ArticleScientific reports2024
Salicylic acid and jasmonic acid-mediated different fate of nickel phytoremediation in two populations of Alyssum inflatum Nyár.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. 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.
- Classical Phytohormones and Peptide Plant Hormones in Abiotic Stress Tolerance: Crosstalk, Physiological Integration, and Crop Improvement.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The bilateral effects of AlBMC plant biology · 2026Article
- Exogenous jasmonic acid and salicylic acid enhance selenium uptake and mitigate cadmium accumulation in pak choi (Frontiers in plant science · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigates Ni phytoremediation and accumulation potential in the presence of salicylic acid (SA) (0, 50 and 200 μM) and jasmonic acid (JA) (0, 5 and 10 μM) in two populations of Alyssum inflatum under various nickel (Ni) doses (0, 100 and 400 μM). By measuring Ni levels in the shoots and roots, values of bioaccumulation coefficient (BAC), biological concentration factor (BCF) and translocation factor (TF) were calculated to quantify Ni accumulation and translocation between plant organs. Additionally, the amounts of histidine (His), citric acid (CA) and malic acid (MA) were explored. The results showed that plant dry weight (DW) [in shoot (29.8%, 8.74%) and in root (21.6%, 24.4%)] and chlorophyll [a (17.1%, 32.5%), b (10.1%, 30.9%)] declined in M and NM populations respectively, when exposed to Ni (400 μM). Conversely, the levels of MA [in shoot (37.0%, 32.0%) and in root (25.5%, 21.2%)], CA [in shoot (17.0%, 10.0%) and in root (47.9%, 37.2%)] and His [in shoot (by 1.59- and 1.34-fold) and in root (by 1.24- and 1.18-fold)] increased. Also, in the presence 400 μM Ni, the highest accumulation of Ni was observed in shoots of M (1392 μg/g DW) and NM (1382 μg/g DW). However, the application of SA and JA (especially in Ni 400 μM + SA 200 μM + JA 5 and 10 μM treatments) mitigated the harmful impact of Ni on physiological parameters. Also, a decreasing trend was observed in the contents of MA, CA, and His. The reduction of these compounds as important chelators of Ni caused a decrease in root-to-shoot Ni transfer and reducing accumulation in the shoots of both populations. The values of phytoremediation indices in both populations exposed to Ni (400 μM) were above one. In presence of the SA and JA, these indices showed a decreasing trend, although the values remained above one (BAC, BCF and TF > 1). Overall, the results indicated that SA and JA can reduce phytoremediation potential of the two populations through different mechanisms.
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.