Nitric oxide is involved in the regulation of melatonin-induced antioxidant responses in <i>Catharanthus roseus</i> roots under cadmium stress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nitric oxide (NO) and melatonin are two biostimulant molecules in plants that not only modulate the growth and development of plants but also confer enhanced tolerance to abiotic stresses. Therefore, in this study, the interactive effects of melatonin and nitric oxide (NO) on seedlings of Catharanthus roseus (L.) G. Don was evaluated under both control and conditions of stress due to Cd. Our results show that both melatonin and sodium nitroprusside (SNP, as an NO donor) significantly improved seedling growth, which was associated with the enhanced concentration of photosynthetic pigments in both the control plants and under Cd-stress conditions. Impacts of both melatonin and SNP were more pronounced in the Cd-stressed plants than control seedlings. The Cd stress increased H2O2 and lipid peroxidation levels in roots. Melatonin, as well as SNP, increased endogenous NO concentration in roots. Both melatonin and SNP enhanced the concentration of proline and the activities of antioxidant enzymes (SOD, POD, APX, CAT) and lowered H2O2 and lipid peroxidation levels in roots of C. roseus plants under Cd stress. These melatonin-induced responses in the roots were suppressed by 4-carboxyphenyl-4,4,5,5-tetramethylimidazoline-1-oxyl-3-oxide (cPTIO; a specific scavenger of NO), but inhibition of melatonin biosynthesis by p–chlorophenylalanine, could not reverse the protective effects conferred by NO. These outcomes suggest that NO, as a downstream signaling molecule, is implicated in the melatonin-promoted antioxidant responses in roots of C. roseus plants.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".