Abstract
Biostimulants have become an asset for agriculture since they are a greener alternative to traditionally used plant protection products. Also, they have gained the farmers' acceptance due to their effect on enhancing the plant's natural defense system against abiotic stresses. Besides commercially available complex products, small molecule-based biostimulants are useful for industry and research. Among them, polyamines (PAs) are well-studied natural compounds that can elicit numerous positive responses in drought-stressed plants. However, the studies are merely focused on the vegetative development of the plant. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate how drenching with putrescine (Put) and spermidine (Spd) modified the maize production and the yield quality parameters. First, a dosage optimization was performed, and then the best PA concentrations were applied by drenching the maize plants grown under well-watered (WW) conditions or water deficit (WD). Different mechanisms of action were observed for Put and Spd regarding maize production, including when both PAs similarly improved the water balance of the plants. The application of Put enhanced the quality and quantity of the yield under WW and Spd under WD. Regarding the nutritional quality of the grains, both PAs increased the carbohydrates content, whereas the contribution to the protein content changed by the interaction between compound and growth conditions. The mineral content of the grains was also greatly affected by the water condition and the PA application, with the most relevant results observed when Spd was applied, ending with flour richer in Zn, Cu, and Ca minerals that are considered important for human health. We showed that the exogenous PA application could be a highly efficient biofortification approach. Our findings open a new exciting use to be studied deep in the biostimulant 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
Drenching with Put enhanced the quality and quantity of maize yield under well-watered conditions.
- Treatment
- application of Pute0
- Outcome
- quality and quantity of the yielde0
- Direction
- enhancede0
- Qualifier
- under WWe0
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“biofortification of maize”
e0“The application of Put enhanced the quality and quantity of the yield under WW and Spd under WD”
Claim · model-written summary
Drenching with Spd enhanced the quality and quantity of maize yield under water deficit.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“biofortification of maize”
e0“The application of Put enhanced the quality and quantity of the yield under WW and Spd under WD”
Claim · model-written summary
Both putrescine and spermidine similarly improved the water balance of maize plants.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“biofortification of maize”
e1“including when both PAs similarly improved the water balance of the plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Both polyamines increased the carbohydrate content of maize grains.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“biofortification of maize”
e2“Regarding the nutritional quality of the grains, both PAs increased the carbohydrates content”
Claim · model-written summary
The effect of the polyamine treatment on maize grain protein content changed with the interaction between compound and growth conditions.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“biofortification of maize”
e3“whereas the contribution to the protein content changed by the interaction between compound and growth conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Water condition and PA application greatly affected the mineral content of maize grains.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“biofortification of maize”
e4“The mineral content of the grains was also greatly affected by the water condition and the PA application”
Claim · model-written summary
Spermidine application gave flour richer in Zn, Cu and Ca minerals in maize.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“biofortification of maize”
e5“with the most relevant results observed when Spd was applied, ending with flour richer in Zn, Cu, and Ca minerals”
Claim · model-written summary
Exogenous polyamine application could be a highly efficient biofortification approach for maize.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“biofortification of maize”
e6“We showed that the exogenous PA application could be a highly efficient biofortification approach”
The same questions in other papers
spermidine · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
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.