2020
DOI: 10.2298/botserb2002175s
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Concentration- and time-dependent effects of strontium on Lens culinaris Medik.

Abstract: This study investigates how strontium (Sr) ions act on meristematic root tip cells of lentil (Lens culinaris) with changing parameters (time and concentration). Plant seeds were exposed to both a standard solution of Sr for different lengths of time (1/4, 1/2, 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24 hours) at a fixed concentration of 1.0 molL-1 (M) and Sr ions at various concentrations (0.05, 0.1, 0.25, 0.5 and 1.0 M) for a certain length of time (12 hours). The seeds treated with Sr were made to sprou… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
0
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 26 publications
0
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Parween et al, (2011) obtained similar results examining the effect of cadmium chloride in pure germ line in broad beans (V. faba) in relation to chromosome anomalies and cell division rate. However, in another study, the seeds of Lens culinaris Medik.were kept at different concentrations of Sr (stronsiyum) (0.05, 0.1, 0.25, 0.5 and 1.0 M) for 12 hours; those anomalies showed no regular distribution (Sepet and Çanlı, 2020). Thus, it is not in agreement with the previous reference and our work.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 79%
“…Parween et al, (2011) obtained similar results examining the effect of cadmium chloride in pure germ line in broad beans (V. faba) in relation to chromosome anomalies and cell division rate. However, in another study, the seeds of Lens culinaris Medik.were kept at different concentrations of Sr (stronsiyum) (0.05, 0.1, 0.25, 0.5 and 1.0 M) for 12 hours; those anomalies showed no regular distribution (Sepet and Çanlı, 2020). Thus, it is not in agreement with the previous reference and our work.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 79%