Back to all available

Enhancing mungbean (Vigna radiata L.) resilience under salinity stress through the synergistic foliar application of zinc and iodine

agricultural-science

Abstract

Salinity stress significantly constrains global crop productivity. This study assessed the efficacy of zinc (Zn) and iodine (I) 0.1% foliar sprays, applied individually and in combination, in mitigating the detrimental effects of 100 mM NaCl on mungbean (Vigna radiata L. cultivar NM-92). Exposure to salt stress alone led to a notable decrease in shoot and root length by 13% and 29%, along with a decline in fresh weight of shoot by 46% and root by 37%, respectively. In contrast, plants treated with Zn and I, especially when combined, showed considerable recovery with an increase in shoot length (4-5%), root length (10-14%), shoot fresh weight (65-69%), and root fresh weight (29-35%) compared to untreated stressed plants. These improvements were linked to enhancing overall growth, elevated chlorophyll contents, antioxidant activity, and accumulation of primary and secondary metabolites, ultimately supporting better yield. A hierarchical heat map correlation analysis further revealed clear clustering of growth traits, stress markers, and defense responses, with Zn and I levels showing strong associations with both improved biomass and enhanced antioxidative activity. The present study explores the potential of individual and combined effects of foliar-applied zinc (Zn) and iodine (I) in alleviating the adverse effects of salinity stress in mungbean plants.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].