.”
Claim · model-written summary
Photoinhibition affected the oxidizing side of PS II in all three plants.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Photoinhibition affected the oxidizing side of PS II in all three plants.”
t0“Different sites of photodamage in chilling-sensitive (sorghum) and chilling-resistant (barley and wheat) plants.”
Claim · model-written summary
In sorghum, photoinhibition damaged the water-splitting reaction.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Photoinhibition affected the oxidizing side of PS II in all three plants. However, the site of inhibition was different in chilling-sensitive and chilling-resistant plants. In sorghum, the water splitting reaction was damaged”
t0“Different sites of photodamage in chilling-sensitive (sorghum) and chilling-resistant (barley and wheat) plants.”
Claim · model-written summary
In barley and wheat, photoinhibition damaged the reaction centre.
- Taxon
- barley and wheat
.jpg?width=60)
Hordeum vulgare
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- Photoinhibitione0
- Outcome
- reaction centree0
- Direction
- damagee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Photoinhibition affected the oxidizing side of PS II in all three plants. However, the site of inhibition was different in chilling-sensitive and chilling-resistant plants. In sorghum, the water splitting reaction was damaged while in barley and wheat the damage occurred in the reaction centre itself.”
t0“Different sites of photodamage in chilling-sensitive (sorghum) and chilling-resistant (barley and wheat) plants.”
The same questions in other papers
light · physiology: photosynthesis · SorghumPositive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- no effect
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →cold · physiology: photosynthesis · SorghumPositive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- no effect
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.