The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Significance of a Two-Phase Growth Response to Salinity in Wheat and Barley
Abstract
Wheat and barley genotypes that differed in salt tolerance were used to test a hypothesis that the growth response to salinity has two phases. In the first phase there would be a large decrease in growth rate caused by the salt outside the roots, i.e. an 'osmotic' response. In the second phase there would be an additional decline in growth caused by salt having built up to toxic levels within plants, i.e. a 'salt-specific' response. If this two-phase model is correct, genotypes that differ in their ability to exclude salt or tolerate high internal salt concentrations would not differ in growth rate for some period of time in saline conditions. This hypothesis was tested using many genotypes that had previously been found to differ greatly in salt tolerance, as defined by differences in percent reduction in yield or biomass after prolonged exposure to NaCl. Leaf extension of 15 wheat and barley genotypes was measured daily while the NaCl in the nutrient solution was increased over 10 days to 250 mM. All 15 genotypes showed a similar percentage reduction in leaf extension rate. Dry matter production of four selected wheat genotypes that again differed greatly in salt tolerance was measured for up to 6 weeks in 150 mM NaCl. All genotypes showed the same growth reduction for 4 weeks. After this initial period the more salt- sensitive genotype showed a greater decline in growth. This occurred after 60% of the leaves were dead. These data strongly support the hypothesis that the growth response to salinity has two phases, and indicate that most changes in metabolism or gene expression leading to growth reductions during the first phase relate to the osmotic effect of salinity, not to any salt-specific effect. They also indicate that the salt within the plant reduces growth by causing premature senescence of old leaves and hence a reduced supply of assimilates to the growing regions.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Mechanisms of Salinity Tolerance
Munns, R., & Tester, M. (2008) · Annual Review of Plant Biology · doi:10.1146/annurev.arplant.59.032607.092911 · Cited by 13,792
Self-citationMehta, P., Jajoo, A., Mathur, S., & Bharti, S. (2010) · Plant Physiology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.plaphy.2009.10.006 · Cited by 480
Factors affecting CO 2 assimilation, leaf injury and growth in salt-stressed durum wheat
James, R. A., Rivelli, A. R., Munns, R., & Caemmerer, S. V. (2002) · Functional Plant Biology · doi:10.1071/fp02069 · Cited by 330
Self-citationAbiotic Stress Responses are Governed by Reactive Oxygen Species and Age
Kanojia, A., & Dijkwel, P. P. (2018) · Annual Plant Reviews online · doi:10.1002/9781119312994.apr0611 · Cited by 64
Transcription factors-golden keys to modulate the plant metabolism to develop salinity tolerance
Bhat, B. A., Mir, R. A., Mir, W. R., Hamdani, S. S., & Mir, M. A. (2024) · Plant Stress · doi:10.1016/j.stress.2024.100409 · Cited by 47
Metadata
- Authors
- Munns, R., Schachtman, D., & Condon, A.
- Venue
- Australian Journal of Plant Physiology
- Publisher
- CSIRO Publishing
- Published
- 1995-08-01
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 561-569
- ISSN
- 0310-7841 (ISSN-L)
- 1446-5655
- OpenAlex
- W2331417319
- Cited by
- 426
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.04
- 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 Significance of a Two-Phase Growth Response to Salinity in Wheat and Barley. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1071/pp9950561
- The paper
- Munns, R., Schachtman, D., & Condon, A. (1995). The Significance of a Two-Phase Growth Response to Salinity in Wheat and Barley. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology. https://doi.org/10.1071/pp9950561
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.