Abstract
We examined the influence of solar ultraviolet-B radiation (UV-B; 280-320 nm) on the maximum photochemical efficiency of photosystem II (F(v)/F(m)), bulk-soluble phenolic concentrations, ferric-reducing antioxidant power (FRAP) and growth of Avena sativa. Treatments involved placing filters on frames over potted plants that reduced levels of biologically effective UV-B by either 71% (reduced UV-B) or by 19% (near-ambient UV-B) over the 52 day experiment (04 July-25 August 2002). Plants growing under near-ambient UV-B had 38% less total biomass than those under reduced UV-B. The reduction in biomass was mainly the result of a 24% lower leaf elongation rate, resulting in shorter leaves and less total leaf area than plants under reduced UV-B. In addition, plants growing under near-ambient UV-B had up to 17% lower F(v)/F(m) values early in the experiment, and this effect declined with plant age. Concentrations of bulk-soluble phenolics and FRAP values were 17 and 24% higher under near-ambient UV-B than under reduced UV-B, respectively. There was a positive relationship between bulk-soluble phenolic concentrations and FRAP values. There were no UV-B effects on concentrations of carotenoids (carotenes + xanthophylls).
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Oats under near-ambient UV-B had 38% less total biomass than under reduced UV-B.
- Taxon
- Avena sativa
Avena sativat0 - Treatment
- near-ambient UV-Be0
- Outcome
- total biomasse0
- Direction
- lesse0
- Value
- 38%e0
- Comparator
- reduced UV-Be0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plants growing under near-ambient UV-B had 38% less total biomass than those under reduced UV-B.”
t0“Avena sativa”
Claim · model-written summary
Near-ambient UV-B reduced oat leaf elongation rate by 24% relative to reduced UV-B.
- Taxon
- Avena sativaAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- near-ambient UV-Be2
- Outcome
- leaf elongation ratee0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Value
- 24%e0
- Comparator
- reduced UV-Be1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“a 24% lower leaf elongation rate”
e1“plants under reduced UV-B”
e2“plants growing under near-ambient UV-B”
t0“Avena sativa”
Claim · model-written summary
Near-ambient UV-B produced shorter oat leaves and less total leaf area than reduced UV-B.
- Taxon
- Avena sativaAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- near-ambient UV-Be1
- Outcome
- leaves and less total leaf areae0
- Direction
- shortere0
- Comparator
- reduced UV-Be0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“resulting in shorter leaves and less total leaf area than plants under reduced UV-B”
e1“plants growing under near-ambient UV-B”
t0“Avena sativa”
Claim · model-written summary
Near-ambient UV-B lowered oat F(v)/F(m) by up to 17% early in the experiment, with the effect declining as plants aged.
- Taxon
- Avena sativaAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- near-ambient UV-Be0
- Outcome
- F(v)/F(m) valuese0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Value
- 17%e0
- Qualifier
- early in the experimente0
- Comparator
- reduced UV-Be1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“plants growing under near-ambient UV-B had up to 17% lower F(v)/F(m) values early in the experiment, and this effect declined with plant age.”
e1“than plants under reduced UV-B”
t0“Avena sativa”
Claim · model-written summary
Near-ambient UV-B increased bulk-soluble phenolics by 17% relative to reduced UV-B.
- Taxon
- Avena sativaAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- near-ambient UV-Be0
- Outcome
- Concentrations of bulk-soluble phenolicse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 17e0
- Comparator
- reduced UV-Be0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Concentrations of bulk-soluble phenolics and FRAP values were 17 and 24% higher under near-ambient UV-B than under reduced UV-B, respectively.”
t0“Avena sativa”
Claim · model-written summary
Near-ambient UV-B increased FRAP values by 24% relative to reduced UV-B.
- Taxon
- Avena sativaAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- near-ambient UV-Be0
- Outcome
- FRAP valuese0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 24%e0
- Comparator
- reduced UV-Be0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Concentrations of bulk-soluble phenolics and FRAP values were 17 and 24% higher under near-ambient UV-B than under reduced UV-B, respectively.”
t0“Avena sativa”
Claim · model-written summary
Bulk-soluble phenolic concentrations and FRAP values were positively related in oats.
- Taxon
- Avena sativaAvena sativat0
- Outcome
- FRAP valuese0
- Direction
- positivee0
- Qualifier
- bulk-soluble phenolic concentrationse0
Not reportedCompound
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There was a positive relationship between bulk-soluble phenolic concentrations and FRAP values.”
t0“Avena sativa”
Claim · model-written summary
UV-B did not affect oat carotenoid concentrations.
- Taxon
- Avena sativaAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- UV-Be0
- Outcome
- concentrations of carotenoids (carotenes + xanthophylls)e0
- Direction
- no UV-B effectse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There were no UV-B effects on concentrations of carotenoids (carotenes + xanthophylls).”
t0“Avena sativa”
The same questions in other papers
uv · physiology: pigments · Avena sativa (oats)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- negative
uv · growth · Avena sativa (oats)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- negative
- no effect
- negative
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 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.