ArticlePloS one2024
Sound waves alter the viability of tobacco cells via changes in cytosolic calcium, membrane integrity, and cell wall composition.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Influence of sound vibrations on plant holobionts: physiological pathways linking root function and rhizospheric microbial interactions.Plant signaling & behavior · 2026Review
- Phytoacoustics: sound perception, mechanosensing, and biological responses to sound in plants.Plant signaling & behavior · 2026Review
- Growth Inhibition and Allelopathy Enhancement ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- 3D biofabricated in vitro models as new approach methodologies for animal alternatives.npj biomedical innovations · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The effect of sound waves (SWs) on plant cells can be considered as important as other mechanical stimuli like touch, wind, rain, and gravity, causing certain responses associated with the downstream signaling pathways on the whole plant. The objective of the present study was to elucidate the response of suspension-cultured tobacco cells (Nicotiana tabacum L. cv Burley 21) to SW at different intensities. The sinusoidal SW (1,000 Hz) was produced through a signal generator, amplified, and beamed to the one layer floating tobacco cells inside a soundproof chamber at intensities of 60, 75, and 90 dB at the plate level for 15, 30, 45, and 60 min. Calibration of the applied SW intensities, accuracy, and uniformity of SW was performed by a sound level meter, and the cells were treated. The effect of SW on tobacco cells was monitored by quantitation of cytosolic calcium, redox status, membrane integrity, wall components, and the activity of wall modifying enzymes. Cytosolic calcium ions increased as a function of sound intensity with a maximum level of 90 dB. Exposure to 90 dB was also accompanied by a significant increase of H2O2 and membrane lipid peroxidation rate but the reduction of total antioxidant and radical scavenging capacities. The increase of wall rigidity in these cells was attributed to an increase in wall-bound phenolic acids and lignin and the activities of phenylalanine ammonia-lyase and covalently bound peroxidase. In comparison, in 60- and 75 dB, radical scavenging capacity increased, and the activity of wall stiffening enzymes reduced, but cell viability showed no changes. The outcome of the current study reveals that the impact of SW on plant cells is started by an increase in cytosolic calcium. However, upon calcium signaling, downstream events, including alteration of H2O2 and cell redox status and the activities of wall modifying enzymes, determined the extent of SW effects on tobacco cells.
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.