Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42894120›Full record

ArticleBMC plant biology2026

Comparative adaptive responses of quinoa cultivars grown hydroponically under saline-sodic stress.

Asma Zafar, Muhammad Munir, Ghulam Murtaza, Abdul Ghafoor, Babiker M A Abdel-Banat, Irfan Afzal, Hassan Ali-Dinar, Zia Ur Rahman Farooqi, Abdullah Sheikh, Weibo Shen

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC plant biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Asma ZafarState Key Laboratory of Soil and Water Conservation and Desertification Control, College of Natural Resources and Environment, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi, 712100, China.
Muhammad MunirDate Palm Research Center of Excellence, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsa, 31982, Saudi Arabia. mmunir@kfu.edu.sa.
Ghulam MurtazaInstitute of Soil and Environmental Sciences, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, 38040, Pakistan. gmurtazauaf@gmail.com.
Abdul GhafoorWater and Environmental Studies Centre, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsa, 31982, Saudi Arabia.
Babiker M A Abdel-BanatDate Palm Research Center of Excellence, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsa, 31982, Saudi Arabia.
Irfan AfzalDepartment of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, 38040, Pakistan.
Hassan Ali-DinarDate Palm Research Center of Excellence, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsa, 31982, Saudi Arabia.
Zia Ur Rahman FarooqiYunnan Provincial Key Lab of Soil Carbon Sequestration and Pollution Control, Faculty of Environmental Science and Engineering, Kunming University of Science and Technology, Kunming, 650500, China.
Abdullah SheikhCamel Research Center, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsa, 31982, Saudi Arabia.
Weibo ShenState Key Laboratory of Soil and Water Conservation and Desertification Control, College of Natural Resources and Environment, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi, 712100, China. shenweibo@nwafu.edu.cn.

Funding

the Deanship of Scientific Research, Vice Presidency for Graduate Studies and Scientific Research, King Faisal University, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, under the Ambitious Researcher program KFU262398
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPakistan has 22 million hectares (Mha) of cultivated land, of which 6.67 Mha are affected by salinity and sodicity, negatively impacting crop growth and quality. Quinoa, a facultative halophyte, was tested under hydroponic conditions to evaluate the effects of saline-sodic water on the growth, biomass, and ionic concentration of four quinoa cultivars (UAF-Q7, GLN-22, GLN-29, and GLN-33), and to assess their tolerance to salt stress. Five treatments were established: (i) control (no salt), and four saline-sodic irrigation waters with EC: SAR combinations of (ii) 10 dS m

resultsPlant analysis showed that saline-sodic water negatively affected quinoa, particularly GLN-22. Among the tested cultivars, GLN-33 performed best at all EC: SAR levels, whereas GLN-33 and GLN-29 performed well at higher SAR levels. The GLN-22 cultivar showed sensitivity to all salt stress levels, as indicated by the increased accumulation of Na

conclusionBased on the results, it was concluded that GLN-33 tolerated all stress levels up to EC 20 dSm

Indexed as

Chenopodium quinoaSalt StressAdaptation, PhysiologicalHydroponicsPlant LeavesSalinitySalt ToleranceSalt-Tolerant PlantsSodium ChlorideSodium ChlorideIon homeostasisPlant physiologyQuinoaSaline-sodic stressSalt tolerance

Identifiers

PMID42894120
PMCPMC13678917

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.