Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 167

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The response of barley to salinity stress differs between hydroponic and soil systems

Tavakkoli, Ehsan, Rengasamy, Pichu, McDonald, Glenn K.·2010·Functional Plant Biology

Abstract

Many studies on salinity stress assume that responses in hydroponics mimic those in soil. However, interactions between the soil solution and the soil matrix can affect responses to salinity stress. This study compared responses to salinity in hydroponics and soil, using two varieties of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). The responses to salinity caused by high concentrations of Na+ and Cl– were compared to assess any consistent differences between hydroponics and soil associated with a cation and an anion that contribute to salinity stress. Concentrated nutrient solutions were also used to assess the effects of osmotic stress. The effects of salinity differed between the hydroponic and soil systems. Differences between barley cultivars in growth, tissue moisture content and ionic composition were not apparent in hydroponics, whereas significant differences occurred in soil. Growth reductions were greater under hydroponics than in soil at similar electrical conductivity values, and the uptake of Na+ and Cl– was also greater. The relative importance of ion exclusion and osmotic stress varied. In soil, ion exclusion tended to be more important at low to moderate levels of stress (EC at field capacity up to 10 dS m–1) but osmotic stress became more important at higher stress levels. High external concentrations of Cl– had similar adverse effects as high concentrations of Na+, suggesting that Cl– toxicity may reduce growth. Fundamental differences in salinity responses appeared between soil and solution culture, and the importance of the different mechanisms of damage varies according to the severity and duration of the salt stress.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1071/fp09202

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 167

Metadata

Authors
Tavakkoli, E., Rengasamy, P., & McDonald, G. K.
Venue
Functional Plant Biology
Published
2010-07-02
Volume
37
Issue
7
Pages
621-633
ISSN
  • 1445-4408 (ISSN-L)
  • 1445-4416
OpenAlex
W2061982371
Cited by
167
References
2
FWCI
14.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The response of barley to salinity stress differs between hydroponic and soil systems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1071/fp09202
The paper
Tavakkoli, E., Rengasamy, P., & McDonald, G. K. (2010). The response of barley to salinity stress differs between hydroponic and soil systems. Functional Plant Biology. https://doi.org/10.1071/fp09202

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.