Abstract
Production of functional food with high levels of selenium (Se) and iodine (I) obtained via plant biofortification shows significant difficulties due to the complex interaction between the two elements. Taking into account the known beneficial effect of silicon (Si) on plant growth and development, single and joint foliar biofortification of chervil plants with potassium iodide (150 mg L−1) and sodium selenate (10 mg L−1) was carried out in a pot experiment with and without Si nanoparticles foliar supplementation. Compared to control plants, nano-Si (14 mg L−1) increased shoot biomass in all treatments: by 4.8 times with Si; by 2.8 times with I + Si; by 5.6 times with Se + Si; by 4.0 times with I + Se + Si. The correspondent increases in root biomass were 4.5, 8.7, 13.3 and 10.0 times, respectively. The growth stimulation effect of Se, I and I + Se treatments resulted in a 2.7, 3.5 and 3.6 times increase for chervil shoots and 1.6, 3.1 and 8.6 times for roots, respectively. Nano-Si improved I biofortification levels by twice, while I and Se enhanced the plant content of each other. All treatments decreased nitrate levels, compared to control, and increased the photopigment accumulation. Improvement of total antioxidant activity and phenolic content was recorded only under the joint application of Se + I + Si. Foliar nano-Si treatment affected other element content in plants: decreased Na+ accumulation in single and joint supplementation with Se and I, restored Fe, Mn and Cr amount compared to the decreased levels recorded in separately Se and I fortified plants and promoted Al accumulation both with or without Se and I biofortification. The results of this research suggest high prospects of foliar nano-Si supply for enhancing both growth and joint I/Se biofortification of chervil.
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 20
Claim · model-written summary
Nano silicon raised shoot biomass 4.8 times with silicon alone.
- Treatment
- nano-Si (14 mg L−1)e0
- Outcome
- shoot biomasse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 4.8 timese0
- Qualifier
- with Sie0
- Comparator
- control plantse0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“Compared to control plants, nano-Si (14 mg L−1) increased shoot biomass in all treatments: by 4.8 times with Si; by 2.8 times with I + Si; by 5.6 times with Se + Si; by 4.0 times with I + Se + Si.”
Claim · model-written summary
Iodine plus silicon raised shoot biomass 2.8 times over control.
- Treatment
- I + Sie0
- Outcome
- shoot biomasse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 2.8 timese0
- Comparator
- control plantse0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“Compared to control plants, nano-Si (14 mg L−1) increased shoot biomass in all treatments: by 4.8 times with Si; by 2.8 times with I + Si; by 5.6 times with Se + Si; by 4.0 times with I + Se + Si.”
Claim · model-written summary
Selenium plus silicon raised shoot biomass 5.6 times over control.
- Treatment
- Se + Sie0
- Outcome
- shoot biomasse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 5.6 timese0
- Comparator
- control plantse0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“Compared to control plants, nano-Si (14 mg L−1) increased shoot biomass in all treatments: by 4.8 times with Si; by 2.8 times with I + Si; by 5.6 times with Se + Si; by 4.0 times with I + Se + Si.”
Claim · model-written summary
Iodine, selenium, and silicon jointly raised shoot biomass 4.0 times over control.
- Treatment
- I + Se + Sie0
- Outcome
- shoot biomasse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 4.0 timese0
- Comparator
- control plantse0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“Compared to control plants, nano-Si (14 mg L−1) increased shoot biomass in all treatments: by 4.8 times with Si; by 2.8 times with I + Si; by 5.6 times with Se + Si; by 4.0 times with I + Se + Si.”
Claim · model-written summary
Root biomass increased 4.5 times with silicon.
Not reportedTaxonTreatmentComparator
Verbatim
e0“The correspondent increases in root biomass were 4.5, 8.7, 13.3 and 10.0 times, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Root biomass increased 8.7 times with iodine and silicon.
Not reportedTaxonTreatmentComparator
Verbatim
e0“The correspondent increases in root biomass were 4.5, 8.7, 13.3 and 10.0 times, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Root biomass increased 13.3 times with selenium and silicon.
Not reportedTaxonTreatmentComparator
Verbatim
e0“The correspondent increases in root biomass were 4.5, 8.7, 13.3 and 10.0 times, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Root biomass increased 10.0 times with iodine, selenium, and silicon.
Not reportedTaxonTreatmentComparator
Verbatim
e0“The correspondent increases in root biomass were 4.5, 8.7, 13.3 and 10.0 times, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Selenium alone increased shoot growth 2.7 times.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The growth stimulation effect of Se, I and I + Se treatments resulted in a 2.7, 3.5 and 3.6 times increase for chervil shoots and 1.6, 3.1 and 8.6 times for roots, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Iodine alone increased shoot growth 3.5 times.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The growth stimulation effect of Se, I and I + Se treatments resulted in a 2.7, 3.5 and 3.6 times increase for chervil shoots and 1.6, 3.1 and 8.6 times for roots, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Iodine and selenium increased shoot growth 3.6 times.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The growth stimulation effect of Se, I and I + Se treatments resulted in a 2.7, 3.5 and 3.6 times increase for chervil shoots and 1.6, 3.1 and 8.6 times for roots, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Selenium increased root growth 1.6 times.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The growth stimulation effect of Se, I and I + Se treatments resulted in a 2.7, 3.5 and 3.6 times increase for chervil shoots and 1.6, 3.1 and 8.6 times for roots, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Iodine increased root growth 3.1 times.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The growth stimulation effect of Se, I and I + Se treatments resulted in a 2.7, 3.5 and 3.6 times increase for chervil shoots and 1.6, 3.1 and 8.6 times for roots, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Iodine and selenium increased root growth 8.6 times.
- Taxon
- chervil
Anthriscus cerefoliume0 - Treatment
- I + See0
- Outcome
- rootse0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 8.6 timese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The growth stimulation effect of Se, I and I + Se treatments resulted in a 2.7, 3.5 and 3.6 times increase for chervil shoots and 1.6, 3.1 and 8.6 times for roots, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Nano silicon doubled iodine biofortification, while iodine and selenium increased each other’s plant content.
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“Nano-Si improved I biofortification levels by twice, while I and Se enhanced the plant content of each other.”
Claim · model-written summary
The treatments lowered nitrate and raised photopigment levels.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“All treatments decreased nitrate levels, compared to control, and increased the photopigment accumulation.”
Claim · model-written summary
All treatments increased photopigment accumulation.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“All treatments decreased nitrate levels, compared to control, and increased the photopigment accumulation.”
Claim · model-written summary
Joint selenium, iodine, and silicon improved antioxidant activity and phenolic content.
- Treatment
- Se + I + Sie0
- Outcome
- total antioxidant activity and phenolic contente0
- Direction
- Improvemente0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“Improvement of total antioxidant activity and phenolic content was recorded only under the joint application of Se + I + Si.”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar nano silicon decreased sodium accumulation with selenium and iodine supplementation.
- Taxon
- plantsViridiplantaee0
- Treatment
- Foliar nano-Si treatmente0
- Outcome
- Na+ accumulatione0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Foliar nano-Si treatment affected other element content in plants: decreased Na+ accumulation in single and joint supplementation with Se and I, restored Fe, Mn and Cr amount compared to the decreased levels recorded in separately Se and I fortified plants and promoted Al accumulation both with or without Se and I biofortification.”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar nano silicon restored iron, manganese, and chromium and promoted aluminum accumulation.
Verbatim
e0“Foliar nano-Si treatment affected other element content in plants: decreased Na+ accumulation in single and joint supplementation with Se and I, restored Fe, Mn and Cr amount compared to the decreased levels recorded in separately Se and I fortified plants and promoted Al accumulation both with or without Se and I biofortification.”
The same questions in other papers
selenium atom · quality: phytochemicals · Anthriscus cerefolium (chervil)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
silicon atom · quality: phytochemicals · Anthriscus cerefolium (chervil)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
application · nutrient: content · Viridiplantae (plants)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
nanoparticle · nutrient: content · Viridiplantae (plants)Results agree
5 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 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.