ArticlePeerJ2020
Multi-walled carbon nanotubes produced after forest fires improve germination and development of
Article in PeerJ, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Emerging progress in investigating the impact of green-synthesized nanoparticles on seed germination.Journal of plant research · 2025Review
- Exposure to single-walled carbon nanotubes differentially affect in vitro germination, biochemical and antioxidant properties of Thymus daenensis celak. seedlings.BMC plant biology · 2023Article
- Engineering plants with carbon nanotubes: a sustainable agriculture approach.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMulti-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) are nanoparticles with countless applications. MWCNTs are typically of synthetic origin. However, recently, the formation of MWCNTs in nature after forest fires has been documented. Previous reports have demonstrated the positive effects of synthetic MWCNTs on the germination and development of species of agronomic interest; nevertheless, there is practically no information on how synthetic or natural MWCNTs affect forest plant development. In this report, based on insights from dose-response assays, we elucidate the comparative effects of synthetic MWCNTs, amorphous carbon, and natural MWCNTs obtained after a forest fire on
methods
resultsThe treatments with natural MWCNTs accelerated the emergence and improved the germination of this plant, thus while untreated seeds achieve 100% of germination within 16th day, seeds supplemented with natural MWCNTs at doses of 20 µg/mL achieve the above percentage within the 4th day. Natural MWCNTs also promoted fresh and dry biomass in all applied treatments, specially at doses of 40 µg/mL where natural MWCNTs significantly promoted leaf number, root growth, and the dry and fresh weights of shoots and roots of seedlings. Seeds supplemented with doses between 20 and 40 µg/mL of amorphous carbon achieving 100% of germination within the 6th day; however, seeds supplemented either with doses of 60 µg/mL of the above carbon or with synthetic MWCNTs at all the tested concentrations could achieve at most 80 % and 70% of germination respectively within the 17 days. Finally, neither treatments added with amorphous carbon nor those added with synthetic MWCNTs, showed significant increases in the fresh and dry biomass of the tested plant. Likewise, the survival of seedlings was reduced between 10 and 20 % with 40 and 60 µg/mL of amorphous carbon, and with synthetic MWCNTs in all the doses applied was reduced at 30% of survival plants.
conclusionsThese findings indicate that MWCNTs produced by wildfire act as plant growth promoters, contributing to the germination and development of adapted to fire-prone conditions species such as
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.