Abstract
Salinity stress severely impacts wheat productivity and grain quality. This study investigated the effects of application of plant growth promoting substances (non-primed control (NP), hydropriming (HP), combined priming (1 mM silicon + 250 mg L − 1 thiourea) (SiP + TUP), combined TU priming (250 mg L − 1 thiourea) + Si foliar application (1 mM silicon) (TUP + SiF), combined TU foliar application (250 mg L − 1 thiourea) + Si priming (1 mM silicon) (TUF + SiP) on salt tolerance and grain quality of two wheat cultivars (salt-tolerant Barzegar and salt-sensitive Amin) under three salinity levels (0.5, 4 and 10 dS m − 1 ). The experiment used a completely randomized factorial design with three replications under greenhouse conditions. Salinity reduced grain yield by 42–60% (more severely in Amin), decreased ash content, moisture, carbohydrates, fiber, and gluten, while increasing grain hardness and protein. The combined TUP + SiF treatment significantly mitigated these effects, particularly in Barzegar, restoring 10.5–39.0% of yield versus 34.4–50.0% in Amin. Mechanistically, the treatment: (1) enhanced K + /Na + ratio (1.7–2.2-fold) via upregulation of transporters, (2) reduced oxidative damage (MDA decreased by 33.8–60.9%) through boosted antioxidant enzymes (SOD 12–14%, POD 33%, APX 25–26%, CAT 55–94%), and (3) improved grain quality by increasing gluten (8.8–9.8%) and carbohydrates (6.7–7.5%) while reducing hardness and protein. Silicon’s role in epidermal silica deposition reduced Na + uptake, while thiourea’s thiol group directly scavenged ROS. Cultivar differences revealed Barzegar’s superior ion homeostasis and antioxidant capacity. The TUP + SiF combination effectively counters salinity impacts through synergistic physiological mechanisms, with greater efficacy in tolerant cultivar. These findings provide practical strategies for wheat cultivation in saline soils, though cultivar-specific optimization may enhance results.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 18
Claim · model-written summary
Salinity reduced wheat grain yield by 42–60%, more severely in Amin.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume5 - Treatment
- Salinitye1
- Outcome
- grain yielde1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 42–60%e1
- Qualifier
- more severely in Amine1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Salinity reduced grain yield by 42–60% (more severely in Amin)”
e5“Salinity stress severely impacts wheat productivity and grain quality”
Claim · model-written summary
Salinity decreased wheat ash content, moisture and carbohydrates.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume5
- Treatment
- Salinitye1
- Outcome
- ash content, moisture, carbohydratese2
- Direction
- decreasede2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Salinity reduced grain yield by 42–60% (more severely in Amin)”
e2“decreased ash content, moisture, carbohydrates, fiber, and gluten”
e5“Salinity stress severely impacts wheat productivity and grain quality”
Claim · model-written summary
Salinity decreased wheat fiber and gluten.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume5
- Treatment
- Salinitye1
- Outcome
- fiber, and glutene2
- Direction
- decreasede2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Salinity reduced grain yield by 42–60% (more severely in Amin)”
e2“decreased ash content, moisture, carbohydrates, fiber, and gluten”
e5“Salinity stress severely impacts wheat productivity and grain quality”
Claim · model-written summary
Salinity increased wheat grain hardness and protein.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume5
- Treatment
- Salinitye1
- Outcome
- grain hardness and proteine3
- Direction
- increasinge3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Salinity reduced grain yield by 42–60% (more severely in Amin)”
e3“while increasing grain hardness and protein”
e5“Salinity stress severely impacts wheat productivity and grain quality”
Claim · model-written summary
The combined TUP + SiF treatment restored 10.5–39.0% of yield in Barzegar under salinity.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume5
- Material
- Barzegare4
- Treatment
- combined TUP + SiF treatmente4
- Outcome
- yielde4
- Direction
- restoringe4
- Value
- 10.5–39.0%e4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“The combined TUP + SiF treatment significantly mitigated these effects, particularly in Barzegar, restoring 10.5–39.0% of yield versus 34.4–50.0% in Amin”
e5“Salinity stress severely impacts wheat productivity and grain quality”
Claim · model-written summary
The combined TUP + SiF treatment restored 34.4–50.0% of yield in Amin under salinity.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume5
- Material
- Amine4
- Treatment
- combined TUP + SiF treatmente4
- Outcome
- yielde4
- Direction
- restoringe4
- Value
- 34.4–50.0%e4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“The combined TUP + SiF treatment significantly mitigated these effects, particularly in Barzegar, restoring 10.5–39.0% of yield versus 34.4–50.0% in Amin”
e5“Salinity stress severely impacts wheat productivity and grain quality”
Claim · model-written summary
The TUP + SiF treatment decreased MDA by 33.8–60.9% under salinity.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“The combined TUP + SiF treatment significantly mitigated these effects, particularly in Barzegar, restoring 10.5–39.0% of yield versus 34.4–50.0% in Amin”
e5“Salinity stress severely impacts wheat productivity and grain quality”
e6“reduced oxidative damage (MDA decreased by 33.8–60.9%)”
Claim · model-written summary
The TUP + SiF treatment boosted wheat SOD activity by 12–14%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“The combined TUP + SiF treatment significantly mitigated these effects, particularly in Barzegar, restoring 10.5–39.0% of yield versus 34.4–50.0% in Amin”
e5“Salinity stress severely impacts wheat productivity and grain quality”
e7“boosted antioxidant enzymes (SOD 12–14%, POD 33%, APX 25–26%, CAT 55–94%)”
Claim · model-written summary
The TUP + SiF treatment boosted wheat POD activity by 33%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“The combined TUP + SiF treatment significantly mitigated these effects, particularly in Barzegar, restoring 10.5–39.0% of yield versus 34.4–50.0% in Amin”
e5“Salinity stress severely impacts wheat productivity and grain quality”
e7“boosted antioxidant enzymes (SOD 12–14%, POD 33%, APX 25–26%, CAT 55–94%)”
Claim · model-written summary
The TUP + SiF treatment boosted wheat APX activity by 25–26%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“The combined TUP + SiF treatment significantly mitigated these effects, particularly in Barzegar, restoring 10.5–39.0% of yield versus 34.4–50.0% in Amin”
e5“Salinity stress severely impacts wheat productivity and grain quality”
e7“boosted antioxidant enzymes (SOD 12–14%, POD 33%, APX 25–26%, CAT 55–94%)”
Claim · model-written summary
The TUP + SiF treatment boosted wheat CAT activity by 55–94%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“The combined TUP + SiF treatment significantly mitigated these effects, particularly in Barzegar, restoring 10.5–39.0% of yield versus 34.4–50.0% in Amin”
e5“Salinity stress severely impacts wheat productivity and grain quality”
e7“boosted antioxidant enzymes (SOD 12–14%, POD 33%, APX 25–26%, CAT 55–94%)”
Claim · model-written summary
The TUP + SiF treatment enhanced the wheat K+/Na+ ratio 1.7–2.2-fold via upregulation of transporters.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume5
- Treatment
- TUP + SiFe4
- Outcome
- K + /Na + ratioe6
- Direction
- enhancede6
- Value
- 1.7–2.2-folde6
- Qualifier
- via upregulation of transporterse6
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“The combined TUP + SiF treatment significantly mitigated these effects, particularly in Barzegar, restoring 10.5–39.0% of yield versus 34.4–50.0% in Amin”
e5“Salinity stress severely impacts wheat productivity and grain quality”
e6“enhanced K + /Na + ratio (1.7–2.2-fold) via upregulation of transporters”
Claim · model-written summary
The TUP + SiF treatment increased wheat grain gluten by 8.8–9.8%.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume5
- Treatment
- TUP + SiFe4
- Outcome
- glutene6
- Direction
- increasinge6
- Value
- 8.8–9.8%e6
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“The combined TUP + SiF treatment significantly mitigated these effects, particularly in Barzegar, restoring 10.5–39.0% of yield versus 34.4–50.0% in Amin”
e5“Salinity stress severely impacts wheat productivity and grain quality”
e6“improved grain quality by increasing gluten (8.8–9.8%) and carbohydrates (6.7–7.5%) while reducing hardness and protein”
Claim · model-written summary
The TUP + SiF treatment increased wheat grain carbohydrates by 6.7–7.5%.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume5
- Treatment
- TUP + SiFe4
- Outcome
- carbohydratese6
- Direction
- increasinge6
- Value
- 6.7–7.5%e6
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“The combined TUP + SiF treatment significantly mitigated these effects, particularly in Barzegar, restoring 10.5–39.0% of yield versus 34.4–50.0% in Amin”
e5“Salinity stress severely impacts wheat productivity and grain quality”
e6“improved grain quality by increasing gluten (8.8–9.8%) and carbohydrates (6.7–7.5%) while reducing hardness and protein”
Claim · model-written summary
The TUP + SiF treatment reduced wheat grain hardness and protein.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume5
- Treatment
- TUP + SiFe4
- Outcome
- hardness and proteine6
- Direction
- reducinge6
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“The combined TUP + SiF treatment significantly mitigated these effects, particularly in Barzegar, restoring 10.5–39.0% of yield versus 34.4–50.0% in Amin”
e5“Salinity stress severely impacts wheat productivity and grain quality”
e6“improved grain quality by increasing gluten (8.8–9.8%) and carbohydrates (6.7–7.5%) while reducing hardness and protein”
Claim · model-written summary
Silicon reduced wheat Na+ uptake through epidermal silica deposition.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume5
- Compound
- Silicone6
- Outcome
- Na + uptakee6
- Qualifier
- epidermal silica depositione6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“Salinity stress severely impacts wheat productivity and grain quality”
e6“Silicon’s role in epidermal silica deposition reduced Na + uptake, while thiourea’s thiol group directly scavenged ROS”
Claim · model-written summary
Thiourea directly scavenged ROS in wheat through its thiol group.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume5
- Compound
- thioureae6
- Outcome
- ROSe6
- Qualifier
- directly scavengede6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“Salinity stress severely impacts wheat productivity and grain quality”
e6“Silicon’s role in epidermal silica deposition reduced Na + uptake, while thiourea’s thiol group directly scavenged ROS”
Claim · model-written summary
Barzegar had superior ion homeostasis and antioxidant capacity compared with Amin.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume5
- Material
- Barzegare7
- Outcome
- ion homeostasis and antioxidant capacitye7
- Direction
- superiore7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“Salinity stress severely impacts wheat productivity and grain quality”
e7“Cultivar differences revealed Barzegar’s superior ion homeostasis and antioxidant capacity”
The same questions in other papers
salinity · quality: protein · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
15 papers more in this group
See all 19 papers →salinity · quality: sugar starch · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
12 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
12 papers more in this group
See all 16 papers →salinity · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
196 papers in the same direction as this paper · 30 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
223 papers more in this group
See all 227 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.