Paper · 2019 · HortScience

Copper Chlorophyllin Impacts on Growth and Drought Stress Tolerance of Tomato Plants

Xunzhong Zhang; Mike Goatley; Jamie Conner; et al.

8
claims
16
verbatim quotes
13
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Plant-based pigments have been used as substances to improve crop yield and quality, but the mechanisms of their action on plant growth and stress tolerance are not well understood. The objective of this study was to investigate effects of two formulations of plant-based copper chlorophyllin (Cu-Chl) with and without synthetic paraffinic oil. These formulations, referred to as B18-0074 and B18-0075, were applied as a soil drench plus foliar or a foliar-only application. We investigated their impact on physiological responses of tomato plants under prolonged drought stress conditions. In addition, we examined photosynthetic impacts associated with the application of Cu-Chl formulations. B18-0074 increased leaf photosynthetic rate (Pn) by 8.8% with soil plus foliar application and 18.6% with foliar application relative to the control under drought stress at day 21. Similarly, B18-0075 increased Pn by 16.9% with soil plus foliar application and 24.6% with foliar application relative to the control under drought stress at day 21. The application of the two Cu-Chl–containing products increased leaf antioxidant enzyme catalase (CAT) and ascorbate peroxidase (APX) activity, as well as glutathione (GSH) content. The two products also increased leaf soluble sugars and proline content, indicating improvement of osmotic adjustment. Soil plus foliar and foliar application only of B18-0075 increased root biomass but did not consistently affect plant shoot growth. The results of this study suggest that application of Cu-Chl in combination with synthetic paraffinic oil may improve photosynthetic function, osmotic adjustment, antioxidant defense capacity, and root growth of tomato plant grown under drought stress conditions.

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 8

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

B18-0074 applied as soil plus foliar increased leaf photosynthetic rate by 8.8% relative to the control under drought stress at day 21.

Taxon
tomato plantsSolanum lycopersicumt0
Organ / stage
leafe1
Treatment
B18-0074e1
Outcome
leaf photosynthetic rate (Pn)e1
Direction
increasede1
Value
8.8%e1
Qualifier
with soil plus foliar applicatione1
Comparator
the controle1

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Tomato Plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–84 · show in text ↑
e1

“B18-0074 increased leaf photosynthetic rate (Pn) by 8.8% with soil plus foliar application and 18.6% with foliar application relative to the control under drought stress at day 21”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 695–874 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

B18-0074 applied as foliar increased leaf photosynthetic rate by 18.6% relative to the control under drought stress at day 21.

Taxon
tomato plantsSolanum lycopersicumt0
Organ / stage
leafe1
Treatment
B18-0074e1
Outcome
leaf photosynthetic rate (Pn)e1
Direction
increasede1
Value
18.6%e1
Qualifier
with foliar applicatione1
Comparator
the controle1

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Tomato Plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–84 · show in text ↑
e1

“B18-0074 increased leaf photosynthetic rate (Pn) by 8.8% with soil plus foliar application and 18.6% with foliar application relative to the control under drought stress at day 21”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 695–874 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

B18-0075 applied as soil plus foliar increased photosynthetic rate (Pn) by 16.9% relative to the control under drought stress at day 21.

Taxon
tomato plantsSolanum lycopersicumt0
Treatment
B18-0075e2
Outcome
Pne2
Direction
increasede2
Value
16.9%e2
Qualifier
with soil plus foliar applicatione2
Comparator
the controle2

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Tomato Plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–84 · show in text ↑
e2

“B18-0075 increased Pn by 16.9% with soil plus foliar application and 24.6% with foliar application relative to the control under drought stress at day 21”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 887–1040 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

B18-0075 applied as foliar increased photosynthetic rate (Pn) by 24.6% relative to the control under drought stress at day 21.

Taxon
tomato plantsSolanum lycopersicumt0
Treatment
B18-0075e2
Outcome
Pne2
Direction
increasede2
Value
24.6%e2
Qualifier
with foliar applicatione2
Comparator
the controle2

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Tomato Plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–84 · show in text ↑
e2

“B18-0075 increased Pn by 16.9% with soil plus foliar application and 24.6% with foliar application relative to the control under drought stress at day 21”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 887–1040 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Two Cu-Chl formulation products increased leaf catalase and ascorbate peroxidase activity and glutathione content.

Taxon
tomato plantsSolanum lycopersicumt0
Organ / stage
leafe3
Treatment
two Cu-Chl–containing productse3
Outcome
leaf antioxidant enzyme catalase (CAT) and ascorbate peroxidase (APX) activity, as well as glutathione (GSH) contente3
Direction
increasede3

Not reportedComparator

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Tomato Plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–84 · show in text ↑
e3

“The application of the two Cu-Chl–containing products increased leaf antioxidant enzyme catalase (CAT) and ascorbate peroxidase (APX) activity, as well as glutathione (GSH) content”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1042–1222 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The two Cu-Chl products increased leaf soluble sugars and proline content, indicating improved osmotic adjustment.

Taxon
tomato plantsSolanum lycopersicumt0
Organ / stage
leafe4
Treatment
two productse4
Outcome
leaf soluble sugars and proline contente4
Direction
increasede4
Qualifier
indicating improvement of osmotic adjustmente4

Not reportedComparator

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Tomato Plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–84 · show in text ↑
e4

“The two products also increased leaf soluble sugars and proline content, indicating improvement of osmotic adjustment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1224–1341 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

B18-0075 applied as soil plus foliar and as foliar increased root biomass.

Taxon
tomato plantsSolanum lycopersicumt0
Organ / stage
roote5
Treatment
B18-0075e5
Outcome
root biomasse5
Direction
increasede5
Qualifier
Soil plus foliar and foliar application onlye5

Not reportedComparator

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Tomato Plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–84 · show in text ↑
e5

“Soil plus foliar and foliar application only of B18-0075 increased root biomass but did not consistently affect plant shoot growth”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1343–1473 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

B18-0075 did not consistently affect plant shoot growth.

Taxon
tomato plantsSolanum lycopersicumt0
Organ / stage
shoote5
Treatment
B18-0075e5
Outcome
plant shoot growthe5
Direction
did not consistently affecte5

Not reportedComparator

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Tomato Plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–84 · show in text ↑
e5

“Soil plus foliar and foliar application only of B18-0075 increased root biomass but did not consistently affect plant shoot growth”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1343–1473 · show in text ↑

copper atom · physiology: antioxidant enzymes · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results differ

8 papers: 4 positive, 4 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  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.