Effects of water deficit and salt stress on some photosynthesis parameters in wheat and Aegilops comosa lines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Photosynthetic responses of Aegilops comosa genotypes were compared to those of wheat Mv9kr1 and Chinese spring in order to verify whether Ae. comosa TA2760 and MvGB1039 genotypes are potentially suitable gene sources for improving the drought and salt tolerance of bread wheat. Although there are some differences between the non-stressed plants and the measure of the decrease of the net-photosynthesis (P N ), it was strongly inhibited by water deficit. Salt stress had similar effect on P N but at the highest (300 mM) NaCl concentration P N of the genotypes showed some activity. Severe drought induced a strong decrease in the effective quantum yield of PS II (ɸ PSII ) in the genotypes, while it was moderate in the case of salt treatment. Moreover, ɸ PSII was unaffected by the increase of NaCl concentration in wheat lines. Parallel with the decrease in ɸ PSII , the photoprotective mechanisms were enhanced in the wheat and wild wheat genotypes during water deficit. These results suggest that the Ae. comosa genotypes seem to respond to these stress factors with similar photosynthetic activity to the wheat lines. Thus, based on the above-mentioned facts, the examined Ae. comosa lines are not particularly good candidates for improving drought tolerance of wheat.
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) | 0.001 | 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".