Paper · 2019 · DergiPark (Istanbul University)

PUTRESCINE AS A PROTECTIVE MOLECULE ON DNA DAMAGE AND DNA METHYLATION CHANGES IN WHEAT UNDER DROUGHT

Esra Arslan; Güleray Ağar; Murat Aydın

8
claims
17
verbatim quotes
1
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

The world suffers with the agricultural drought stress which leading to decreasing crop production, and also adversely affecting cereals on morphological, physiological, biochemical and molecular levels.However, exogenous treatment of some osmotically active materials like putrescine has been regarded as a good preventive against these harmful effects of drought.But there is a lack of information on putrescine has any effects on DNA damage and DNA methylation in crops.The current study was goal to determine DNA damage levels and DNA methylation changes in Triticum aestivum cv.Karasu 90 subjected to different concentrations of drought (-2, -4, -6 bar PEG) and whether putrescine (0.01, 0.1, 1 mM) has any ameliorative effect on these changes is determined with RAPDs and CRED-RAs techniques.In addition, total oxidant status (TOS) and total antioxidant status (TAS) values were investigated based on drought and putrescine treatments.The findings showed that drought stress caused DNA damage and DNA methylation changes.However, these effects decreased after putrescine treatments.Putrescine has been shown to decrease oxidative damage caused by drought via increasing antioxidant status in drought stress.According to results, it was concluded that putrescine could be preferred for its force to protect wheat DNA from the damaging effects of drought and the demethylation positively contributed to drought stress tolerance.

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Drought stress caused DNA damage in wheat.

Taxon
Triticum aestivumTriticum aestivume1
Material
cv.Karasu 90e1
Treatment
drought stresse0
Outcome
DNA damagee0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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 findings showed that drought stress caused DNA damage and DNA methylation changes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 941–1026 · show in text ↑
e1

“Triticum aestivum cv.Karasu 90”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 562–592 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Drought stress changed DNA methylation in wheat.

Taxon
Triticum aestivumTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
drought stresse0
Outcome
DNA methylation changese0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

“drought stress caused DNA damage and DNA methylation changes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 966–1026 · show in text ↑
e1

“Triticum aestivum cv.Karasu 90”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 562–592 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Putrescine reduced drought-induced DNA damage.

Treatment
putrescine treatmentse0
Outcome
DNA damagee1
Direction
decreasede0
Comparator
drought stresse1

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

“these effects decreased after putrescine treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1036–1087 · show in text ↑
e1

“The findings showed that drought stress caused DNA damage and DNA methylation changes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 941–1026 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 81–86 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Putrescine reduced drought-induced DNA methylation changes.

Treatment
putrescine treatmentse0
Outcome
DNA methylation changese1
Direction
decreasede0
Comparator
drought stresse1

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

“these effects decreased after putrescine treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1036–1087 · show in text ↑
e1

“The findings showed that drought stress caused DNA damage and DNA methylation changes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 941–1026 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 81–86 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Putrescine decreased drought-related oxidative damage.

Treatment
Putrescinee0
Outcome
oxidative damagee0
Direction
decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

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

“Putrescine has been shown to decrease oxidative damage caused by drought via increasing antioxidant status in drought stress”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1088–1212 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 81–86 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Putrescine increased antioxidant status under drought stress.

Treatment
Putrescinee0
Outcome
antioxidant statuse0
Direction
increasinge0

Not reportedComparator

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

“Putrescine has been shown to decrease oxidative damage caused by drought via increasing antioxidant status in drought stress”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1088–1212 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 81–86 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors proposed putrescine to protect wheat DNA under drought.

Treatment
putrescinee0
Outcome
protect wheat DNA from the damaging effects of droughte0

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

“putrescine could be preferred for its force to protect wheat DNA from the damaging effects of drought”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1257–1358 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors concluded demethylation contributed positively to drought tolerance.

Outcome
drought stress tolerancee0
Direction
positivelye0
Qualifier
demethylatione0

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 demethylation positively contributed to drought stress tolerance”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1363–1431 · show in text ↑
e1

“protect wheat DNA from the damaging effects of drought”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1304–1358 · show in text ↑

putrescine · molecular: expression · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

putrescine · physiology: oxidative · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

10 papers: 10 positive, 0 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

6 papers more in this group

See all 10 papers →

putrescine · molecular: metabolites · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

11 papers: 11 positive, 0 negative or no effect

10 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

7 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

drought · molecular: expression · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

98 papers: 74 positive, 24 negative or no effect

23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 74 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

94 papers more in this group

See all 98 papers →

drought · cytology · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

10 papers: 0 positive, 10 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

6 papers more in this group

See all 10 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.