Abstract
Effects of different concentrations of ozone on grain filling, flag leaf senescence and final grain yield in field‐grown spring wheat ( Triticum aestivum L. cv. Dragon) were studied using open‐top chambers. The hypothesis tested was that an ozone‐induced reduction in grain yield is mainly related to an enhanced senescence and a shortening of the grain‐filling period. The plants were exposed to filtered air (F), non‐filtered air without extra ozone (NF) or non‐filtered air with 3 different levels of ozone added (NF1+, NF2+ and NF3+). The mean daytime (08.00–20.00 h) ozone concentrations during the exposure period (31 days) were 7, 20, 34, 48 and 62 nmol mol−1 in F, NF, NF1+, NF2+ and NF3+, respectively. The corresponding ozone doses, expressed as the accumulated exposure over a concentration threshold of 40 nmol mol−1 (AOT40), were 0, 12, 1 989, 5 881 and 10 375 nmol mol−1 h, respectively, and 884, 2 594, 4 557, 6 188 and 7 900 μmol m−2, respectively, expressed as the calculated cumulative flag leaf ozone flux (CFO30). The flag leaves senesced earlier and the grain‐filling duration was significantly shorter at higher ozone exposure compared to F (−5, −13 and −18% in NF1+, NF2+ and NF3+, respectively). The relative grain‐filling rate did not differ between the treatments. The 1000‐grain weights were 10, 28 and 37% lower, and the grain yields were 15, 29 and 46% lower than F in NF1+, NF2+ and NF3+, respectively. Ozone exposure had no significant effect on the number of grains per unit ground area or on straw yield, but significantly reduced the harvest index and increased the grain protein concentration in NF2+ and NF3+ compared to F. The grain yield was negatively correlated with the ozone dose, expressed either as AOT40 or as CFO3 with or without an ozone flux threshold. The 1000‐grain weight was positively correlated with the grain‐filling duration (R2=0.998), which in turn was positively correlated with the leaf area duration (R2=0.989).
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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Higher ozone exposure made the flag leaves of spring wheat senesce earlier.
- Taxon
- spring wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Material
- cv. Dragone0
- Treatment
- higher ozone exposuree1
- Outcome
- flag leavese1
- Direction
- senesced earliere1
- Comparator
- Fe1
- Setting
- open‐top chamberse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“field‐grown spring wheat ( Triticum aestivum L. cv. Dragon) were studied using open‐top chambers”
e1“The flag leaves senesced earlier and the grain‐filling duration was significantly shorter at higher ozone exposure compared to F (−5, −13 and −18% in NF1+, NF2+ and NF3+, respectively)”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher ozone exposure significantly shortened the grain-filling duration of spring wheat by 5 to 18%.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- cv. Dragone0
- Treatment
- higher ozone exposuree1
- Outcome
- grain‐filling duratione1
- Direction
- significantly shortere1
- Value
- −5, −13 and −18%e1
- Comparator
- Fe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“field‐grown spring wheat ( Triticum aestivum L. cv. Dragon) were studied using open‐top chambers”
e1“The flag leaves senesced earlier and the grain‐filling duration was significantly shorter at higher ozone exposure compared to F (−5, −13 and −18% in NF1+, NF2+ and NF3+, respectively)”
Claim · model-written summary
The relative grain-filling rate of spring wheat did not differ between ozone treatments.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- cv. Dragone0
- Treatment
- different concentrations of ozonee2
- Outcome
- relative grain‐filling ratee3
- Direction
- did not differe3
- Comparator
- the treatmentse3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“field‐grown spring wheat ( Triticum aestivum L. cv. Dragon) were studied using open‐top chambers”
e2“Effects of different concentrations of ozone”
e3“The relative grain‐filling rate did not differ between the treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Ozone treatments lowered the 1000-grain weight of spring wheat by 10, 28 and 37% relative to filtered air.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- cv. Dragone0
- Treatment
- NF1+, NF2+ and NF3+e4
- Outcome
- 1000‐grain weightse4
- Direction
- lowere4
- Value
- 10, 28 and 37%e4
- Comparator
- Fe4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“field‐grown spring wheat ( Triticum aestivum L. cv. Dragon) were studied using open‐top chambers”
e4“The 1000‐grain weights were 10, 28 and 37% lower, and the grain yields were 15, 29 and 46% lower than F in NF1+, NF2+ and NF3+, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Ozone treatments lowered the grain yield of spring wheat by 15, 29 and 46% relative to filtered air.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- cv. Dragone0
- Treatment
- NF1+, NF2+ and NF3+e4
- Outcome
- grain yieldse4
- Direction
- lowere4
- Value
- 15, 29 and 46%e4
- Comparator
- Fe4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“field‐grown spring wheat ( Triticum aestivum L. cv. Dragon) were studied using open‐top chambers”
e4“The 1000‐grain weights were 10, 28 and 37% lower, and the grain yields were 15, 29 and 46% lower than F in NF1+, NF2+ and NF3+, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Ozone exposure had no significant effect on grain number per unit ground area or on straw yield of spring wheat.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- cv. Dragone0
- Treatment
- Ozone exposuree5
- Outcome
- number of grains per unit ground area or on straw yielde5
- Direction
- no significant effecte5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“field‐grown spring wheat ( Triticum aestivum L. cv. Dragon) were studied using open‐top chambers”
e5“Ozone exposure had no significant effect on the number of grains per unit ground area or on straw yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Ozone in NF2+ and NF3+ significantly reduced the harvest index of spring wheat compared with filtered air.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- cv. Dragone0
- Treatment
- NF2+ and NF3+e6
- Outcome
- harvest indexe6
- Direction
- significantly reducede6
- Comparator
- Fe6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“field‐grown spring wheat ( Triticum aestivum L. cv. Dragon) were studied using open‐top chambers”
e6“significantly reduced the harvest index and increased the grain protein concentration in NF2+ and NF3+ compared to F”
Claim · model-written summary
Ozone in NF2+ and NF3+ increased the grain protein concentration of spring wheat compared with filtered air.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- cv. Dragone0
- Treatment
- NF2+ and NF3+e6
- Outcome
- grain protein concentratione6
- Direction
- increasede6
- Comparator
- Fe6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“field‐grown spring wheat ( Triticum aestivum L. cv. Dragon) were studied using open‐top chambers”
e6“significantly reduced the harvest index and increased the grain protein concentration in NF2+ and NF3+ compared to F”
Claim · model-written summary
Grain yield of spring wheat was negatively correlated with the ozone dose, expressed as AOT40 or as CFO3.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- cv. Dragone0
- Treatment
- ozone dosee7
- Outcome
- grain yielde7
- Direction
- negatively correlatede7
- Qualifier
- AOT40 or as CFO3e7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“field‐grown spring wheat ( Triticum aestivum L. cv. Dragon) were studied using open‐top chambers”
e7“The grain yield was negatively correlated with the ozone dose, expressed either as AOT40 or as CFO3 with or without an ozone flux threshold”
Claim · model-written summary
The 1000-grain weight of spring wheat was positively correlated with the grain-filling duration.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- cv. Dragone0
- Outcome
- 1000‐grain weighte7
- Direction
- positively correlatede7
- Value
- R2=0.998e7
- Comparator
- grain‐filling duratione7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“field‐grown spring wheat ( Triticum aestivum L. cv. Dragon) were studied using open‐top chambers”
e7“The 1000‐grain weight was positively correlated with the grain‐filling duration (R2=0.998), which in turn was positively correlated with the leaf area duration (R2=0.989)”
Claim · model-written summary
The grain-filling duration of spring wheat was positively correlated with the leaf area duration.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- cv. Dragone0
- Outcome
- grain‐filling duratione7
- Direction
- positively correlatede7
- Value
- R2=0.989e7
- Comparator
- leaf area duratione7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“field‐grown spring wheat ( Triticum aestivum L. cv. Dragon) were studied using open‐top chambers”
e7“The 1000‐grain weight was positively correlated with the grain‐filling duration (R2=0.998), which in turn was positively correlated with the leaf area duration (R2=0.989)”
The same questions in other papers
ozone · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
62 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
66 papers more in this group
See all 70 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.