Paper · 2023 · Functional Plant Biology

Silver nanoparticles protect tillering in drought-stressed wheat by improving leaf water relations and physiological functioning

Muhammad Sarwar; Muhammad Farrukh Saleem; Najeeb Ullah; et al.

9
claims
17
verbatim quotes
24
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-nd

Abstract

The tillering phase of wheat (Triticum aestivum ) crops is extremely susceptible to drought. We explored the potential of silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) in protecting wheat genotypes from drought injury during this sensitive stage. After treating with AgNPs (60ppm), the plants were submitted to different water levels; i.e. 100% field capacity (FC), 75% FC (mild drought), 50% FC (moderate drought) and 25% FC (severe drought) from 15 to 41days after sowing (tillering phase). Leaf physiological data were collected at stress termination, while yield attributes were recorded at crop maturity. We found that increasing drought intensity significantly impaired leaf physiology and grain yield of both studied genotypes. Compared with control, moderately and severely drought-stressed plants produced 25% and 45% lesser grain yield per spike, respectively (averaged across genotypes and years of study). Likewise, moderate and severe drought reduced photosynthesis by 49% and 76%, respectively, compared with control. In contrast, AgNPs significantly restored leaf physiological functioning and grain yield formation at maturity. For example, under moderate and severe drought, AgNPs-treated plants produced 22% and 17% more grains per plant, respectively, than their respective water-treated plants. Our study suggests that exogenous AgNPs can protect wheat crops from drought during early development stages.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 9

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Increasing drought intensity significantly impaired leaf physiology and grain yield in both genotypes.

Treatment
increasing drought intensitye0
Outcome
leaf physiology and grain yielde0
Direction
impairede0
Qualifier
both studied genotypese0

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

“We found that increasing drought intensity significantly impaired leaf physiology and grain yield of both studied genotypes.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 593–717 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Moderate drought reduced grain yield per spike by 25% relative to control.

Treatment
moderatelye0
Outcome
grain yield per spikee0
Direction
lessere0
Value
25%e0
Qualifier
averaged across genotypes and years of studye0
Comparator
controle0

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

“Compared with control, moderately and severely drought-stressed plants produced 25% and 45% lesser grain yield per spike, respectively (averaged across genotypes and years of study).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 718–900 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Severe drought reduced grain yield per spike by 45% relative to control.

Treatment
severely drought-stressede0
Outcome
grain yield per spikee0
Direction
lessere0
Value
45%e0
Qualifier
averaged across genotypes and years of studye0
Comparator
controle0

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

“Compared with control, moderately and severely drought-stressed plants produced 25% and 45% lesser grain yield per spike, respectively (averaged across genotypes and years of study).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 718–900 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Moderate drought reduced photosynthesis by 49% relative to control.

Treatment
moderatee0
Outcome
photosynthesise0
Direction
reducede0
Value
49%e0
Comparator
controle0

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

“Likewise, moderate and severe drought reduced photosynthesis by 49% and 76%, respectively, compared with control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 901–1014 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Severe drought reduced photosynthesis by 76% relative to control.

Treatment
severe droughte0
Outcome
photosynthesise0
Direction
reducede0
Value
76%e0
Comparator
controle0

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

“Likewise, moderate and severe drought reduced photosynthesis by 49% and 76%, respectively, compared with control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 901–1014 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

AgNPs significantly restored leaf physiology and grain yield formation at maturity.

Organ / stage
maturitye0
Treatment
AgNPse0
Outcome
leaf physiological functioning and grain yield formatione0
Direction
restorede0

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

“In contrast, AgNPs significantly restored leaf physiological functioning and grain yield formation at maturity.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1015–1126 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

AgNPs-treated plants produced 22% more grains per plant under moderate drought than water-treated plants.

Treatment
AgNPs-treatede0
Outcome
grains per plante0
Direction
moree0
Value
22%e0
Qualifier
moderatee0
Comparator
water-treated plantse0

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

“under moderate and severe drought, AgNPs-treated plants produced 22% and 17% more grains per plant, respectively, than their respective water-treated plants.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1140–1297 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

AgNPs-treated plants produced 17% more grains per plant under severe drought than water-treated plants.

Treatment
AgNPs-treatede0
Outcome
grains per plante0
Direction
moree0
Value
17%e0
Qualifier
severe droughte0
Comparator
water-treated plantse0

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

“under moderate and severe drought, AgNPs-treated plants produced 22% and 17% more grains per plant, respectively, than their respective water-treated plants.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1140–1297 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors suggest exogenous AgNPs can protect wheat from drought during early development.

Treatment
exogenous AgNPse0
Outcome
protect wheat crops from droughte0
Qualifier
during early development stagese0

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

“Our study suggests that exogenous AgNPs can protect wheat crops from drought during early development stages.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1298–1407 · show in text ↑

drought · physiology: photosynthesis · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

246 papers: 41 positive, 205 negative or no effect

204 papers in the same direction as this paper · 41 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

242 papers more in this group

See all 246 papers →

drought · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

632 papers: 95 positive, 537 negative or no effect

536 papers in the same direction as this paper · 95 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

628 papers more in this group

See all 632 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.