Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24626462›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Unexpected behavior of some nitric oxide modulators under cadmium excess in plant tissue.

Jozef Kováčik, Petr Babula, Bořivoj Klejdus, Josef Hedbavny, Markéta Jarošová

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
14.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. The impact of engineered nickel oxide nanoparticles on ascorbate glutathione cycle inPhysiology and molecular biology of plants : an international journal of functional plant biology · 2023
    Article
  4. Impact of humic acid on the accumulation of metals by microalgae.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2018
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jozef KováčikInstitute of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Faculty of Agronomy, Mendel University in Brno, Brno, Czech Republic; CEITEC - Central European Institute of Technology, Mendel University in Brno, Brno, Czech Republic.
Petr BabulaDepartment of Natural Drugs, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Veterinary and Pharmaceutical Sciences Brno, Brno, Czech Republic.
Bořivoj KlejdusInstitute of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Faculty of Agronomy, Mendel University in Brno, Brno, Czech Republic; CEITEC - Central European Institute of Technology, Mendel University in Brno, Brno, Czech Republic.
Josef HedbavnyInstitute of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Faculty of Agronomy, Mendel University in Brno, Brno, Czech Republic.
Markéta JarošováInstitute of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Faculty of Agronomy, Mendel University in Brno, Brno, Czech Republic.
Central European Institute of Technology · CZMendel University in Brno · CZUniversity of Veterinary Sciences Brno · CZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Various nitric oxide modulators (NO donors--SNP, GSNO, DEA NONOate and scavengers--PTIO, cPTIO) were tested to highlight the role of NO under Cd excess in various ontogenetic stages of chamomile (Matricaria chamomilla). Surprisingly, compared to Cd alone, SNP and PTIO elevated Cd uptake (confirmed also by PhenGreen staining) but depleted glutathione (partially ascorbic acid) and phytochelatins PC2 and PC3 in both older plants (cultured hydroponically) and seedlings (cultured in deionised water). Despite these anomalous impacts, fluorescence staining of NO and ROS confirmed predictable assumptions and revealed reciprocal changes (decrease in NO but increase in ROS after PTIO addition and the opposite after SNP application). Subsequent tests using alternative modulators and seedlings confirmed changes to NO and ROS after application of GSNO and DEA NONOate as mentioned above for SNP while cPTIO altered only NO level (depletion). On the contrary to SNP and PTIO, GSNO, DEA NONOate and cPTIO did not elevate Cd content and phytochelatins (PC2, PC3) were rather elevated. These data provide evidence that various NO modulators are useful in terms of NO and ROS manipulation but interactions with intact plants affect metal uptake and must therefore be used with caution. In this view, cPTIO and DEA NONOate revealed the less pronounced side impacts and are recommended as suitable NO scavenger/donor in plant physiological studies under Cd excess.

Indexed as

AntioxidantsAscorbic AcidCadmiumChamomileCyclic N-OxidesGlutathioneImidazolesMicroscopy, ConfocalMicroscopy, FluorescenceNitric OxideNitric Oxide DonorsNitroprussideReactive Oxygen SpeciesSeedsS-Nitrosoglutathione2-phenyl-4,4,5,5-tetramethylimidazoline-1-oxyl-3-oxideAntioxidantsAscorbic AcidCadmiumCyclic N-OxidesGlutathioneImidazolesNitric OxideNitric Oxide DonorsNitroprussideReactive Oxygen SpeciesS-Nitrosoglutathione

Identifiers

PMID24626462
PMCPMC3953596
OpenAlexW2079441323

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.