Paper · 2020 · Menoufia Journal of Plant Production

EFFECT OF SOME NANOTECNOLOGY MATERIALS IN INDUCING TOMATO PRODUCTIVITY UNDER TEMPERATURE STRESS

A. A. Midan; Sally A. Midan; Mervat E. Sorial; et al.

13
claims
40
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Two experiments were carried out in private farm (Khatatba Minufiya Governorate) in winter of field 2016/ 2017and 2017/ 2018 seasons to evaluate the alteration of physiological and biochemical processes as well as yield and its quality of tomato plants (Solanum lycopersicum) grown under chilling stress (5-10°C at night). The nanobiostimulators used in this study were, NB compound contains (CPPU, BR and proline) used by two concentrations (NB1: 0.5 and NB2: 1.0 ml L), nano jasmonic acid (JA1: 5 and JA2: 10 ppm), and finally nano silicon (Si1: 2 and Si2: 3 mM) beside the control plants which sprayed with tap water. The treatments applied as foliar on tomato seedlings grown under low temperature at 45, 60 and 90 day after transplanting. The results were as following:- low temperature caused significant reductions in plant height, fresh and dry weight of leaves and branches as well as leaf area, chlorophyll content, antioxidant enzymes (PPO, PO and CAT), also reduced proline content and total sugars. Moreover significant reduction in early and total yield and firmness, TSS and Vit C, meanwhile increased chilling injury index (CI %.) Spraying NB1 and Si1 at low concentration caused a significant reduction in chilling injury index (CI) and increased significantly chlorophyll content, antioxidant enzymes (PPO, PO and CAT), proline content and total sugars. Meanwhile significantly reduced chilling injury index (CI). Moreover, nanobiodtimulators at low concentration caused a good performance for tomato plants with highly early yield (57, 48%) and (43, 40%) for NB1 & Si1 beside total yield (30, 37%) and (20, 23%) for NB1 & Si1, in both seasons respectively, also the same treatments had induction in firmness, TSS and Vit. C compared to the control plants.

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 13

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Low temperature significantly reduced tomato growth traits.

Treatment
low temperaturee0
Outcome
plant height, fresh and dry weight of leaves and branches as well as leaf areae0
Direction
reductionse0

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

e0

“low temperature caused significant reductions in plant height, fresh and dry weight of leaves and branches as well as leaf area”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 776–903 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATO”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Low temperature significantly reduced chlorophyll, antioxidant enzymes, proline and sugars.

Treatment
low temperaturee1
Outcome
chlorophyll content, antioxidant enzymes (PPO, PO and CAT)e0
Direction
reducede0
Qualifier
proline content and total sugarse0

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

e0

“chlorophyll content, antioxidant enzymes (PPO, PO and CAT), also reduced proline content and total sugars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 905–1010 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATO”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e1

“low temperature caused significant reductions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 776–821 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Low temperature significantly reduced early and total yield.

Treatment
low temperaturee1
Outcome
early and total yielde0
Direction
reductione0

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

e0

“significant reduction in early and total yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1021–1067 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATO”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e1

“low temperature caused significant reductions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 776–821 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Low temperature significantly reduced firmness, TSS and vitamin C.

Treatment
low temperaturee1
Outcome
firmness, TSS and Vit Ce0
Direction
reductione0

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

e0

“significant reduction in early and total yield and firmness, TSS and Vit C”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1021–1095 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATO”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e1

“low temperature caused significant reductions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 776–821 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Low temperature increased chilling injury index.

Treatment
low temperaturee1
Outcome
chilling injury index (CI %.)e0
Direction
increasede0

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

e0

“increased chilling injury index (CI %.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1107–1146 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATO”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e1

“low temperature caused significant reductions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 776–821 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

NB1 and Si1 significantly reduced chilling injury.

Treatment
NB1 and Si1 at low concentratione0
Outcome
chilling injury index (CI)e0
Direction
reductione0
Comparator
control plantse1

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

e0

“Spraying NB1 and Si1 at low concentration caused a significant reduction in chilling injury index (CI)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1147–1249 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATO”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e1

“beside the control plants which sprayed with tap water”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 565–619 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

NB1 and Si1 significantly increased chlorophyll and antioxidant enzymes.

Treatment
NB1 and Si1e1
Outcome
chlorophyll content, antioxidant enzymes (PPO, PO and CAT)e0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
control plantse2

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

e0

“increased significantly chlorophyll content, antioxidant enzymes (PPO, PO and CAT)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1254–1336 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATO”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e1

“Spraying NB1 and Si1 at low concentration caused a significant reduction in chilling injury index (CI)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1147–1249 · show in text ↑
e2

“compared to the control plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1743–1773 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

NB1 and Si1 significantly increased proline and sugars.

Treatment
NB1 and Si1e1
Outcome
proline content and total sugarse0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
control plantse2

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

e0

“increased significantly chlorophyll content, antioxidant enzymes (PPO, PO and CAT), proline content and total sugars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1254–1370 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATO”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e1

“Spraying NB1 and Si1 at low concentration caused a significant reduction in chilling injury index (CI)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1147–1249 · show in text ↑
e2

“compared to the control plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1743–1773 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NB1 raised early yield by 57% and 48% across the two seasons.

Treatment
NB1e0
Outcome
early yielde0
Value
57, 48%e0
Comparator
control plantse1

Not reportedDirection

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

e0

“early yield (57, 48%) and (43, 40%) for NB1 & Si1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1538–1587 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATO”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e1

“compared to the control plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1743–1773 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Si1 raised early yield by 43% and 40% across the two seasons.

Treatment
Si1e0
Outcome
early yielde0
Value
43, 40%e0
Comparator
control plantse1

Not reportedDirection

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

e0

“early yield (57, 48%) and (43, 40%) for NB1 & Si1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1538–1587 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATO”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e1

“compared to the control plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1743–1773 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NB1 raised total yield by 30% and 37% across the two seasons.

Treatment
NB1e0
Outcome
total yielde0
Value
30, 37%e0
Comparator
control plantse1

Not reportedDirection

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

e0

“total yield (30, 37%) and (20, 23%) for NB1 & Si1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1595–1644 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATO”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e1

“compared to the control plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1743–1773 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Si1 raised total yield by 20% and 23% across the two seasons.

Treatment
Si1e0
Outcome
total yielde0
Value
20, 23%e0
Comparator
control plantse1

Not reportedDirection

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

e0

“total yield (30, 37%) and (20, 23%) for NB1 & Si1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1595–1644 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATO”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e1

“compared to the control plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1743–1773 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NB1 and Si1 improved firmness, TSS and vitamin C.

Treatment
NB1 & Si1e1
Outcome
firmness, TSS and Vit. Ce0
Direction
inductione0
Comparator
control plantse0

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

e0

“the same treatments had induction in firmness, TSS and Vit. C compared to the control plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1681–1773 · show in text ↑
t0

“TOMATO”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e1

“for NB1 & Si1 beside total yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1574–1606 · show in text ↑

cold · physiology: pigments · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results differ

13 papers: 5 positive, 8 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

9 papers more in this group

See all 13 papers →

cold · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results differ

16 papers: 2 positive, 14 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. no effect

12 papers more in this group

See all 16 papers →

cold · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results differ

55 papers: 22 positive, 33 negative or no effect

32 papers in the same direction as this paper · 22 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

51 papers more in this group

See all 55 papers →

cold · crop injury · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 4 positive, 4 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

cold · quality: sugar starch · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

10 papers: 4 positive, 6 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

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.