4.7 Article

Overcoming Low Germination and Low Quality of Flax Seeds (Linum usitatissimum L.) in Unfavorable Storage Using Static Magnetic Fields

Journal

AGRICULTURE-BASEL
Volume 13, Issue 11, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/agriculture13112120

Keywords

flax seed; development; vigor indices; seed leachate conductivity; chlorophyll and carotenoid content; peroxidase and catalase activity

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study demonstrates that exposing flax seeds to static magnetic fields can improve their germination and quality. Specifically, a 350 mT magnetic field treatment for 100 and 120 minutes achieved the best germination results and showed significant improvements in several biological indicators.
Flax seeds stored in unfavorable conditions were exposed to static magnetic fields (SMFs) of 50-350 mT for 20-120 min to overcome low germination and quality. Seed germination increased slightly with increasing strength of SMF and duration of treatment. Seed germination from 89% to 100% was achieved in SMF treatments of 150 mT (120 min), 200 mT (80-120 mT), 250 mT (60-120 min), 300 mT (40-120 min), and 350 mT (40-120 min). In these treatments, germination was 2.78- to 3.12-fold higher than in the control after 10 days. Treatments with 350 mT for 100 and 120 min showed the best results in germination (100%), as well as a 26.81-fold increase in vigor I, 28.69-fold increase in vigor II, 1-fold increase in chlorophyll a, 0.84-fold in chlorophyll b, 0.46-fold increase in carotenoid content, and 2.63-fold increase in catalase activity compared to the control after 10 days. Also, SMF treatment of 350 mT (20-120 min) reduced cell leakage and electrical conductivity by 1-fold compared to the control. SMF is a healthy, biologically safe, and environmentally friendly treatment and can be a tool for overcoming problems of low germination and quality of seeds stored under unfavorable conditions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available