Search

Statement of the Problem Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) has been suggested to be used in sequence or in combination with chlorhexidine (CHX) to enhance the antibacterial activity against Enterococcus faecalis, but there is no research in the literature on the safety and effectiveness of this irrigation protocol. Purpose This study aimed to assess the cytocompatibility and antibacterial activity of different concentrations of CHX combined with H2O2in comparison with the activity of 5.25 and 2.5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl). Materials and Method Different concentrations of H2O2 (10, 5, 3 and 1%) were exposed to the PDL cells. Then, the solution with minimal cytotoxicity was selected (3% H2O2). The cytocompatibility and antibacterial activity of 0.1, 0.2, 1 and 2% CHX combined with 3% H2O2 were evaluated and compared with 5.25 and 2.5% NaOCl. The differences in the mean viability of PDL cells were evaluated by one-way ANOVA. Kruskal-Wallis and post-hoc Dunn's tests were adopted to compare the antibacterial activity of the solutions against E.faecalis. Results The viability of PDL cells was lower when treated with 5.25 or 2.5% NaOCl than all combinations of CHX and H2O2.There was no significant difference in the antibacterial activity of the solutions against E.faecalis, except for the 0.1% CHX + 3% H2O2 combination, which had significantly lower efficacy than other groups. Conclusion All combinations of CHX and H2O2 (used in this study)except 0.1% CHX + 3% H2O2 were efficient irrigants against planktonic E.faecalis and had a better cytocompatibility with PDL cells than 5.25 and 2.5% NaOCl.

The adsorption of Basic Blue 9 (BB9) from aqueous solution by Fe3O4 nanoparticles loaded onto wheat straw (NP-WS) from agricultural biomass was investigated. Magnetic nanoparticles (Fe3O4) were prepared by chemical precipitation of a Fe2+ and Fe3+ salts from aqueous solution by ammonia. These nanoparticles of the adsorbent were characterized by field emission scanning electron microscopy, X-ray diffraction, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy and nitrogen physisorption. The adsorption isotherm data were fitted to Langmuir, Sips, Redlich–Peterson, and Freundlich equations. The Langmuir adsorption capacity, Qmax was found to be 627.1 mg g−1. The Freunlich equation yielded the best fit to the experimental data in comparison to the other isotherm equations. It was found that the adsorption of BB9 increases by increasing the temperature from 293 to 323 K and the process is endothermic in nature. The removal of BB9 by NP-WS followed pseudo-second-order reaction kinetics based on Lagergren equations ...

For a graph $G$, the signless Laplacian Estrada index is defined as $SLEE(G)=\sum^{n}_{i=1}e^{q^{}_i}$,where $q_1, q_2, \dots, q_n$are the eigenvalues of the signless Laplacian matrix of $G$. In this paper, we first characterize the unicyclic graphs with the first two largest and smallest $SLEE$ and then determine the unique unicyclic graph with maximum $SLEE$ among the unicyclic graphs on $n$ vertices with given diameter., Comment: 13 pages, 5 figures

In order to study of hydropriming and halopriming on germination and early growth stage of wheat (Triticum aestivum) an experiment was carried out in laboratory of the Department of Agronomy and Plant breeding, Shahrood University of Technology. Seed treatments consisted of T1: control (untreated seeds), T2: soaking in distilled water for 18 h (hydropriming). T3: soaking in - 1.2 MPa solution of CaSO4 for 36 h (halopriming). Germination and early seedling growth were studied using distilled water (control) and under osmotic potentials of -0.4, -0.8 and -1.2 MPa for NaCl and polyethylene glycol (PEG 6000), respectively. Results showed that Hydroprimed seeds achieved maximum germination seedling dry weight, especially during the higher osmotic potentials. Minimum germination was recorded at untreated seeds (control) followed by osmopriming. Under high osmotic potentials, hydroprimed seeds had higher GI (germination index) as compared to haloprimed or untreated seeds. Interaction effect of seed treatment and osmotic potential significantly affected the seedling vigour index (SVI)., {"references":["Abdual-baki, A.A., J.D. Anderson, 1973. Relationship between\ndecarboxilation of glutamic acid and vigour in soybean seed, Crop Sci.,\n13, 222-226.","Afzal, I., S.M.A. Basra, A. Iqbal, 2005. The effects of seed soaking with\nplant growth regulators on seedling vigour of wheat under salinity stress,\nJ. Stress Physiol and Biochemis. 1, 6-14.","Association of Official Seed Analysis (AOSA). 1983. Seed Vigour\nTesting Handbook. Contribution No. 32 to the handbook on Seed\nTesting, Spring field, IL.","Ashraf, M., H. Rauf, 2001. Inducing salt tolerance in maize Zea mays\n(L.) through seed priming with chloride salts: growth and ion transport at\nearly growth stages, Acta Physiol.Plant., 23, 407-414.","Ashraf, M., M.R. Foolad, 2005. Pre-sowing seed treatment-a shotgun\napproach to improve germination growth and crop yield under saline and\nnone-saline conditions, Advan. Agron., 88, 223-271.","Basra, S.M.A., I. Afzal, S. Anwar, M. Anwar-ul-haq, M. Shafq, K.\nMajeed, 2006. Alleviation of salinity stress by seed invigoration\ntechniques in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), Seed Technol., 28, 36-46.","Fu, J.R., X.H. Lu, R.Z. Chen, B.Z. Zhang, Z.S. Liu, Z.S. Li, D.Y.\nCai,1988. Osmoconditioning of peanut Arachis hypogaea (L.) seeds with\nPEG to improve vigour and some biochemical activities, Seed Sci.\nTechnol., 16, 197-212.","Gao, Y.P., L. Young, P. Bonham-smith, L.V. Gusta, 1999.\nCharacterization and expression of plasma and tonoplast membrane\naquaporins in primed seed of Brassica napus during germination under\nstress conditions, Plant Mol. Biol., 40, 635-444.","Garg, B.K. and I.C. Gupta, 1997. Plant Relations to salinity. In: Saline\nwastelands environment and plant growth. Pp: 79-121. Scientific\nPublishers, Jodhpur.\n[10] Ghassemi, F., A.J. Jakeman, H.A. Nik, 1995. Salinisation of land and\nwater resources. Human causes, extent, management and case\nstudies,University of New South Wales Press, Sydney, pp 526-225 Seed\ninvigoration techniques to improve germination.\n[11] Kaya, M.D., G. Okcu, M. Atak, Y. Cikili, O. Kolsaric, 2006. Seed\ntreatments to overcome salt and drought stress during germination in\nsunfower (Helianthus annuus L.), Europ. J. Agronomy., 24, 291-295.\n[12] Khaje-hosseini, M., A.A. Powell, I.J. Bingham, 2003. The interaction\nbetween salinity stress and seed vigour during germination of soybean\nseeds, Seed Sci. Technol., 31, 715-725.\n[13] Madidi, S., B. Barudi, F.B. Ameur, 2004. Effects of salinity on\ngermination and early growth of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) cultivars,\nInt. J. Agri. Biol., 6, 767-770.\n[14] Mass, E.V. and G.J. Hoffman, 1977. Crop salt tolerance current\nassessment. J. Irrig. Drain., 103: 115-134.\n[15] Rafique, M., 1990. Soil resources and soil related problems in Pakistan.\nIn Ahmad, M. (ed.), Soil Physics Application under Stress\nEnvironments. BARD, PARC, Islamabad.\n[16] Roy, N.K., A.K. Srivastava, 2000. Adverse effect of salt stress\nconditions on chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) leaves\nand its amelioration through pre-soaking treatments, Indian J. Agric.\nSci., 70, 777-778.\n[17] Scott S. J., Jones R. A. and W. A. Willams. 1984. Review of data\nanalysis methods for seed germination. Crop Science. 24: 1192-1199.\n[18] SAS Institute Inc., 1988. SAS/STAT User-s Guide, Release 6.03. SAS\nInstitute Inc., Cary, NC."]}

The heterotrophic seedling growth can be defined as a product of two components: (1) the weight of mobilized seed reserve, and (2) conversion efficiency of utilized seed reserve to seedling tissue. The first component can be further divided into (1) initial seed weight, and (2) the fraction of seed reserve, which is mobilized. The objective of this study was the identification of the sensitive seedling growth component(s) in response to drought and salinity stresses. Two experiments were separately conducted using various salinity levels (osmotic pressure) of 0, 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1, 1.25 and 1.5 MPa created using NaCl as first experiment and by polyethylene glycol (drought stress) of 0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1, 1.2 and 1.4 MPa in second experiment. Seeds of five crops species (Hordeum vulgare, Brassica napus, Zea mays, Medicago sativa and Medicago scutellata) were used in each experiment. In both experiments, seedling growth, fraction of seed reserve utilization and weight of mobilized seed reserve decreased with increasing drought and salt intensity. However, drought and salinity stresses had no effect on the conversion efficiency. It was concluded that the sensitive component of seedling growth is the weight of mobilized seed reserve., {"references":["Ashraf, M., McNeily, T., 1988. Variability in salt tolerance of nine\nspring wheat cultivars. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 160, 14-21","Beveridge, J.L., Wilise, C.P., 1959. Influence of depth of planting, seed\nsize and variety on emergence and seedling vigor in alfalfa. Agron. J. 51,\n731-734.","Bockous, W.W., Shroyer, J.P., 1996. Effect of seed size on seedling\nvigor and forage production of winter wheat. Can. J. Plant Sci. 76, 101-\n105.","Carter, T.E., Jr., P.I. DeSouza, and L.C. Purcell. 1999. Recent advances\nin breeding for drought and aluminum resistance in soybean. P. 106-125.\nIn H.E. Kauffman (ed). Proc. Of World Soybean Res. Conf., VI,\nChicago. 4-7 Aug. 1999. Superior Print., Champaign, IL.","Condon, A.G., Richards, R.A., Farquhar, G.D., 1993. Relationships\nbetween carbon isotope discrimination, water use efficiency and\ntranspiration efficiency for dry land wheat. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 44,\n1693-1711.","Davidson, D.J., Chevalier, P.M., 1987. Influence of polyethylenglycol\ninduced water deficits on tiller production in spring wheat. Crop Sci. 27,\n1185-118.","Douglas, C.L., Wilkins, D.E., Churchill, D.B., 1994. Tillage, seed size\nand seed density effects on performance of soft white winter wheat.\nAgron. J. 86, 707-711.","Francois, L.E., Maas, E.V., Donovan, T.J., Young's, V.L., 1986. Effects\nof salinity on grain yield and quality, vegetative growth and germination\nof semi dwarf and drum wheat. Agron. J. 78, 1053-1058.","Goydani, B.M., Singh, C., 1971. Influence of seed size on growth and\nyield of wheat. Indian J. Agron. 16, 209-212.\n[10] Grieve, C.M., Francois, L.E., 1992. The importance of initial seed size\nin wheat plant response to salinity. Plant Soil 147, 197-205.\n[11] Guedira, M., Shroyer, J.P., Kirkham, M.B., Paulsen, G.M., 1997. Wheat\ncoleoptile and root growth and seedling survival after dehydration and\nrehydration. Agron. J. 89, 822-826.\n[12] Hampson, C.R., Simpson, G.M., 1990. Effects of temperature, salt and\nosmotic pressure on early growth of wheat (Triticum aestivum). 1.\nGermination. Can. J. Bot. 68, 524-528.\n[13] Hegary, T.W., Ross, H.A., 1976. Effects of light and water deficit on\nradicle growth of lettuce seeds under high temperature stress. New\nPhytol. 82, 49-57.\n[14] Johnson, D.R.,Wax, L.M., 1978. Relationships of soybean germination\nand vigor tests to field performance. Agron. J. 70, 273-278.\n[15] Kiem, D.L., Krostad, W.E., 1981. Drought response of winter wheat\ncultivars grown under field stress conditions. Crop Sci. 21, 11-15.\n[16] Lafond, G.P., Backer, R.J., 1986. Effects of temperature, moisture\nstress, and seed size on germination of nine spring wheat cultivars. Crop\nSci. 26, 563-567.\n[17] Peterson, C.M., Klepper, B., Rickman,R.W., 1989. Seed reserves and\nseedling development in winter wheat. Agron. J. 81, 245-251.\n[18] Purcell, L.C., and J.E. Specht. 2003. Physiological traits for\nameliorating water-deficit stress. In H.R. Boerma and J.E. Specht (ed).\nSoybean: Improvement, production, and uses (in press). 3rd ed. Agron.\nMonogr. 16. ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, Madison, WI.\n[19] Randhawa, A.S., Anand, S.C., Jolly, R.S., 1974. Effect of seed-size and\nseed-rate on wheat yield. J. Res. 11, 9-12.\n[20] Serraj, R., and T.R. Sinclair. 2002. Osmolyte accumulation: Can it\nreally help increase crop yield under drought conditions? Plant Cell\nEnviron. 25: 333-341.\n[21] Shroyer, J.P., Cox, T.S., 1984. Effects of cultivar, environment and their\ninteraction on seed quality of hard red winter wheat from production\nfields. J. Appl. Seed Prod. 2, 24-28.\n[22] Singh, B.P., 1970. Influence of seed size and depth of sowing on early\ngrowth and yield of dwarf wheat. Madras Agric. J. 57, 449-452."]}

In order to study of The Effect of seed inoculation with Pseudomonas putida+Bacillus lentus on yield and yield components of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars, an experiment was carried out as factorial based on Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) in Agricultural Research Station of Shahrood University of Technology. Results showed that inoculation with Pseudomonas putida+Bacillus lentus promoted seed germination. Also, inoculation with Pseudomonas putida+Bacillus lentus significantly affected grain yield, Number of spikes per m2, Number of grain per spike and 1000-seed weight and There was not statistically significant difference between Chamran and Pishtaz cultivars . Finally, the dosages of chemical fertilizers currently applied in commercial wheat field in Iran (Shahrood region) could be reduced through proper combination of Pseudomonas putida+Bacillus lentus inoculation plus fertilization., {"references":["Amer, G.A.; Utkheda, R.S.; 2000. Development of formulation of\nbiologica agents for management of root rot of lettuce and cucumber.\nCan. J. Microbiol. 46:809-816.","Baldani, V.L.D.; Baldani, J.I.; Dobereiner, J.; 1987. Inoculation of fieldgrown\nwheat (Triticum astivum) with Azospirillum spp. In Brazil. Biol.\nFertil. Soils 4: 37-40.","Bashan, Y.; Levanony, H.; 1990. Current status of Azospirillum\ninoculation technology: Azospirillum as a challenge for agriculture. Can\nJ Microbiol 36:591-599.","Belimov, A.A.; Kojemiakov, P.A.; Chuvarliyeve, C.V.; 1995. Interation\nbetween barley and mixed cultures of nitrogen fixing and phosphatesolubilizing\nbacteria. Plant Soil. 17:29-37.","Bethlenfalvay, G.J.; Andrade, G.; Azcon-Aguilar, C.; 1997. Plant and\nsoil responses to mycorrhizal fungi and rhizobacteria in nodulated or\nnitrate-fertilize peas. Biol. Fertil.Soil. 24: 164-168.","Bhattarai, T.; Hess, D.; 1993. Yield responses of Nepalese spring wheat\n(T. aestivum L.) cultivars to inoculation with Azospirillum spp. Of\nNepalese origin. Plant Soil 151, 67-76.","Biswas, J.C.; Ladha, J. K.; Dazzo, F. B.; 2000. Rhizobia inoculation\nimproves nutrient uptake and growth of lowland rice. Soil Sci. Soc\nAm.J. 64:1644-1650.","Bullied, W.J.; Buss, T.J.; Vessey, J.K. (2002). Bacillus cereus UW85\ninoculation effects on growth, nodulation and N accumulation in grain\nlegumes: Field studies. Can. J. Plant Sci., 82, 291-298.","Caballero-Mellado, J.; Carcano-Montiel, M.G.; Mascarua-Esparza,\nM.A.; 1992. Field inoculation of wheat (Triticum aestivum) with\nAzospirillum brasilense under temperate climate. Symbiosis 13:243-253.\n[10] Cakmakci, R.; Kantar, F.; Sahin, F.; 2001. Effect of N-fixing bacterial\ninoculations on yield of sugar beet and barley. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci.\n164:527-531.\n[11] De Silva, A.; Patterson, K.; Rothrock, C.; Moore, J. (2000). Growth\npromotion of highbush blueberry by fungal and bacterial\ninoculants.Hort. Sci., 35, 1228-1230.\n[12] De freitas, J.R,; 2000. Yield and N assimilation of winter wheat (T.\naestivum L., var. Norstar) inoculated with rhizobacteria. Pedobiologia.\n44: 97-104.\n[13] Fukui, R.; Schroth, M.N.; Hendson, M.; Hancock, J.G.; Firestone, M.K.;\n1994. Growth patterns and metabolic activity of Pseudomonas in sugar\nbeet spermospheres: Relationship to pericarp colonization by Pythium\nultimum. Phytopathol. 84:1331-1338.\n[14] Gouzou, L.; Burtin, G.; Philippy, R.; Bartoli, F.; Heulin, T.; 1993. Effect\nof inoculation with Bacillus polymyxa on soil aggregation in the wheat\nrhizosphere: preliminary examination. Geoderma 56, 479-491.\n[15] Glick, B.R.; Jacobson, C.B.; Schwarze, M.M.; Pasternak, J.J. (1994). 1-\nAminocyclopropane-1-carboxylic acid deaminase mutants of the plant\ngrowth-promoting rhizobacterium Pseudomonas putida GR12-2 do not\nstimulate canola root elongation. Can. J. Microbiol., 40,911-915.\n[16] Hoflich, G., Wiehe, W.; Hecht-Buchholz, C.H.; 1995. Rhizosphere\ncolonization of different growth- promoting Pseudomonas and\nRhizobium bacreria. Microbiol Res. 150:139-147.\n[17] Joo, G.-J.; Kim, Y.-M.; Lee, I.-J.; Song, K.-S.; Rhee, I.-K.\n(2004).Growth promotion of red pepper plug seedlings and the\nproduction of gibberellins by Bacillus cereus, Bacillus macroides, and\nBacillus pumilus. Biotechnol. Lett., 26, 487-491.\n[18] Kapulnik, Y.; Okon, Y.; Henis, Y.; 1987. Yield response of spring wheat\ncultivars (Triticum aestivum and T. durum) to inoculation with\nAzospirillum brasilense under field conditions. Biol. Fertil. Soil. 4: 27-\n35.\n[19] Kucey, R.M.N.; Janzen, H. H.; Legett, M.E.; 1989. Microbially mediated\nincreases in plant available phosphorus. Adv. Agron. 42:199-228.\n[20] Kumar, V.; Narula, N.; 1999. Solubilization of inorganic phosphates and\ngrowth emergence of wheat as affected by Azotobacter chrococcum.\nBiol. Fert. Soils. 28:301-305.\n[21] Kim, D-S.; Cook, R.J.; Weller, D.M. (1997). Bacillus sp. L324-92 for\nbiological control of three root diseases of wheat grown with reduced\ntillage. Phytopathol., 87, 551-558.\n[22] Kloepper, J.W.; Lifshitz, R.; Zablotowicz, R.M. (1989). Free-living\nbacterial inocula for enhancing crop productivity. Trends Biotechnol.,7,\n39-44.\n[23] Lifshitz, R.; Kloepper, J.W.; Kozlowsky, M.; Simonson, C.; Carlson, J.;\nTipping, E.M. et al.; 1987. Growth promotion of canola (rapeseed)\nseedlings by strain of Pseudomonas putida under gnotobiotic conditions.\nCan J Microbiol 33(5):390-395.\n[24] Lugtenberg, B.J.; Chin-A-Woeng, T.F.; loemberg, G.V. (2002).\nMicrobe-plant interactions: principles and mechanisms. Antonie van\nLeeuwenhoek, 81, 373-383.\n[25] Murty, M.G.; Ladha, J.K.; 1988. Influence of Azospirillum inoculation\non the mineral uptake and growth of rice under hydroponic conditions.\nPlant and Soil. 108: 281-285.\n[26] Nicholson, W.L. (2002). Roles of Bacillus endospores in the\nenvironment. CMLS, Cell. Mol. Life Sci., 59, 410-416.\n[27] Ozturk, A.; Caglar, O.; Sahin, F.; 2003. Yield response of wheat and\nbarley to inoculation of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria at various\nlevels of nitrogen fertilization. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 166: 262-266.\n[28] Pal, S.S.; 1999. Interaction of an acid tolerant strain of phosphate\nsolubilizing bacteria with a few acid tolerant crops. Plant Soil. 213:221-\n230.\n[29] Quadt-Hallmann, A.; Hallmann, J.; Kloepper, J.W. (1997). Bacterial\nendophytes in cotton: location and interaction with other plantassociated\nbacteria. Can. J. Microbiol., 43, 254-259.\n[30] Rai, S.N.; Gaur, A.C.; 1988. Characterization of Azotobacter spp. And\neffect of Azotobacter and Azospirillum as inoculant on the yield and Nuptak\nof wheat crop. Plant Soil. 109: 131-134.\n[31] Rodriguez, C.E.A.; Gonzales, A.G.; Lopez, J.R.; Di Ciacco, C.A.;\nPacheco, B.J.C.; Parada, J.L.; 1996. Response of fiel Grown wheat to\ninoculation with Azospirillum brasilense and Bacillus polymyxa in the\nsemiarid region of Argentina. Soils Fertil. 59: 800.\n[32] Ryder, M.H.; Nong, Y.Z.; Terrace, T.E.; Rovira, A.D.; Hua, T. W.;\nCorrell, R.L.; 1999. Use of strains of Bacillus isolated in China to\nsuppress take-all and Rhizoctonia root ot, and promote seedling growth\nof glasshouse-grown wheat in Australian soils. Soil Biol. Biochem.\n31,19-29.\n[33] Ryu, C.; Farag, M.A.; Hu, C.-H.; Reddy, M.S.; Wei, H.-X.; Pare, P.W.;\nKloepper, J.W. (2003). Bacteria volatiles promote growth in\nArabidopsis. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., (USA) 100, 4927-4932.\n[34] Sahin, F.; Cakmakci, R.; Kantar, F.; 2004. Sugar beet and barley yields\nin relation to inoculation with N-fixing and phosphate solubilizing\nbacteria. Plant and Soil 265,123-129.\n[35] Saubidet, M.I.; Fatta, N.; Barneix, A.J. (2002). The effect of inoculation\nwith Azospirillum brasilense on growth and nitrogen utilization by\nwheat plants. Plant. Soil., 245, 215-222.\n[36] Schilling, G.; Grnransee, A.; Deubel, A.; Lezovic, G.; Ruppel, S.; 1998.\nPhosphorus availability, root exudates, and microbial activity in the\nrhizosphere. Z. Pflanzenernahr. Bodenk. 161:465-478.\n[37] Tiwari, V.N.; Lehri, L.K.; Pathak, A.N.; 1989 Effect of inoculating crop\nwith phosphor-microbes. Exp. Agric. 25:47-50.\n[38] Urquiaga, S.; Cruz, K.H.S.; Boddey, R.M.; 1992. Contribution of\nnitrogen fixation to suger cane: nitrogen-15 and nitrogen-balance\nestimates. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 56:105-114.\n[39] Whitelaw, M.A.; 2000. Growth promotion of plants inoculated with\nphosphate-solubilizing fungi. Adv. Agron. 69:99-151.\n[40] Whitelaw, M.A.; Hardenand, T.A.; Bender, G.L.; 1997. Plant growth\npromotion of wheat inoculated with Penicillium radicum sp. Nov.\nAustralian J. Soil Res. 35:291-300.\n[41] Yoneyama, T.; Muraoka, T.; Kim, T.H.; Dacanay, E.V.; Nakanishi, Y.;\n1997. The natural N abundance of sugarcane and neighboring plants in\nBrazil, the Philippines and Miyako (Japan). Plant Soil. 189:239-244.\n[42] Young, C.S.; Lethbridge, G.; Shaw, L.J.; Burns, R.G. (1995). Survival of\ninoculated Bacillus cereus spores and vegetative cells in nonplanted and\nrhizosphere soil. Soil Biol. Biochem., 27, 1017-1026."]}