Journals / Turkish Journal of Botany / 2020 / Cilt: 44 - Sayı: 5

Ultrastructural response of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) lines to potential allelopathy of Alstonia scholaris (L.) R. Br. leaf extract

Pages
509–525
Publication Date
2020-09-23
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

A low concentration (15%) of allelochemical extract promoted growth and development and a high concentration (30%) was toxic, causing growth retardation and tissue damage.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:An investigation was carried out to evaluate the impact of the allelopathic effect of Alstonia scholaris leaf extract on morphoanatomical and physiological characteristics of 5 wheat lines.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Three extract dilutions were prepared, viz. 0 (control), 15 and 30% of the aqueous extract and sprayed on wheat lines (3094, 5066, M5082, 7076 and A2011) at 15-day intervals until maturity from November 2017 to May 2018.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:A low concentration (15%) of allelochemical extract promoted growth and development and a high concentration (30%) was toxic, causing growth retardation and tissue damage.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Chlorenchyma · devil tree · leaf thickness

Abstract

An investigation was carried out to evaluate the impact of the allelopathic effect of Alstonia scholaris leaf extract on morphoanatomical and physiological characteristics of 5 wheat lines. Three extract dilutions were prepared, viz. 0 (control), 15 and 30% of the aqueous extract and sprayed on wheat lines (3094, 5066, M5082, 7076 and A2011) at 15-day intervals until maturity from November 2017 to May 2018. All wheat lines responded differently to an allelochemical extract of A. scholaris. Disintegration of root parenchyma and transformation of stem chlorenchyma to sclerenchyma in stems were noted in Line 3094. Increased sclerification in the root cortex (141.7-212.5 mu m) and stem hypodermal region (212.5-354.2 mu m) was recorded in Line 5066. Line M5082 showed intensive sclerification in the root cortex and vascular region, and around stem vascular bundles along with a significant decrease in leaf thickness. Line 7076 was the most sensitive genotype showing significant reduction in the stem (1402.8-821.8 mu m) and root area (963.5791.9 mu m) and leaf thickness (1346.2-396.8 mu m). Line A2011 responded very differently by increasing proportion of parenchyma and sclerenchyma. A low concentration (15%) of allelochemical extract promoted growth and development and a high concentration (30%) was toxic, causing growth retardation and tissue damage.

🔖

Cite This Article

HAMEED, M., FATİMA, S., AHMAD, F., ASHRAF, M., MARYAM, M., AHMAD, M. S. A., AHMAD, I., IQBAL, U. (2020). Ultrastructural response of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) lines to potential allelopathy of Alstonia scholaris (L.) R. Br. leaf extract. Turkish Journal of Botany, Cilt: 44 - Sayı: 5, 509–525. https://ajindex.com/articles/192717

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (4)

  1. Abu-Romman S., 2011, World Applied Sciences Journal, V15, P947 ALBUQUERQUE MBD, 2011, AGRON SUSTAIN DEV, V31, P379, DOI DOI 10.1051/AGR0/2010031 Arioli T, 2015, J APPL PHYCOL, V27, P2007, DOI 10.1007/s10811-015-0574-9 Arulmozhi S., 2007, Pharmacognosy Reviews, V1, P163 Aulya Nailul Rahmi, 2018, Pertanika Journal of Tropical Agricultural Science, V41, P1193 Bais HP, 2003,
  2. SCIENCE, V301, P1377, DOI 10.1126/science.1083245 Banerjee N, 2015, INT J RECENT RES LIF, V2, P62 Barkosky RR, 2000, J CHEM ECOL, V26, P2095, DOI 10.1023/A:1005564315131 Bartwal A, 2013, J PLANT GROWTH REGUL, V32, P216, DOI 10.1007/s00344-012-9272-x Batish DR, 2006, AGR ECOSYST ENVIRON, V113, P399, DOI 10.1016/j.agee.2005.09.020 Benyas E, 2010, ROM BIOTECH LETT, V15, P5223 Bhadoria P. B. S., 2011, American Journal of Experimental Agriculture, V1, P7 BLUM RW, 1993, J ADOLESCENT HEALTH, V14, P570, DOI 10.1016/1054-139X(93)90143-D Bouchagier P., 2008, Journal of Agronomy, V7, P49 Bughio FA, 2013, PAK J BOT, V45, P97. Burgos NR, 2004, J CHEM ECOL, V30, P671, DOI 10.1023/B:JOEC.0000018637.94002.ba Cai XH, 2008, ORG LETT, V10, P577, DOI 10.1021/ol702682h Chai TT, 2013, BOT STUD, V54, DOI 10.1186/1999-3110-54-8 Channa S, 2005, J ETHNOPHARMACOL, V97, P469, DOI 10.1016/j.jep.2004.12.009 Chon SU, 2002, CROP PROT, V21, P1077, DOI 10.1016/S0261-2194(02)00092-3 Christensen JH, 1998, PLANT PHYSIOL, V118, P125, DOI 10.1104/pp.118.1.125 Cruz-Ortega R, 1998, J CHEM ECOL, V24, P2039, DOI 10.1023/A:1020733625727 Donaldson LA, 2001,
  3. PHYTOCHEMISTRY, V57, P859, DOI 10.1016/S0031-9422(01)00049-8 dos Santos WD, 2008, J CHEM ECOL, V34, P1230, DOI 10.1007/s10886-008-9522-3 dos Santos WD, 2004, J CHEM ECOL, V30, P1203, DOI 10.1023/B:JOEC.0000030272.83794.f0 El-Askary HI, 2012, NAT PROD RES, V26, P1755, DOI 10.1080/14786419.2011.608848 El-Sahhar K. F., 2011, Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, V5, P56 Elansary HO, 2016, PLANT PHYSIOL BIOCH, V105, P310, DOI 10.1016/j.plaphy.2016.05.024 Emamjamaati A, 2016, INT J FARMING ALLIED, V5, P509 Feitoza RBB, 2018, S AFR J BOT, V116, P142, DOI 10.1016/j.sajb.2018.03.005 Fujii Y, 2000, J WEED SCI TECHNOLOG, V45, P80, DOI DOI 10.3719/WEED.45.SUPPLEMENT_80 Gatti AB, 2010, ACTA BOT BRAS, V24, P454, DOI 10.1590/S0102-33062010000200016 Gniazdowska A., 2015, REACTIVE OXYGEN NITR, P155, DOI DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-1079-1J Hussain MI, 2011, J EXP BOT, V62, P4533, DOI 10.1093/jxb/err161 Inderjit, 2003,
  4. PLANTA, V217, P529, DOI 10.1007/s00425-003-1054-z Inderjit, 2011, TRENDS