• Energy Research

In a world with climate change and environmental pollution, modern Biology is concerned with organismic susceptibility. At the same time, policy and decision makers seek information about organismic susceptibility. Therefore, information about organismic susceptibility may have far-reaching implications to the entire biosphere that can extend to several forthcoming generations. Here, we review a sample of approximately 200 published peer-reviewed articles dealing with plant response to ground-level ozone to understand how the information about susceptibility is communicated. A fuzzy and often incorrect terminology was used to describe the responsiveness of plants to ozone. Susceptibility was classified too arbitrarily and this was reflected to the approximately 50 descriptive words that were used to characterize susceptibility. The classification of susceptibility was commonly based on calculated probability (p) value. This practice is inappropriate as p values do not provide any basis for effect or susceptibility magnitude. To bridge the gap between science and policy decision making, classification of susceptibility should be done using alternative approaches, such as effect size estimates in conjunction with multivariate ordination statistics.

The sensitivity to ozone of ten Bangladeshi wheat cultivars was tested by exposing plants to eight ozone exposure regimes (50, 60, 80, 100, 120, 135, 150, and 200 ppb for 14, 11, 8, 6, 5, 4, 3, and 1 days, respectively, for 8 h/day) in controlled environment chambers. Visible leaf injury, dry weight, chlorophyll, carotenoid content, leaf greenness (SPAD value), quantum yield of photosynthesis, and stomatal resistance were measured to evaluate response. Shoot biomass, total chlorophyll, leaf greenness, and carotenoid content were reduced in ozone-exposed plants. Based on the results of principal component analysis (PCA)-biplot analysis, the order of sensitivity to ozone was: Akbar >> Sufi ≥ Bijoy ≥ Shatabdi > Bari-26 ≥ Gourab > Bari-25 ≥ Prodip ≥ Sourav >> Kanchan. The most important parameters to discriminate cultivars with respect to ozone sensitivity were visible injury and chlorophyll b/a ratio, whereas quantum yield of photosynthesis was less important. Differences in stomatal resistance were not a significant factor in ozone response. Regression of cultivars' PCA scores against year of release revealed no trend, suggesting that ozone tolerance was not incorporated during cultivar breeding.

Nature food 4(10), 854 - 865 (2023). doi:10.1038/s43016-023-00858-y Published by Nature Research, London

The antiozonant and research tool ethylene diurea (EDU) is widely studied as a phytoprotectant against the widespread pollutant ground-surface ozone. Although it has been extensively used, its potential toxicity in the absence of ozone is unknown and its mode of action is unclear. The purpose of this research was to toxicologically assess EDU and to further investigate its mode of action using Lemna minor L. as a model organism. Application of EDU concentrations greater than 593 mg L(-1) (practically 600 mg L(-1)) resulted in adverse inhibition of colony growth. As no-observed-toxic-effects concentration (NOEL) we recommend a concentration of 296 mg L(-1) (practically 300 mg L(-1)). A hormetic response was detected, i.e. stimulatory effects of low EDU concentrations, which may indicate overcompensation in response to disruption in homeostasis. Growth inhibition and suppressed biomass were associated with impacted chlorophyll a fluorescence (ΦPSII, qP and ETR). Furthermore, EDU increased mesophyll thickness, as indicated by frond succulence index. Applications of concentrations ≥593 mg L(-1) to uncontrolled environments should be avoided due to potential toxicity to sensitive organisms and the environment.

Salinity, one of the major abiotic stresses in plants, significantly hampers germination, photosynthesis, biomass production, nutrient balance, and yield of staple crops. To mitigate the impact of such stress without compromising yield and quality, sustainable agronomic practices are required. Among these practices, seaweed extracts (SWEs) and microbial biostimulants (PGRBs) have emerged as important categories of plant biostimulants (PBs). This research aimed at elucidating the effects on growth, yield, quality, and nutrient status of two Greek tomato landraces (‘Tomataki’ and ‘Thessaloniki’) following treatments with the Ascophyllum nodosum seaweed extract ‘Algastar’ and the PGPB ‘Nitrostim’ formulation. Plants were subjected to bi-weekly applications of biostimulants and supplied with two nutrient solutions: 0.5 mM (control) and 30 mM NaCl. The results revealed that the different mode(s) of action of the two PBs impacted the tolerance of the different landraces, since ‘Tomataki’ was benefited only from the SWE application while ‘Thessaloniki’ showed significant increase in fruit numbers and average fruit weight with the application of both PBs at 0.5 and 30 mM NaCl in the root zone. In conclusion, the stress induced by salinity can be mitigated by increasing tomato tolerance through the application of PBs, a sustainable tool for productivity enhancement, which aligns well with the strategy of the European Green Deal.