Abstract
The oat × maize chromosome addition (OMA) lines, as hybrids between C3 and C4 plants, can potentially help us understand the process of C4 photosynthesis. However, photosynthesis is often affected by adverse environmental conditions, including drought stress. Therefore, to assess the functioning of the photosynthetic apparatus in OMA lines under drought stress, the chlorophyll content and chlorophyll a fluorescence (CF) parameters were investigated. With optimal hydration, most of the tested OMA lines, compared to oat cv. Bingo, showed higher pigment content, and some of them were characterized by increased values of selected CF parameters. Although 14 days of drought caused a decrease of chlorophylls and carotenoids, only slight changes in CF parameters were observed, which can indicate proper photosynthetic efficiency in most of examined OMA lines compared to oat cv. Bingo. The obtained data revealed that expected changes in hybrid functioning depend more on the specific maize chromosome and its interaction with the oat genome rather than the number of retained chromosomes. OMA lines not only constitute a powerful tool for maize genomics but also are a source of valuable variation in plant breeding, and can help us to understand plant susceptibility to drought. Our research confirms more efficient functioning of hybrid photosynthetic apparatus than oat cv. Bingo, therefore contributes to raising new questions in the fields of plant physiology and biochemistry. Due to the fact that the oat genome is not fully sequenced yet, the mechanism of enhanced photosynthetic efficiency in OMA lines requires further research.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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
Claim · model-written summary
Most OMA lines had higher pigment content than oat Bingo with optimal hydration.
- Taxon
- oat
Avena sativae0 - Material
- OMA linese0
- Outcome
- pigment contente0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- optimal hydratione0
- Comparator
- oat cv. Bingoe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“With optimal hydration, most of the tested OMA lines, compared to oat cv. Bingo, showed higher pigment content”
Claim · model-written summary
Some OMA lines had increased selected chlorophyll fluorescence parameters.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativat0
- Material
- Oat × Maize Addition Linest0
- Outcome
- selected CF parameterse0
- Direction
- increasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“some of them were characterized by increased values of selected CF parameters”
t0“Oat × Maize Addition Lines”
Claim · model-written summary
Fourteen days of drought decreased chlorophylls.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- 14 days of droughte0
- Outcome
- chlorophyllse0
- Direction
- decreasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“14 days of drought caused a decrease of chlorophylls and carotenoids”
t0“Oat × Maize Addition Lines”
Claim · model-written summary
Fourteen days of drought decreased carotenoids.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- 14 days of droughte0
- Outcome
- carotenoidse0
- Direction
- decreasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“14 days of drought caused a decrease of chlorophylls and carotenoids”
t0“Oat × Maize Addition Lines”
Claim · model-written summary
Drought caused only slight changes in chlorophyll fluorescence parameters.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- droughtt0
- Outcome
- CF parameterse0
- Direction
- slight changese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“only slight changes in CF parameters were observed”
t0“Response to Drought Stress in Oat”
Claim · model-written summary
Hybrid functioning depended more on the particular maize chromosome and its interaction with the oat genome than chromosome count.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativae0
- Gene
- specific maize chromosomee0
- Outcome
- changes in hybrid functioninge0
- Direction
- depend more one0
- Comparator
- number of retained chromosomese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“expected changes in hybrid functioning depend more on the specific maize chromosome and its interaction with the oat genome rather than the number of retained chromosomes”
Claim · model-written summary
OMA lines were identified as a source of breeding variation.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativat0
- Outcome
- source of valuable variation in plant breedinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“OMA lines not only constitute a powerful tool for maize genomics but also are a source of valuable variation in plant breeding”
t0“Oat × Maize Addition Lines”
Claim · model-written summary
Hybrid photosynthetic apparatus was more efficient than that of oat Bingo.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativae0
- Outcome
- functioning of hybrid photosynthetic apparatuse0
- Direction
- more efficiente0
- Comparator
- oat cv. Bingoe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“more efficient functioning of hybrid photosynthetic apparatus than oat cv. Bingo”
The same questions in other papers
drought · physiology: pigments · Avena sativa (oats)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →drought · molecular: metabolites · Avena sativa (oats)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- negative
- negative
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.