aluminium atom · Physiology: osmolytes · Sorghum
2 claims from these papers.
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.
- Aluminum toxicity and water deficit effects on leaf photosynthesis and stomatal conductance, growth traits, proline, organic acids, and mineral nutrients in sorghum (1993)
no changeIncreasing aluminum did not change shoot or root proline.
Antioxidant enzyme response of sorghum plant upon exposure to Aluminum, Chromium and Lead heavy metals (2017)increaseAt 64 ppm Al increased leaf proline nearly fivefold versus control.
The records name no dose, test system or situation that separates the two claims.Compare the two papers →
Papers reporting a positive result 1
Papers reporting a negative result or no effect 1
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.