Paper · 1997 · Plant Disease

Effects of Barley Yellow Dwarf Virus on Root and Shoot Growth of Winter Wheat Seedlings Grown in Aeroponic Culture

T. K. Hoffman; F. L. Kolb

9
claims
23
verbatim quotes
36
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Seedlings of eight soft red winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) cultivars were grown in an aeroponic mist box to study the effects of barley yellow dwarf virus (BYDV) on root and shoot growth and to look for differences in root and shoot growth among cultivars. The cultivars selected for the study were Caldwell, Cardinal, Clark, Howell, IL 87-2834, Tyler, and Pioneer brands 2548 and 2555. A split-plot treatment design was used, with uninfected and inoculated treatments as whole plots and cultivars as subplots. Differences among cultivars were found for most growth characteristics under both control and BYDV-infected conditions. There was a strong positive correlation between shoot and root dry weights in both the control and BYDV treatments, indicating that cultivars with vigorous shoot growth tended to have more vigorous root growth. BYDV severely reduced root length, distance from seminal root tip to the nearest lateral root, and the root to shoot ratio for all cultivars tested. The number of adventitious roots and shoot percent dry matter were increased by BYDV infection for some cultivars. Chlorosis and stunting were not observed in shoots during the 18 days of the experiment, whereas roots were visibly stunted approximately 4 days after inoculation. Results indicate that, initially, the root system is affected more severely than the shoot in BYDV-infected wheat seedlings.

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 9

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cultivars differed in most growth traits under both conditions.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Outcome
most growth characteristicse0
Comparator
control and BYDV-infected conditionse0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Differences among cultivars were found for most growth characteristics under both control and BYDV-infected conditions.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 513–632 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 65–77 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Shoot and root dry weights were positively correlated in control and BYDV treatments.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
BYDV treatmentse0
Outcome
shoot and root dry weightse0
Direction
positivee0
Comparator
controle0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“strong positive correlation between shoot and root dry weights in both the control and BYDV treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 645–747 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 65–77 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

BYDV reduced root length across cultivars.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
BYDVe0
Outcome
root lengthe0
Direction
reducede0
Qualifier
all cultivars testede0
Comparator
uninfectede1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“BYDV severely reduced root length, distance from seminal root tip to the nearest lateral root, and the root to shoot ratio for all cultivars tested”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 844–991 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 65–77 · show in text ↑
e1

“uninfected and inoculated treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 434–470 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

BYDV reduced distance from seminal root tip to the nearest lateral root.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
BYDVe0
Outcome
distance from seminal root tip to the nearest lateral roote0
Direction
reducede0
Qualifier
all cultivars testede0
Comparator
uninfectede1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“BYDV severely reduced root length, distance from seminal root tip to the nearest lateral root, and the root to shoot ratio for all cultivars tested”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 844–991 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 65–77 · show in text ↑
e1

“uninfected and inoculated treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 434–470 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

BYDV reduced root to shoot ratio across cultivars.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
BYDVe0
Outcome
root to shoot ratioe0
Direction
reducede0
Qualifier
all cultivars testede0
Comparator
uninfectede1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“BYDV severely reduced root length, distance from seminal root tip to the nearest lateral root, and the root to shoot ratio for all cultivars tested”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 844–991 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 65–77 · show in text ↑
e1

“uninfected and inoculated treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 434–470 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

BYDV increased adventitious root number for some cultivars.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
BYDV infectione0
Outcome
number of adventitious rootse0
Direction
increasede0
Qualifier
some cultivarse0
Comparator
uninfectede1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The number of adventitious roots and shoot percent dry matter were increased by BYDV infection for some cultivars.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 993–1107 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 65–77 · show in text ↑
e1

“uninfected and inoculated treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 434–470 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

BYDV increased shoot percent dry matter for some cultivars.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
BYDV infectione0
Outcome
shoot percent dry mattere0
Direction
increasede0
Qualifier
some cultivarse0
Comparator
uninfectede1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The number of adventitious roots and shoot percent dry matter were increased by BYDV infection for some cultivars.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 993–1107 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 65–77 · show in text ↑
e1

“uninfected and inoculated treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 434–470 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Shoot chlorosis and stunting were not seen during 18 days.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Organ / stage
shootse0
Outcome
Chlorosis and stuntinge0
Qualifier
18 dayse0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Chlorosis and stunting were not observed in shoots during the 18 days of the experiment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1108–1195 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 65–77 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Roots were visibly stunted about four days after inoculation.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Organ / stage
rootse0
Treatment
inoculatione0
Outcome
roots were visibly stuntede0
Value
approximately 4 dayse0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“roots were visibly stunted approximately 4 days after inoculation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1205–1270 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 65–77 · show in text ↑

Hordeum vulgare · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 2 positive, 6 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. negative

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 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.