Back to all available

Different Application Methods of Humic Acid and Zinc Differentially Regulate Osmotic Balance and CBF Pathways in Cold-Stressed Oat (Avena sativa L.)

agricultural-science
plant-science

Abstract

The present study investigated the effects of different humic acid (HA) and zinc (Zn) application methods on membrane resistance index (MDI), leaf relative water content (RWC), turgor loss (TL), proline content, and CBF gene expressions in oat plants exposed to various low temperatures. To accomplish this objective, two oat cultivars, one assumed to be cold-sensitive (Albatros) and the other tolerant (Checota), were cultivated with applied HA and Zn to the seeds and soil, either separately or in combination, under controlled conditions until the 3-4 leaf stage. Subsequently, the plants were exposed to temperatures of 4°C, 0°C, -5°C, -10°C, and -15°C for a duration of 24 hours, respectively. The results of the study indicated that different application methods of HA and Zn resulted in different low-temperature responses on the investigated plant traits. It was determined that soil HA+Zn, seed priming (SP) HA+soil application (SA) Zn, and SP_Zn+SA_HA were more effective in protecting the plant from low-temperature stress. This determination was based on the values of MDI, RWC, TL, and proline. The results of this study indicated that the activities of CBF genes and related genes VRN1 and ZAT12 were also up-regulated by low temperatures, suggesting that soil HA+Zn application may be more beneficial in activating the plant's defense system.
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].