Abstract
Sericin solution (SER), derived from silkworm cocoons, is a mixture with promising properties that may enhance plant growth. To evaluate the potential use of this SER preparation as a biostimulant, a study was conducted on lettuce ( Lactuca sativa L.) plants, assessing both leaf spray and soil drenching methods. The experimental design included the study of plant responses to SER treatment in well-watered and water stress (WS) conditions and compared them with those of two commercially available reference biostimulants (REF1, REF2). Although some beneficial effects were observed in well-watered plants, the most significant ones occurred under WS. In this condition, the fluorescence performance index (PI) increased in plants treated with SER via leaf spray. Additionally, both SER and the commercial references reduced leaf temperature, suggesting a positive impact on leaf transpiration. Moreover, shoot head diameter remained unaffected in plants treated with REF1 and SER via leaf spray. Although SER did not fully counteract the effects caused by WS, several biochemical parameters, such as the phenolic index, and the contents of total sugars, sucrose, proline, and malondialdehyde (MDA), revealed notable differences in metabolic responses, some of which were comparable to those induced by the commercial references. Interestingly, the mode of SER application appeared to elicit distinct physiological responses. Notably, leaf application of both SER and REF1 significantly reduced leaf nitrate content under non-stress condition. This study supports the potential use of SER as a biostimulant. Being derived from textile industry waste, it aligns well with the principles of the circular economy.
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 11
Claim · model-written summary
SER leaf spray increased lettuce fluorescence performance index under water stress.
- Taxon
- lettuce
Lactuca sativat0 - Treatment
- SER via leaf spraye0
- Outcome
- fluorescence performance index (PI)e0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.)”
e0“the fluorescence performance index (PI) increased in plants treated with SER via leaf spray.”
Claim · model-written summary
SER reduced leaf temperature under water stress.
- Taxon
- lettuceLactuca sativat0
- Treatment
- SERe0
- Outcome
- leaf temperaturee0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.)”
e0“both SER and the commercial references reduced leaf temperature”
Claim · model-written summary
Commercial references reduced leaf temperature under water stress.
- Taxon
- lettuceLactuca sativat0
- Treatment
- commercial referencese0
- Outcome
- leaf temperaturee0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.)”
e0“both SER and the commercial references reduced leaf temperature”
Claim · model-written summary
REF1 leaf spray left shoot head diameter unaffected.
- Taxon
- lettuceLactuca sativat0
- Treatment
- REF1e0
- Outcome
- shoot head diametere0
- Direction
- remained unaffectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.)”
e0“shoot head diameter remained unaffected in plants treated with REF1 and SER via leaf spray.”
Claim · model-written summary
SER leaf spray left shoot head diameter unaffected.
- Taxon
- lettuceLactuca sativat0
- Treatment
- SER via leaf spraye0
- Outcome
- shoot head diametere0
- Direction
- remained unaffectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.)”
e0“shoot head diameter remained unaffected in plants treated with REF1 and SER via leaf spray.”
Claim · model-written summary
SER produced notable differences in phenolic index and sugar measures under water stress.
- Taxon
- lettuceLactuca sativat0
- Outcome
- phenolic index, and the contents of total sugars, sucrosee0
- Comparator
- commercial referencese0
Not reportedTreatmentDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.)”
e0“the phenolic index, and the contents of total sugars, sucrose, proline, and malondialdehyde (MDA), revealed notable differences in metabolic responses, some of which were comparable to those induced by the commercial references.”
Claim · model-written summary
SER produced notable differences in proline and malondialdehyde content under water stress.
- Taxon
- lettuceLactuca sativat0
- Outcome
- proline, and malondialdehyde (MDA)e0
- Comparator
- commercial referencese0
Not reportedTreatmentDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.)”
e0“the phenolic index, and the contents of total sugars, sucrose, proline, and malondialdehyde (MDA), revealed notable differences in metabolic responses, some of which were comparable to those induced by the commercial references.”
Claim · model-written summary
SER application modes elicited distinct physiological responses.
- Taxon
- lettuceLactuca sativat0
- Treatment
- mode of SER applicatione0
- Outcome
- distinct physiological responsese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.)”
e0“the mode of SER application appeared to elicit distinct physiological responses.”
Claim · model-written summary
SER leaf application significantly reduced leaf nitrate under non-stress conditions.
- Taxon
- lettuceLactuca sativat0
- Treatment
- leaf application of both SERe0
- Outcome
- leaf nitrate contente0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Qualifier
- non-stress conditione0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.)”
e0“leaf application of both SER and REF1 significantly reduced leaf nitrate content under non-stress condition.”
Claim · model-written summary
REF1 leaf application significantly reduced leaf nitrate under non-stress conditions.
- Taxon
- lettuceLactuca sativat0
- Treatment
- REF1e0
- Outcome
- leaf nitrate contente0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Qualifier
- non-stress conditione0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.)”
e0“leaf application of both SER and REF1 significantly reduced leaf nitrate content under non-stress condition.”
Claim · model-written summary
SER did not fully counteract water stress effects.
- Taxon
- lettuceLactuca sativat0
- Outcome
- effects caused by WSe0
- Direction
- did not fully counteracte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.)”
e0“Although SER did not fully counteract the effects caused by WS”
The same questions in other papers
application · yield · Lactuca sativa (garden lettuce)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 30 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
34 papers more in this group
See all 38 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.