Silver nanoparticles preplant bulb soaking affects tulip production

Figures & data

Figure 1. Visible effects of silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) on tulip growth attributes. Left to right: 0 (control), 25, 50, 100 and 150 mg L⁻¹ AgNPs.

Table 1. Impacts of silver nanoparticles’ (AgNPs) various concentrations on flowering of tulip in two seasons.

AgNPs (mg L^−1)	Days to anthesis	Cut-flower length (cm)	Stem diameter (mm)	Petal length (mm)	Fresh cut-flower weight (g)	Vase life (days)
Season 2014–2015
0	39.7 a	35.2 c	49.5 c	41.8 b	31.9 b	6.7 a
25	36.4 b	39.1 b	50.9 bc	45.2 a	32.4 b	6.7 a
50	34.7 c	40.3 b	53.5 ab	45.7 a	34.3 ab	6.5 a
100	34.2 c	43.1 a	54.3 a	45.2 a	37.3 a	6.7 a
150	35.4 bc	40.4 b	50.2 c	44.6 a	30.0 b	6.7 a
Season 2015–2016
0	33.4 a	35.8 c	54.3 a	46.1 b	30.5 c	6.7 a
25	31.3 b	41.4 b	56.0 a	47.5 a	32.7 bc	6.5 a
50	28.0 d	45.8 a	56.0 a	48.2 a	36.0 ab	6.8 a
100	29.1 c	45.9 a	57.6 a	48.3 a	38.0 a	6.8 a
150	29.9 c	45.1 a	55.1 a	47.9 a	33.1 bc	6.8 a

Note: A different letter in each column indicate a significant difference between treatments at P ≤ 0.05. Each value is the mean of 20 plants (five plants × four replications).

Figure 2. Impacts of silver nanoparticles’ (AgNPs) various concentrations on the leaf greenness index of tulip in seasons 2014–2015 (A) and 2015–2016 (B). Vertical bars indicate the mean ± standard deviation (n = 4). A different letter above each bar indicates a significant difference between treatments at P ≤ 0.05.

Figure 3. Impacts of silver nanoparticles’ (AgNPs) various concentrations on stomatal conductance of tulip in seasons 2014–2015 (A) and 2015–2016 (B). Vertical bars indicate the mean ± standard deviation (n = 4). A different letter above each bar indicates a significant difference between treatments at P ≤ 0.05.

Figure 4. Impacts of silver nanoparticles’ (AgNPs) various concentrations on the root fresh weight of tulip in seasons 2014–2015 (A) and 2015–2016 (B). Vertical bars indicate the mean ± standard deviation (n = 4). A different letter above each bar indicates a significant difference between treatments at P ≤ 0.05.

Figure 5. Impacts of silver nanoparticles’ (AgNPs) various concentrations on root length of tulip in seasons 2014–2015 (A) and 2015–2016 (B). Vertical bars indicate the mean ± standard deviation (n = 4). A different letter above each bar indicates a significant difference between treatments at P ≤ 0.05.

Table 2. Impacts of silver nanoparticles’ (AgNPs) various concentrations on bulbs yield of tulip in two seasons.

AgNPs (mg L^−1)	Fresh weight of daughter bulbs per plant (g)	Number of daughter bulbs per plant
Season 2014–2015
0	19.4 c	4.26 bc
25	22.5 b	4.40 bc
50	25.0 ab	5.33 a
100	25.6 a	4.50 b
150	23.6 ab	4.03 c
Season 2015–2016
0	14.3 d	2.50 b
25	18.0 c	2.83 ab
50	20.1 b	3.16 ab
100	22.4 a	3.50 a
150	19.3 bc	3.16 ab

Note: A different letters in each column indicate a significant difference between treatments at P ≤ 0.05. Each value is the mean of 20 plants (five plants × four replications).