Abstract
The growth rate of maize ( Zea mays L. cv. Cross Bantam T51) coleoptiles in the dark was highest at the basal zone and decreased towards the tip. Growth was strongly inhibited by white fluorescent light (5 W m −2 ), especially in the basal zone of coleoptiles. Light irradiation caused an increase in the values of stress‐relaxation parameters, the minimum stress‐relaxation time and the relaxation rate and a decrease in the extensibility (strain/stress) of the cell walls at all zones. In addition, during growth, the accumulation of osmotic solutes was strongly inhibited by white light irradiation, resulting in an increased osmotic potential. The influences of white light on the mechanical properties of the cell wall and the osmotic potential of the tissue sap were most prominent in the basal zone. Significant correlations were observed between the increment of coleoptile length and the mechanical properties of the cell walls or the osmotic potential of the tissue sap and osmotic solutes content. Furthermore, light inhibited the outward bending of split coleoptile segments. These facts suggest that white light inhibits elongation of maize coleoptiles by modifying both the mechanical properties of the cell walls and cellular osmotic potential, which control the rate of water uptake.
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Dark-grown maize coleoptile growth was highest basally and declined toward the tip.
- Material
- Cross Bantam T51e0
- Organ / stage
- coleoptilese0
- Outcome
- growth ratee0
- Direction
- decreased towards the tipe0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The growth rate of maize ( Zea mays L. cv. Cross Bantam T51) coleoptiles in the dark was highest at the basal zone and decreased towards the tip.”
Claim · model-written summary
White fluorescent light strongly inhibited coleoptile growth, especially basally.
- Organ / stage
- coleoptilese0
- Treatment
- white fluorescent light (5 W m −2 )e0
- Outcome
- Growthe0
- Direction
- strongly inhibitede0
- Comparator
- in the darke1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Growth was strongly inhibited by white fluorescent light (5 W m −2 ), especially in the basal zone of coleoptiles.”
e1“maize ( Zea mays L. cv. Cross Bantam T51) coleoptiles in the dark”
Claim · model-written summary
Light raised the minimum stress-relaxation time.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Light irradiation caused an increase in the values of stress‐relaxation parameters, the minimum stress‐relaxation time and the relaxation rate”
t0“maize coleoptiles”
Claim · model-written summary
Light raised the relaxation rate.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Light irradiation caused an increase in the values of stress‐relaxation parameters, the minimum stress‐relaxation time and the relaxation rate”
t0“maize coleoptiles”
Claim · model-written summary
Light reduced cell-wall extensibility in all zones.
- Treatment
- Light irradiatione1
- Outcome
- extensibility (strain/stress) of the cell wallse0
- Direction
- decreasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“a decrease in the extensibility (strain/stress) of the cell walls at all zones.”
e1“Light irradiation caused an increase in the values of stress‐relaxation parameters”
t0“maize coleoptiles”
Claim · model-written summary
White light inhibited accumulation of osmotic solutes during growth.
- Treatment
- white light irradiatione0
- Outcome
- accumulation of osmotic solutese0
- Direction
- strongly inhibitede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“during growth, the accumulation of osmotic solutes was strongly inhibited by white light irradiation”
t0“maize coleoptiles”
Claim · model-written summary
White light increased osmotic potential.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“white light irradiation, resulting in an increased osmotic potential”
t0“maize coleoptiles”
Claim · model-written summary
Light effects on wall mechanics and sap osmotic potential were most prominent basally.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The influences of white light on the mechanical properties of the cell wall and the osmotic potential of the tissue sap were most prominent in the basal zone.”
t0“maize coleoptiles”
Claim · model-written summary
Coleoptile elongation correlated significantly with wall mechanics.
- Organ / stage
- coleoptilee0
- Outcome
- increment of coleoptile lengthe0
- Qualifier
- mechanical properties of the cell wallse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Significant correlations were observed between the increment of coleoptile length and the mechanical properties of the cell walls or the osmotic potential of the tissue sap and osmotic solutes content.”
t0“maize coleoptiles”
Claim · model-written summary
Coleoptile elongation correlated significantly with sap osmotic potential and solute content.
- Organ / stage
- coleoptilee0
- Outcome
- increment of coleoptile lengthe0
- Qualifier
- osmotic potential of the tissue sap and osmotic solutes contente0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Significant correlations were observed between the increment of coleoptile length and the mechanical properties of the cell walls or the osmotic potential of the tissue sap and osmotic solutes content.”
t0“maize coleoptiles”
Claim · model-written summary
Light inhibited outward bending of split coleoptile segments.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“light inhibited the outward bending of split coleoptile segments.”
t0“maize coleoptiles”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors infer that light suppresses maize elongation through wall mechanics and cellular osmotic potential controlling water uptake.
- Treatment
- white lighte0
- Outcome
- elongation of maize coleoptilese0
- Direction
- inhibitse0
- Qualifier
- modifying both the mechanical properties of the cell walls and cellular osmotic potentiale0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“white light inhibits elongation of maize coleoptiles by modifying both the mechanical properties of the cell walls and cellular osmotic potential, which control the rate of water uptake.”
The same questions in other papers
radiation · molecular: metabolites · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →light · molecular: metabolites · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
26 papers more in this group
See all 30 papers →light · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
27 papers in the same direction as this paper · 29 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
53 papers more in this group
See all 57 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.