Abstract
Atmospheric nanoplastics are emergingly found to deposit on leaves of terrestrial plants and adversely affect plant growth. Lipid remodeling has been verified as one of the important strategies for plants to respond to abiotic stress; however, its molecular response to atmospheric nanoplastics in crop leaves remains unclear. In this study, maize leaves were exposed to 50 nm polystyrene nanoplastics (PSNPs) with pristine (nPS), carboxy (nPS-COOH), and amino groups (nPS-NH 2 ) at environmentally relevant doses (1 and 10 μg/d). Ten-day exposure of nPS-NH 2 induced the strongest phenotypic and physiological inhibition regardless of the exposure dose. All PSNPs were internalized into maize leaves via the stomatal pathway, accumulating dose-dependently. Meanwhile, the highest PSNP absorption efficiency was found in nPS-NH 2 treatment (0.208%), which was 3.92- and 2.37-fold of those in the treatments of nPS and nPS-COOH, respectively. The significant inhibitory effect of three PSNPs on the biosynthesis of 31 membrane “structural” and “signaling” lipids and their gene expression in maize leaves was found through lipidomics and transcriptomics analysis. Five key genes ( LACS4, GPAT2, LPP2, DGK1, and PLD1 ) involved in membrane lipid metabolisms were identified by weighted gene coexpression network analysis. These findings provide valuable insights into the interactions between atmospheric NPs and crop growth from the molecular perspective of lipid remodeling.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 7
Claim · model-written summary
Ten-day nPS-NH 2 exposure produced the strongest maize phenotypic and physiological inhibition at both doses.
- Treatment
- nPS-NH 2e0
- Outcome
- phenotypic and physiological inhibitione0
- Direction
- strongeste0
- Qualifier
- regardless of the exposure dosee0
- Comparator
- nPS-COOHe1
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Ten-day exposure of nPS-NH 2 induced the strongest phenotypic and physiological inhibition regardless of the exposure dose”
e1“maize leaves were exposed to 50 nm polystyrene nanoplastics (PSNPs) with pristine (nPS), carboxy (nPS-COOH), and amino groups (nPS-NH 2 )”
Claim · model-written summary
All PSNP forms entered maize leaves through stomata and accumulated with dose.
- Organ / stage
- leavese0
- Outcome
- PSNPs were internalized into maize leaves via the stomatal pathwaye0
- Direction
- accumulating dose-dependentlye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“All PSNPs were internalized into maize leaves via the stomatal pathway, accumulating dose-dependently”
Claim · model-written summary
nPS-NH 2 had the highest maize leaf absorption efficiency, 0.208%, 3.92-fold that of nPS.
- Treatment
- nPS-NH 2e0
- Outcome
- PSNP absorption efficiencye0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 0.208%e0
- Qualifier
- 3.92-e0
- Comparator
- nPSe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the highest PSNP absorption efficiency was found in nPS-NH 2 treatment (0.208%), which was 3.92- and 2.37-fold of those in the treatments of nPS and nPS-COOH, respectively”
e1“maize leaves were exposed”
Claim · model-written summary
nPS-NH 2 absorption efficiency in maize was 2.37-fold that of nPS-COOH.
- Treatment
- nPS-NH 2e0
- Outcome
- PSNP absorption efficiencye0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 2.37-folde0
- Comparator
- nPS-COOHe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the highest PSNP absorption efficiency was found in nPS-NH 2 treatment (0.208%), which was 3.92- and 2.37-fold of those in the treatments of nPS and nPS-COOH, respectively”
e1“maize leaves were exposed”
Claim · model-written summary
The three PSNP forms significantly inhibited biosynthesis of 31 maize membrane structural and signaling lipids.
- Treatment
- three PSNPse0
- Outcome
- biosynthesis of 31 membrane “structural” and “signaling” lipidse0
- Direction
- inhibitorye0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The significant inhibitory effect of three PSNPs on the biosynthesis of 31 membrane “structural” and “signaling” lipids and their gene expression in maize leaves”
Claim · model-written summary
The three PSNP forms significantly inhibited associated gene expression in maize leaves.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The significant inhibitory effect of three PSNPs on the biosynthesis of 31 membrane “structural” and “signaling” lipids and their gene expression in maize leaves”
Claim · model-written summary
Network analysis identified LACS4, GPAT2, LPP2, DGK1 and PLD1 as key genes in maize membrane lipid metabolism.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Five key genes ( LACS4, GPAT2, LPP2, DGK1, and PLD1 ) involved in membrane lipid metabolisms were identified”
e1“maize leaves were exposed”
The same questions in other papers
nanoparticle · molecular: expression · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →nanoparticle · disease · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 17 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
16 papers more in this group
See all 20 papers →nanoparticle · molecular: metabolites · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
23 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
20 papers more in this group
See all 24 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.