Abstract
Cadmium (Cd) contamination in agricultural soils poses a severe global threat to crop productivity and food safety. This study evaluated the synergistic potential of caffeic acid (CA), ethylene (ET) and plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR, Bacillus subtilis ) in mitigating Cd-induced phytotoxicity in cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.). A loamy soil was spiked with 10 mg Cd kg⁻¹ and 17 treatments, including individual and combined applications of CA (30/60 µM), ET (100/200 µM) and PGPR (10¹¹ CFU kg⁻¹), were tested in a completely randomized design (CRD) with four replicates over 90 days. Cd stress alone significantly decreased root length (21.79%), shoot length (17.12%), fiber strength (12.30%), chlorophyll content (60.91%), photosynthetic rate (46.43%) and micronutrient uptake (Fe by 25.80% and Zn by 24.23%) and increased oxidative markers (MDA by 40.76%) and Cd accumulation in tissues (up to 17,900% in roots). In contrast, the combined application of CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17) markedly reversed these effects, increasing vegetative growth (up to 55.31%), gas exchange attributes (photosynthesis by 93.41%), fiber quality (length by 9.65%, strength by 14.93%), antioxidant defense suppression (SOD activity decreased by 17.43%) and micronutrient content (Fe in shoots by 31.33%, Mn in roots by 58.33%), while decreasing Cd concentration in shoots by 34.54% and in leaves by 32.39%. Soil health also improved, with DTPA-extractable Cd reducing by 65% and organic matter increasing by 8.3%. These findings demonstrate that the triple amendment strategy is a highly effective and eco-friendly approach for sustaining cotton productivity in Cd-contaminated agroecosystems. This study demonstrates a novel, field-applicable “triple-amendment recipe,” 60 µM caffeic acid + 200 µM ethylene + Bacillus subtilis , that simultaneously improve cotton fiber quality, nutrient homeostasis and soil health in Cd-contaminated agroecosystems. • Combined CA, ET and PGPR mitigated Cd stress in cotton effectively. • T17 treatment enhanced growth, yield and fiber quality under Cd. • Reduced Cd bioavailability and improved soil properties significantly. • Enhanced antioxidant activity and oxidative stress tolerance.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc. 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 20
Claim · model-written summary
Cadmium stress decreased cotton root length by 21.79%.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutumt0 - Treatment
- Cd stresse0
- Outcome
- root lengthe0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 21.79%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cd stress alone significantly decreased root length (21.79%)”
t0“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Cadmium stress decreased cotton shoot length by 17.12%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- Cd stresse0
- Outcome
- shoot lengthe0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 17.12%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cd stress alone significantly decreased root length (21.79%), shoot length (17.12%)”
t0“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Cadmium stress decreased cotton fiber strength by 12.30%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- Cd stresse0
- Outcome
- fiber strengthe0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 12.30%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cd stress alone significantly decreased root length (21.79%), shoot length (17.12%), fiber strength (12.30%)”
t0“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Cadmium stress decreased cotton chlorophyll content by 60.91%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- Cd stresse0
- Outcome
- chlorophyll contente0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 60.91%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cd stress alone significantly decreased root length (21.79%), shoot length (17.12%), fiber strength (12.30%), chlorophyll content (60.91%)”
t0“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Cadmium stress decreased cotton photosynthetic rate by 46.43%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- Cd stresst1
- Outcome
- photosynthetic ratee0
- Direction
- decreasedt1
- Value
- 46.43%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“photosynthetic rate (46.43%)”
t0“cotton”
t1“Cd stress alone significantly decreased”
Claim · model-written summary
Cadmium stress decreased cotton Fe uptake by 25.80%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“micronutrient uptake (Fe by 25.80% and Zn by 24.23%)”
t0“cotton”
t1“Cd stress alone significantly decreased”
Claim · model-written summary
Cadmium stress decreased cotton Zn uptake by 24.23%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“micronutrient uptake (Fe by 25.80% and Zn by 24.23%)”
t0“cotton”
t1“Cd stress alone significantly decreased”
Claim · model-written summary
Cadmium stress increased cotton MDA by 40.76%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“increased oxidative markers (MDA by 40.76%)”
t0“cotton”
t1“Cd stress alone”
Claim · model-written summary
Cadmium stress increased cotton root Cd accumulation by up to 17,900%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Organ / stage
- rootse0
- Treatment
- Cd stresst1
- Outcome
- Cd accumulation in tissuese0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- up to 17,900%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“increased oxidative markers (MDA by 40.76%) and Cd accumulation in tissues (up to 17,900% in roots)”
t0“cotton”
t1“Cd stress alone”
Claim · model-written summary
The combined treatment increased cotton vegetative growth by up to 55.31%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17)e0
- Interactor
- PGPRe0symbiont
- Outcome
- vegetative growthe0
- Direction
- increasinge0
- Value
- up to 55.31%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the combined application of CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17) markedly reversed these effects, increasing vegetative growth (up to 55.31%)”
t0“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
The combined treatment increased cotton photosynthesis by 93.41%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17)e0
- Interactor
- PGPRe0symbiont
- Outcome
- photosynthesise0
- Direction
- increasinge0
- Value
- 93.41%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the combined application of CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17) markedly reversed these effects, increasing vegetative growth (up to 55.31%), gas exchange attributes (photosynthesis by 93.41%)”
t0“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
The combined treatment increased cotton fiber length by 9.65%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17)t1
- Interactor
- PGPRt1symbiont
- Outcome
- lengthe0
- Direction
- increasingt1
- Value
- 9.65%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“fiber quality (length by 9.65%, strength by 14.93%)”
t0“cotton”
t1“the combined application of CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17) markedly reversed these effects, increasing”
Claim · model-written summary
The combined treatment increased cotton fiber strength by 14.93%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17)t1
- Interactor
- PGPRt1symbiont
- Outcome
- strengthe0
- Direction
- increasingt1
- Value
- 14.93%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“fiber quality (length by 9.65%, strength by 14.93%)”
t0“cotton”
t1“the combined application of CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17) markedly reversed these effects, increasing”
Claim · model-written summary
The combined treatment decreased cotton SOD activity by 17.43%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17)t1
- Interactor
- PGPRt1symbiont
- Outcome
- SOD activitye0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 17.43%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“SOD activity decreased by 17.43%”
t0“cotton”
t1“the combined application of CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17)”
Claim · model-written summary
The combined treatment increased cotton shoot Fe content by 31.33%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17)t1
- Interactor
- PGPRt1symbiont
- Outcome
- Fe in shootse0
- Direction
- increasingt1
- Value
- 31.33%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“micronutrient content (Fe in shoots by 31.33%, Mn in roots by 58.33%)”
t0“cotton”
t1“the combined application of CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17) markedly reversed these effects, increasing”
Claim · model-written summary
The combined treatment increased cotton root Mn content by 58.33%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17)t1
- Interactor
- PGPRt1symbiont
- Outcome
- Mn in rootse0
- Direction
- increasingt1
- Value
- 58.33%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“micronutrient content (Fe in shoots by 31.33%, Mn in roots by 58.33%)”
t0“cotton”
t1“the combined application of CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17) markedly reversed these effects, increasing”
Claim · model-written summary
The combined treatment decreased cotton shoot Cd concentration by 34.54%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17)t1
- Interactor
- PGPRt1symbiont
- Outcome
- Cd concentration in shootse0
- Direction
- decreasinge0
- Value
- 34.54%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“decreasing Cd concentration in shoots by 34.54% and in leaves by 32.39%”
t0“cotton”
t1“the combined application of CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17)”
Claim · model-written summary
The combined treatment decreased cotton leaf Cd concentration by 32.39%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Organ / stage
- leavese0
- Treatment
- CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17)t1
- Interactor
- PGPRt1symbiont
- Outcome
- Cd concentratione0
- Direction
- decreasinge0
- Value
- 32.39%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“decreasing Cd concentration in shoots by 34.54% and in leaves by 32.39%”
t0“cotton”
t1“the combined application of CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17)”
Claim · model-written summary
The combined treatment reduced soil DTPA-extractable Cd by 65%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17)t1
- Interactor
- PGPRt1symbiont
- Outcome
- DTPA-extractable Cde0
- Direction
- reducinge0
- Value
- 65%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soil health also improved, with DTPA-extractable Cd reducing by 65%”
t0“cotton”
t1“the combined application of CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17)”
Claim · model-written summary
The combined treatment increased soil organic matter by 8.3%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17)t1
- Interactor
- PGPRt1symbiont
- Outcome
- organic mattere0
- Direction
- increasinge0
- Value
- 8.3%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“organic matter increasing by 8.3%”
t0“cotton”
t1“the combined application of CA 60 µM + ET 200 µM + PGPR (T17)”
The same questions in other papers
ethene · nutrient: content · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- negative
ethene · physiology: photosynthesis · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- positive
ethene · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- positive
cadmium atom · nutrient: content · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- no effect
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →cadmium atom · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →cadmium atom · quality: grain · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
cadmium atom · physiology: pigments · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- negative
- negative
cadmium atom · physiology: oxidative · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- negative
- negative
- negative
8 of 17 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.