(+)-abscisic acid · Molecular: metabolites · Vicia faba (faba bean)
10 claims from these papers; 3 citations between them.
Papers whose results differ, checked claim by claim 1
1 pair of papers on this question report results that differ: an effect in one paper, the opposite effect or no effect in the other. Two model reviewers reading both claims accepted each pair.
- Effects of ABA and CaCl2 on GABA accumulation in fava bean germinating under hypoxia-NaCl stress (2015)
increaseABA enhanced GAD and DAO activity and GABA content in cotyledon and shoot.
Effects of chloride salts and hormones on γ-aminobutyric acid enrichment in germinated faba beans(Vicia faba L.) (2012)no changeABA did not increase GABA content in germinated faba beans under hypoxia stress.
The records name no dose, test system or situation that separates the two claims.Compare the two papers →
How these papers cite each other
3 citations between these papers: 1 on the same side, 2 across the two sides.
- Positive result
- Negative result or no effect
- Citation, pointing to the cited paper
- Citation across the two sides
- Larger circle: more citations overall
Years run left to right. Citations come from the papers’ OpenAlex reference lists. Hover a paper to bring forward its citations; click it to open the paper.
Papers reporting a positive result 5
- positive
An Abscisic Acid-Activated and Calcium-Independent Protein Kinase from Guard Cells of Fava Bean. · 1996
- positive
- positive
Hydrogen Sulfide Mediates ABA-induced Stomatal Closure of Vicia faba L. · 2011
- positive
Effects of ABA and CaCl2 on GABA accumulation in fava bean germinating under hypoxia-NaCl stress · 2015
- positive
- negative
- negative
Papers reporting a negative result or no effect 3
A paper is on the positive side when any of its claims here is positive. Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. Claims that compare genotypes are left out; a claim about lacking a nutrient counts the other way round in that nutrient’s question. “Results differ” marks a question where two model reviewers, reading both claims, accepted at least one pair of papers whose results differ.