| Literature DB >> 32927707 |
Sajid Mehmood1,2, Waqas Ahmed1,2, Muhammad Ikram3, Muhammad Imtiaz4, Sammina Mahmood5, Shuxin Tu6, Diyun Chen1,2.
Abstract
Entities:
Keywords: antioxidants; biochar; chitosan; kinetics; salinity tolerance genes; sodium
Year: 2020 PMID: 32927707 PMCID: PMC7569946 DOI: 10.3390/plants9091173
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Figure 1Sorption kinetics of Na+ on chitosan modified biochar using (A,B); sorption isotherm of Na+ on chitosan modified biochar (C).
Leaf phosphorus (P) and nitrogen (N) contents and Root and Shoot biomass/growth of un-amended and amended soybean plants with chitosan modified and as-is biochar under saline conditions.
| Treatments | P Content | N Content | Root Length | Shoot Length | Root FW | Shoot FW | Root DW | Shoot DW |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| % | cm | g | ||||||
| T1 | 0.3 ± 0.02 BCD | 0.8 ± 0.06 CD | 12 ± 0.91 BC | 19 ± 1.46 CD | 0.9 ± 0.07 B | 1.4 ± 0.1 B | 0.10 ± 0.01 C | 0.27 ± 0.02 B |
| T2 | 0.4 ± 0.03 B | 0.8 ± 0.06 CD | 13 ± 0.99 B | 24 ± 1.8 B | 0.9 ± 0.07 B | 1.5 ± 0.12 B | 0.12 ± 0.01 B | 0.28 ± 0.02 B |
| T3 | 0.5 ± 0.04 A | 1.1 ± 0.09 A | 20 ± 1.52 A | 32 ± 2.45 A | 1.4 ± 0.11 A | 2.1 ± 0.16 A | 0.16 ± 0.01 A | 0.42 ± 0.03 A |
| T4 | 0.3 ± 0.03 BC | 0.7 ± 0.06 D | 8 ± 0.69 E | 15 ± 1.23 FG | 0.6 ± 0.05 C | 0.8 ± 0.07 D | 0.05 ± 0 E | 0.18 ± 0.02 C |
| T5 | 0.3 ± 0.03 BC | 0.8 ± 0.07 BC | 11 ± 0.82 CD | 17 ± 1.33 DEF | 0.7 ± 0.05 C | 1.1 ± 0.08 C | 0.06 ± 0 E | 0.21 ± 0.02 C |
| T6 | 0.4 ± 0.03 B | 0.9 ± 0.07 B | 13 ± 1.03 B | 20 ± 1.62 C | 0.7 ± 0.06 C | 1.1 ± 0.09 C | 0.08 ± 0.01 D | 0.20 ± 0.02 C |
| T7 | 0.3 ± 0.02 E | 0.5 ± 0.04 E | 5 ± 0.42 F | 14 ± 1.1 G | 0.4 ± 0.03 D | 0.6 ± 0.05 E | 0.03 ± 0 F | 0.08 ± 0.01 D |
| T8 | 0.2 ± 0.02 DE | 0.5 ± 0.04 E | 7 ± 0.6 E | 16 ± 1.35 EFG | 0.5 ± 0.04 D | 0.7 ± 0.06 DE | 0.04 ± 0 F | 0.08 ± 0.01 D |
| T9 | 0.33 ± 0.03 E | 0.6 ± 0.05 E | 9 ± 0.78 D | 19 ± 1.46 CDE | 0.7 ± 0.05 C | 0.9 ± 0.07 D | 0.05 ± 0 E | 0.10 ± 0.01 D |
Data are shown as the mean ± standard deviation (n = 3). Different letters next to numbers in the same column indicate significant differences between treatments (p ≤ 0.05). T1, control plants without NaCl and modified biochar treatments; T2, plants treated with as-is biochar; T3, plants treated with chitosan modified biochar; T4, plants treated with 40 mM NaCl; T5, plants treated with 40 mM NaCl and as-is biochar; T6, plants treated with 40 mM NaCl and chitosan modified biochar; T7, plants treated with 80 mM NaCl; T8, plants treated with 80 mM NaCl and as-is biochar; T9, plants treated with 80 mM NaCl and chitosan modified biochar.
Figure 2The sodium ion contents in the shoot (A) and root (B) and shoot/root (C) of un-amended and amended soybean plants with chitosan modified and as-is biochar under saline conditions. Data are shown as the mean ± standard deviation (n = 3). Different letters above the chart columns indicate significant differences among treatments (p ≤ 0.05). T1, control plants without NaCl, modified and as-is biochar treatments; T2, plants treated with as-is biochar; T3, plants treated with chitosan modified biochar; T4, plants treated with 40 mM NaCl; T5, plants treated with 40 mM NaCl and as-is biochar; T6, plants treated with 40 mM NaCl and chitosan modified biochar; T7, plants treated with 80 mM NaCl; T8, plants treated with 80 mM NaCl and as-is biochar; T9, plants treated with 80 mM NaCl and chitosan modified biochar.
Figure 3The total protein (A) and soluble sugars (B) contents of un-amended and amended soybean plants with chitosan modified and as-is biochar under saline conditions. Data are shown as the mean ± standard deviation (n = 3). Different letters above the chart columns indicate significant differences among treatments (p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 4The chlorophyll A (A), chlorophyll B (B), and carotenoids (C) contents of un-amended and amended soybean plants with chitosan modified and as-is biochar under saline conditions. Data are shown as the mean ± standard deviation (n = 3). Different letters above the chart columns indicate significant differences among treatments (p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 5The proline (A) and glycine betain (GB) (B) and carotenoids (C) contents of un-amended and amended soybean plants with chitosan modified and as-is biochar under saline conditions. Data are shown as the mean ± standard deviation (n = 3). Different letters above the chart columns indicate significant differences among treatments (p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 6The hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) content (A) and lipid peroxidation (MDA) level (B) from leaves of un-amended and amended soybean plants with chitosan modified and as-is biochar under saline conditions. Data are shown as the mean ± standard deviation (n = 3). Different letters above the chart columns indicate significant differences among treatments (p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 7Ascorbate peroxidase (APX) (A), superoxide dismutase (SOD) (B), peroxidase (POD) (C) and catalase (CAT) (D) activities of un-amended and amended soybean plants with chitosan modified and as-is biochar under saline conditions. Data are shown as the mean ± standard deviation (n = 3). Different letters above the chart columns indicate significant differences among treatments (p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 8The expressional levels (log2(RPKM + 1)) of antioxidant enzyme-encoding gene and salt-tolerant genes in thirteen soybean tissues.
Figure 9Expression levels of APX (A), SOD (B), POD (C), CAT (D), GmCHS (E) and GmSALT3 (F) genes of un-amended and amended soybean plants with chitosan modified and as-is biochar under saline conditions. Data are shown as the mean ± standard deviation (n = 3).