Paper · 2025 · International Journal of Molecular Sciences

Evaluating Drought Tolerance in Codonopsis pilosula Seedlings: Combining Growth, Physiology, Yield, and Tolerance Indices

Hongyan Wang; Yuan Chen; Fengxia Guo; et al.

14
claims
28
verbatim quotes
3
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Drought stress during the Codonopsis pilosula (Campanulaceae) seedling stage significantly affects its growth, quality, and yield. The aim of this study was to identify drought-tolerant cultivars of C. pilosula by using the growth—physiology—yield composite index (GPYCI) and drought-tolerant indices. Nine C. pilosula cultivars were evaluated under normal-watered (black plastic film hole sowing, BF) and water-stressed (spread in the open field, SF) conditions in a design that adopted a two-factor paired experiment with three replications. The emergence rate was significantly influenced by the water treatment, while both the water treatment and the cultivar affected root length, proline content, APX activity, and chlorophyll levels. The G1 cultivar performed better than others in multiple aspects. Yields and their attributes varied among cultivars under different water levels. The average yield was 7350.76 kg/hm2 under BF conditions and 4856.32 kg/hm2 under SF conditions. Drought stress reduced the total root length, single root fresh weight, and yield by 18.33%, 28.4%, and 33.9%, respectively. Correlation analysis revealed unique physiological response mechanisms to water changes among cultivars. Drought tolerance indices and comprehensive factor analysis indicated varying levels of drought tolerance among cultivars. This study has provided valuable insights into the growth, physiology, and yield response of C. pilosula under drought conditions and laid the foundation for breeding drought-tolerant cultivars.

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 14

Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Water treatment significantly influenced the emergence rate of C. pilosula seedlings.

Taxon
Codonopsis pilosulaCodonopsis pilosulat0
Treatment
water treatmente1
Outcome
emergence ratee1

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Codonopsis pilosula
Codonopsis pilosula · TaxonDoronenko · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Codonopsis pilosula”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–51 · show in text ↑
e1

“The emergence rate was significantly influenced by the water treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 544–614 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Water treatment affected root length, proline content and APX activity of C. pilosula.

Taxon
Codonopsis pilosulaCodonopsis pilosulat0
Treatment
water treatmente2
Outcome
root length, proline content, APX activitye2

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Codonopsis pilosula
Codonopsis pilosula · TaxonDoronenko · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Codonopsis pilosula”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–51 · show in text ↑
e2

“both the water treatment and the cultivar affected root length, proline content, APX activity, and chlorophyll levels”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 622–739 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Water treatment affected chlorophyll levels of C. pilosula.

Taxon
Codonopsis pilosulaCodonopsis pilosulat0
Treatment
water treatmente2
Outcome
chlorophyll levelse2

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Codonopsis pilosula
Codonopsis pilosula · TaxonDoronenko · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Codonopsis pilosula”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–51 · show in text ↑
e2

“both the water treatment and the cultivar affected root length, proline content, APX activity, and chlorophyll levels”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 622–739 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cultivar affected root length, proline content and APX activity of C. pilosula.

Taxon
Codonopsis pilosulaCodonopsis pilosulat0
Material
cultivare2
Outcome
root length, proline content, APX activitye2

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Codonopsis pilosula
Codonopsis pilosula · TaxonDoronenko · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Codonopsis pilosula”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–51 · show in text ↑
e2

“both the water treatment and the cultivar affected root length, proline content, APX activity, and chlorophyll levels”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 622–739 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cultivar affected chlorophyll levels of C. pilosula.

Taxon
Codonopsis pilosulaCodonopsis pilosulat0
Material
cultivare2
Outcome
chlorophyll levelse2

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Codonopsis pilosula
Codonopsis pilosula · TaxonDoronenko · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Codonopsis pilosula”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–51 · show in text ↑
e2

“both the water treatment and the cultivar affected root length, proline content, APX activity, and chlorophyll levels”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 622–739 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The G1 cultivar performed better than the other cultivars in multiple aspects.

Taxon
Codonopsis pilosulaCodonopsis pilosulat0
Material
G1 cultivare3
Outcome
multiple aspectse3
Direction
bettere3
Comparator
otherse3

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Codonopsis pilosula
Codonopsis pilosula · TaxonDoronenko · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Codonopsis pilosula”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–51 · show in text ↑
e3

“The G1 cultivar performed better than others in multiple aspects”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 741–805 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yields and their attributes varied among cultivars under different water levels.

Taxon
Codonopsis pilosulaCodonopsis pilosulat0
Treatment
different water levelse4
Outcome
Yields and their attributese4

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Codonopsis pilosula
Codonopsis pilosula · TaxonDoronenko · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Codonopsis pilosula”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–51 · show in text ↑
e4

“Yields and their attributes varied among cultivars under different water levels”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 807–886 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The average yield of C. pilosula under BF conditions was 7350.76 kg/hm2.

Taxon
Codonopsis pilosulaCodonopsis pilosulat0
Outcome
average yielde5
Value
7350.76 kg/hm2e5
Setting
BF conditionse5

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Codonopsis pilosula
Codonopsis pilosula · TaxonDoronenko · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Codonopsis pilosula”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–51 · show in text ↑
e5

“The average yield was 7350.76 kg/hm2 under BF conditions and 4856.32 kg/hm2 under SF conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 888–983 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The average yield of C. pilosula under SF conditions was 4856.32 kg/hm2.

Taxon
Codonopsis pilosulaCodonopsis pilosulat0
Outcome
average yielde5
Value
4856.32 kg/hm2e5
Setting
SF conditionse5

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Codonopsis pilosula
Codonopsis pilosula · TaxonDoronenko · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Codonopsis pilosula”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–51 · show in text ↑
e5

“The average yield was 7350.76 kg/hm2 under BF conditions and 4856.32 kg/hm2 under SF conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 888–983 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Drought stress reduced total root length of C. pilosula by 18.33%.

Taxon
Codonopsis pilosulaCodonopsis pilosulat0
Treatment
Drought stresse6
Outcome
total root lengthe6
Direction
reducede6
Value
18.33%e6

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Codonopsis pilosula
Codonopsis pilosula · TaxonDoronenko · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Codonopsis pilosula”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–51 · show in text ↑
e6

“Drought stress reduced the total root length, single root fresh weight, and yield by 18.33%, 28.4%, and 33.9%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 985–1108 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Drought stress reduced single root fresh weight of C. pilosula by 28.4%.

Taxon
Codonopsis pilosulaCodonopsis pilosulat0
Treatment
Drought stresse6
Outcome
single root fresh weighte6
Direction
reducede6
Value
28.4%e6

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Codonopsis pilosula
Codonopsis pilosula · TaxonDoronenko · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Codonopsis pilosula”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–51 · show in text ↑
e6

“Drought stress reduced the total root length, single root fresh weight, and yield by 18.33%, 28.4%, and 33.9%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 985–1108 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Drought stress reduced yield of C. pilosula by 33.9%.

Taxon
Codonopsis pilosulaCodonopsis pilosulat0
Treatment
Drought stresse6
Outcome
yielde6
Direction
reducede6
Value
33.9%e6

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Codonopsis pilosula
Codonopsis pilosula · TaxonDoronenko · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Codonopsis pilosula”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–51 · show in text ↑
e6

“Drought stress reduced the total root length, single root fresh weight, and yield by 18.33%, 28.4%, and 33.9%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 985–1108 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Correlation analysis revealed physiological response mechanisms of C. pilosula to water changes that differ among cultivars.

Taxon
Codonopsis pilosulaCodonopsis pilosulat0
Outcome
physiological response mechanisms to water changese7
Qualifier
among cultivarse7

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Codonopsis pilosula
Codonopsis pilosula · TaxonDoronenko · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Codonopsis pilosula”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–51 · show in text ↑
e7

“Correlation analysis revealed unique physiological response mechanisms to water changes among cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1110–1213 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Drought tolerance indices and comprehensive factor analysis indicated varying levels of drought tolerance among C. pilosula cultivars.

Taxon
Codonopsis pilosulaCodonopsis pilosulat0
Outcome
varying levels of drought tolerance among cultivarse1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Codonopsis pilosula
Codonopsis pilosula · TaxonDoronenko · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Codonopsis pilosula”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–51 · show in text ↑
e1

“Drought tolerance indices and comprehensive factor analysis indicated varying levels of drought tolerance among cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1215–1336 · show in text ↑

drought · growth · Codonopsis pilosulaPositive and negative results

3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect

2 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

drought · yield · Codonopsis pilosulaResults agree

2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. negative
See all 2 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.