Paper · 2026 · BMC Plant Biology

Differential impacts of iron oxide nanoparticles and zinc on ion homeostasis, antioxidant defense, and growth performance of cotton under salinity stress

Hatice Kübra Gören; Uğur Tan; Muhittin Kulak; et al.

16
claims
30
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-nd

Abstract

Salinity is one of the most detrimental abiotic stresses, significantly impairing plant growth, nutrient balance, and productivity. In recent decades, nanotechnology-based approaches, such as the use of iron oxide nanoparticles Fe(II,III) oxide nanoparticles, and micronutrient supplementation like zinc (Zn) foliar applications, have emerged as promising strategies to mitigate salinity-induced damage. These approaches are gaining importance due to their potential to enhance ion homeostasis, antioxidant defenses, and physiological functions, thereby improving plant resilience under saline conditions. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of Fe(II,III) oxide NPs and Zn on macro- and microelement accumulation, enzymatic antioxidant activity, total phenolic and flavonoid contents, and growth performance of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) subjected to salinity stress. In this regard, we designed the two different salinity conditions assigned to the main plots (0 dS m−1 control and 13 dS NaCl m−1) and the foliar application to the sub-plots, which included distilled water, zinc (Zn) (80 ppm) and iron oxide nanoparticles Fe(II,III) oxide NPs; 300 ppm). The study demonstrated that Fe(II,III) oxide NPs significantly enhanced cotton growth under salinity stress, increasing dry leaf weight (DLW) to 0.74 g and fresh leaf weight (FLW) to 4.96 g. Foliar application of zinc (Zn) notably improved relative water content (RWC) to 83.90% and SPAD value to 43.53. Both foliar treatments markedly influenced the levels of flavonoids, proline, and antioxidant enzymes (CAT, POD, and SOD) in cotton leaves under saline conditions. A substantial increase in proline content and antioxidant enzyme activities was observed, with proline levels reaching 3.19 and 3.18 μmol g⁻1 FW for Zn and Fe(II,III) oxide NPs, respectively. Catalase (CAT) activity also increased significantly under salinity stress, rising to 54.86% with Zn and 55.72% with Fe(II,III) oxide NPs compared to non-saline conditions. Another notable finding was a 384.7% increase in leaf Zn content with Zn application under salinity stress. Nutrient accumulation exhibited organ-specific variations, with Fe(II,III) oxide NPs affecting affecting K, Mg, Na, Fe2⁺/Fe3⁺, and Zn whereas Zn treatments enhanced K, Mg, Na, Zn, Cu, and Mn concentrations. Additionally, Zn, Cu, and Mg concentrations were higher in leaves, while Na, Zn, Cu, and Mn were more pronounced in roots. The results indicate that foliar applications of Zn and Fe(II,III) oxide NPs enhance cotton growth and stress tolerance by promoting ion homeostasis, strengthening antioxidant defenses, and supporting key physiological processes. This study highlights the potential of nanotechnology as a sustainable strategy for nutrient management in saline environments, contributing to improved agricultural productivity and resilience.

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 16

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Iron oxide nanoparticles increased dry leaf weight under salinity to 0.74 g.

Treatment
Fe(II,III) oxide NPse0
Outcome
dry leaf weight (DLW)e0
Direction
increasinge0
Value
0.74 ge0
Qualifier
under salinity stresse0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Fe(II,III) oxide NPs significantly enhanced cotton growth under salinity stress, increasing dry leaf weight (DLW) to 0.74 g”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1193–1316 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Iron oxide nanoparticles increased fresh leaf weight under salinity to 4.96 g.

Treatment
Fe(II,III) oxide NPse0
Outcome
fresh leaf weight (FLW)e0
Direction
increasinge0
Value
4.96 ge0
Qualifier
under salinity stresse0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Fe(II,III) oxide NPs significantly enhanced cotton growth under salinity stress, increasing dry leaf weight (DLW) to 0.74 g and fresh leaf weight (FLW) to 4.96 g”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1193–1354 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zinc foliar application improved relative water content to 83.90%.

Treatment
Foliar application of zinc (Zn)e0
Outcome
relative water content (RWC)e0
Direction
improvede0
Value
83.90%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–131 · show in text ↑
e0

“Foliar application of zinc (Zn) notably improved relative water content (RWC) to 83.90%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1356–1443 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zinc foliar application improved SPAD value to 43.53.

Treatment
Foliar application of zinc (Zn)e0
Outcome
SPAD valuee0
Direction
improvede0
Value
43.53e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–131 · show in text ↑
e0

“Foliar application of zinc (Zn) notably improved relative water content (RWC) to 83.90% and SPAD value to 43.53”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1356–1467 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zinc increased cotton leaf proline to 3.19 μmol g⁻1 FW under salinity.

Treatment
Zne0
Outcome
proline contente0
Direction
increasee0
Value
3.19e0
Qualifier
μmol g⁻1 FWe0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–131 · show in text ↑
e0

“A substantial increase in proline content and antioxidant enzyme activities was observed, with proline levels reaching 3.19 and 3.18 μmol g⁻1 FW for Zn and Fe(II,III) oxide NPs, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1633–1823 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Iron oxide nanoparticles increased cotton leaf proline to 3.18 μmol g⁻1 FW.

Treatment
Fe(II,III) oxide NPse0
Outcome
proline contente0
Direction
increasee0
Value
3.18 μmol g⁻1 FWe0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–131 · show in text ↑
e0

“A substantial increase in proline content and antioxidant enzyme activities was observed, with proline levels reaching 3.19 and 3.18 μmol g⁻1 FW for Zn and Fe(II,III) oxide NPs, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1633–1823 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Zinc increased catalase activity to 54.86% under salinity relative to nonsaline conditions.

Treatment
Zne0
Outcome
Catalase (CAT) activitye0
Direction
increasede0
Value
54.86%e0
Comparator
non-saline conditionse0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–131 · show in text ↑
e0

“Catalase (CAT) activity also increased significantly under salinity stress, rising to 54.86% with Zn and 55.72% with Fe(II,III) oxide NPs compared to non-saline conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1825–1996 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Iron oxide nanoparticles increased catalase activity to 55.72% under salinity relative to nonsaline conditions.

Treatment
Fe(II,III) oxide NPse0
Outcome
Catalase (CAT) activitye0
Direction
increasede0
Value
55.72%e0
Comparator
non-saline conditionse0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–131 · show in text ↑
e0

“Catalase (CAT) activity also increased significantly under salinity stress, rising to 54.86% with Zn and 55.72% with Fe(II,III) oxide NPs compared to non-saline conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1825–1996 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zinc application increased leaf Zn content by 384.7% during salinity.

Treatment
Zn applicatione0
Outcome
leaf Zn contente0
Direction
increasee0
Value
384.7%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–131 · show in text ↑
e0

“a 384.7% increase in leaf Zn content with Zn application under salinity stress”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2026–2104 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Iron oxide nanoparticles affected cotton K, Mg and Na accumulation.

Treatment
Fe(II,III) oxide NPse0
Outcome
K, Mg, Nae0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–131 · show in text ↑
e0

“Fe(II,III) oxide NPs affecting affecting K, Mg, Na, Fe2⁺/Fe3⁺, and Zn”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2170–2239 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Iron oxide nanoparticles affected cotton Fe and Zn accumulation.

Treatment
Fe(II,III) oxide NPse0
Outcome
Fe2⁺/Fe3⁺, and Zne0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–131 · show in text ↑
e0

“Fe(II,III) oxide NPs affecting affecting K, Mg, Na, Fe2⁺/Fe3⁺, and Zn”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2170–2239 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zinc treatment enhanced cotton K, Mg and Na concentrations.

Treatment
Zn treatmentse0
Outcome
K, Mg, Nae0
Direction
enhancede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–131 · show in text ↑
e0

“Zn treatments enhanced K, Mg, Na, Zn, Cu, and Mn concentrations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2248–2311 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zinc treatment enhanced cotton Zn, Cu and Mn concentrations.

Treatment
Zn treatmentse0
Outcome
Zn, Cu, and Mn concentrationse0
Direction
enhancede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–131 · show in text ↑
e0

“Zn treatments enhanced K, Mg, Na, Zn, Cu, and Mn concentrations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2248–2311 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cotton leaf Zn, Cu and Mg concentrations were higher than in roots.

Organ / stage
leavese0
Outcome
Zn, Cu, and Mg concentrationse0
Direction
highere0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–131 · show in text ↑
e0

“Zn, Cu, and Mg concentrations were higher in leaves”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2327–2378 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cotton root Na, Zn, Cu and Mn were more pronounced than in leaves.

Organ / stage
rootse0
Outcome
Na, Zn, Cu, and Mne0
Direction
more pronouncede0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–131 · show in text ↑
e0

“Na, Zn, Cu, and Mn were more pronounced in roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2386–2434 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zinc foliar treatment influenced cotton leaf flavonoids, proline and antioxidant enzymes under salinity.

Organ / stage
cotton leavese0
Treatment
foliar treatmentse0
Outcome
levels of flavonoids, proline, and antioxidant enzymese0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–131 · show in text ↑
e0

“Both foliar treatments markedly influenced the levels of flavonoids, proline, and antioxidant enzymes (CAT, POD, and SOD) in cotton leaves under saline conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1469–1631 · show in text ↑

zinc atom · nutrient: content · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ

16 papers: 13 positive, 3 negative or no effect

12 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

12 papers more in this group

See all 16 papers →

iron atom · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

7 papers: 6 positive, 1 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. positive

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 papers →

oxide · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

zinc atom · physiology: antioxidant enzymes · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

zinc atom · physiology: water · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

zinc atom · physiology: osmolytes · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

zinc atom · physiology: pigments · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree

9 papers: 9 positive, 0 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 papers →

application · physiology: water · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

16 papers: 15 positive, 1 negative or no effect

14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

12 papers more in this group

See all 16 papers →

8 of 12 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.

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.