Biological Evidence 2026, Vol.16 http://bioscipublisher.com/index.php/be © 2026 BioSciPublisher, an online publishing platform of Sophia Publishing Group. All Rights Reserved. Sophia Publishing Group (SPG), founded in British Columbia of Canada, is a multilingual publisher.
Biological Evidence 2026, Vol.16 http://bioscipublisher.com/index.php/be © 2026 BioSciPublisher, an online publishing platform of Sophia Publishing Group. All Rights Reserved. Sophia Publishing Group (SPG), founded in British Columbia of Canada, is a multilingual publisher. BioSciPublisher, operated by Sophia Publishing Group (SPG), is an international Open Access publishing platform that publishes scientific journals in the field of life science. Sophia Publishing Group (SPG), founded in British Columbia of Canada, is a multilingual publisher. Publisher Sophia Publishing Group Edited by Editorial Team of Biological Evidence Email: edit@be.bioscipublisher.com Website: http://bioscipublisher.com/index.php/be Address: 11388 Stevenston Hwy, PO Box 96016, Richmond, V7A 5J5, British Columbia Canada Biological Evidence (ISSN 1927-6478) is an open access, peer reviewed journal published online by BioSci Publisher. The journal is considering all aspects of biological evidence, with emphasis on matters of the distributed data sets, small-scale experimental testing, basic biological research, or negative results confirmed the report, previous research methods, improved results, software tools and update the database, as well as the corresponding short-term projects and presumptions. All the articles published in Biological Evidence are Open Access, and are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. BioSciPublisher uses CrossCheck service to identify academic plagiarism through the world’s leading plagiarism prevention tool, iParadigms, and to protect the original authors’ copyrights.
Bioscience Evidence (online), 2026, Vol. 16, No.1 ISSN 1927-6478 https://bioscipublisher.com/index.php/be © 2026 BioSci Publisher, an online publishing platform of Sophia Publishing Group. All Rights Reserved. Sophia Publishing Group (SPG), founded in British Columbia of Canada, is a multilingual publisher Latest Content Assessment of Hydrogen Peroxide Potential in Mitigating Salinity Stress on Growth and Yield of Zea mays (L.) – Maize Joseph Kolade Afolabi, Otitoloju Kekere Bioscience Evidence, 2026, Vol. 16, No. 1, 1-11 Effects of Water Deficit Irrigation on Quality of Pear Minghua Li, Xingzhu Feng Bioscience Evidence, 2026, Vol. 16, No. 1, 12-22 Substrate Selection and Nutrient Supply for Greenhouse Strawberry Yield Optimization Hongfang Lan, Miaoya Weng Bioscience Evidence, 2026, Vol. 16, No. 1, 23-38 Influence of Planting Density on Citrus Yield and Tree Vigor Guiping Zhang, Wei Wang Bioscience Evidence, 2026, Vol. 16, No. 1, 39-51 Integrated Orchard Management for High-Quality Bayberry Production Jianbo Lü Bioscience Evidence, 2026, Vol. 16, No. 1, 52-67
Bioscience Evidence 2026, Vol.16, No.1, 1-11 http://bioscipublisher.com/index.php/be 1 Research Report Open Access Assessment of Hydrogen Peroxide Potential in Mitigating Salinity Stress on Growth and Yield of Zeamays (L.) - Maize Joseph Kolade Afolabi, Otitoloju Kekere Department of Plant Science & Biotechnology, Adekunle Ajasin University, Akungba-Akoko, Ondo State, Nigeria Corresponding email: otito.kekere@aaua.edu.ng Bioscience Evidence, 2026, Vol.16, No.1 doi: 10.5376/be.2026.16.0001 Received: 23 Nov., 2025 Accepted: 20 Jan., 2026 Published: 24 Feb., 2026 Copyright © 2026 Afolabi and Kekere, This is an open access article published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Preferred citation for this article: Afolabi J.K., and Kekere O., 2026, Assessment of hydrogen peroxide potential in mitigating salinity stress on growth and yield of Zea mays (L.) - maize, Bioscience Evidence, 16(1): 1-11 (doi: 10.5376/be.2026.16.0001) Abstract Salt stress is one of the major limitations of seed germination, plant growth, productivity and nutritional composition. Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) functions as a signalling molecule that modulates physiological and biochemical processes under abiotic stress. Therefore, this research was conducted to assess the potential of H2O2 in mitigating adverse effects of salinity stress on the growth and yield of Zeamays (L.). The experiment was conducted in a screenhouse using 96 pots each filled with 14 kg topsoil and arranged in a completely randomized design with eight replicates per treatment. Maize seedlings raised were grouped into two: Each pot in Group A was irrigated with sodium chloride (NaCl) solution and supplemented with 50 ml of 3% H2O2 (882 mM) which was applied to the soil, while each pot in Group B received NaCl solution without H2O2. Salinity treatments were applied at 0 (control), 50, 100, 150, 200, and 250 mM NaCl three times per week and flushed once per week to prevent salt accumulation. Growth, yield, biomass, leaf chlorophyll as well as grain nutritional composition were assessed following standard procedures, and data were analysed using One Way Analysis of Variance at p ≤ 0.05. Plant height declined the most from 160.76 cm in control to 112.19 cm at 250 mM NaCl without H2O2, while H2O2 treated plants at the same salinity decreased to only 123.52 cm. However, other growth parameters were not significantly enhanced by H2O2. The effect of salinity on number of grains per plant was positively influenced byH2O2 as salinity decreased it from 226.25 to 84.50 without H2O2, but H2O2-treated plants maintained up to 88.12 per plant at 250 mM. Salinity treatments devoid of H2O2 had protein reduced from 15.14% to 13.44%, fat from 1.88% to 1.74%, and crude fibre from 3.40% to 2.74%. However, salinity with H2O2 treatment sustained higher values (14.31%, 2.41%, and 2.80%, respectively). This study demonstrates that hydrogen peroxide can mitigate salinity-induced stress on growth and productivity in maize, supporting its potential role as a stress modulator in crop production under saline conditions. Keywords Salt stress; Hydrogen peroxide; Salinity tolerance; Zeamays 1 Introduction Maize (Zeamays L.) is a major cereal crop globally, serving as a staple food for millions and a vital component of the agricultural economy (Yadesa and Diro, 2023). Its significance stems from high yield potential, economic value, and broad adaptability. The global annual production of maize exceeds 1 billion metric tons, with leading producers including the United States of America, China, Brazil, and various African countries (Galani et al., 2022). In Nigeria, maize plays a critical role in food security and rural livelihoods, being widely cultivated across subsistence and commercial farming systems (Ogunniyi et al., 2021). Maize is rich in carbohydrates, providing essential energy, and contains key micronutrients such as vitamin A, iron, and zinc, essential for human nutrition (Galani et al., 2022; Kihara et al., 2024). Its industrial importance is underscored by its use in livestock feed and as raw material for bioethanol, starch, and biodegradable plastics (Maitra and Singh, 2021). Despite this importance, maize productivity faces considerable challenges from abiotic stresses like soil salinity, which severely limit plant growth, yield, and nutritional quality (Syed et al., 2021; Islam et al., 2024). Soil salinity, typically resulting from excessive sodium chloride accumulation, disrupts water uptake, ionic balance, and induces oxidative stress through reactive oxygen species (ROS), including hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) (Al Otaibi et al., 2024). These biochemical imbalances cause reductions in photosynthesis, biomass, and ultimately grain yield (Zhu et al., 2023).
Bioscience Evidence 2026, Vol.16, No.1, 1-11 http://bioscipublisher.com/index.php/be 2 Several mitigation strategies have been explored to combat salinity stress, including breeding salt-tolerant genotypes, soil amendments, and exogenous application of biostimulants (Haque et al., 2021; Irin and Hasanuzzaman, 2024). Among these, hydrogen peroxide has gained attention as a signaling molecule modulating physiological responses under abiotic stress through activation of antioxidant defenses and osmotic adjustment mechanisms (Kesawat et al., 2023). Exogenous H2O2 application at low concentrations promotes antioxidant enzyme activities such as superoxide dismutase, catalase, and peroxidase, thereby reducing oxidative damage and improving salinity tolerance (Chattha et al., 2022). Moreover, H2O2 enhances nutrient uptake and water use efficiency in salt-stressed plants (Iqbal et al., 2023). However, while H2O2’s role in mitigating salinity effects has been studied in several crops, its influence on maize performance under saline conditions remains underexplored. Given maize's critical role in food security and its vulnerability to salt stress, there is a pressing need to evaluate the potential of hydrogen peroxide as a sustainable management option for salinity mitigation in maize cultivation. This study, therefore, aims to assess the effect of H2O2 application on growth, yield, and grain nutritional composition of maize subjected to varying levels of salinity stress. 2 Materials and Methods 2.1 Location of the experiment This experiment was carried out at the screen house of the Department of Plant Science & Biotechnology (PSB), Adekunle Ajasin University, Akungba-Akoko (AAUA), Ondo State, Nigeria (latitude 7.20N, longitude 5.440E). 2.2 Sources of materials for the experiment Seeds of Zea mays (maize) were obtained from the Federal College of Agriculture, Akure, Ondo State (FECA), Nigeria. The salt (NaCl) and Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) were obtained from the laboratory, and the soil used for planting was collected from the experimental plots of PSB Department, AAUA. The soil was analyzed for physical and chemical properties using the standard methods of AOAC (1985). It was shade-dried and passed through a 2-mm sieve. Total N was analyzed using the macro Kjeldahl procedure; organic carbon by Walkley and Black procedure with percentage derived by multiplying organic carbon content by 1.72; and pH using soil: water ratio of 1:2 with a pH meter. Available phosphorus was got through the Bray 1 method; exchangeable acidity by titration method; exchangeable K, Na, Ca, Al and Mg by extraction with 1 M ammonium acetate at pH 7.0; and the amount of K and Na was measured using a Corning Flame Photometer with appropriate filter, while Ca, Al and Mg were determined using a Perkin-Elmer Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer (AAS). The electrical conductivity was read with a conductivity meter. 2.3 Soil collection and preparation Topsoil (0~15 cm depth) was collected from an arable farmland within the premises of Adekunle Ajasin University, Akungba-Akoko, Ondo State. The soil was sieved to remove debris and thoroughly mixed to obtain a homogeneous medium. Approximately 14 kg of prepared soil was placed into each perforated polythene pot. Maize was grown in perforated polythene pots filled with 14 kg of the prepared topsoil. Three maize seeds were sown per pot, and seedlings were allowed to establish before thinning to one seedling per pot prior to the commencement of treatments. 2.4 Experimental setup A total of 96 pots were grouped into two (Groups A and B), each consisting of 48 pots. The potted soils on which the maize seedlings were grown were irrigated three weeks after planting with sodium chloride (NaCl) solution at concentrations of 0 (control), 50, 100, 150, 200, and 250 mM three times in the week of planting. Each potted soil in Group A received 50 ml of 3% hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) solution the following week equivalent to 882 mM, while pots in Group B received no H2O2 treatment. All pots were watered to saturation and allowed to drain once per week to prevent salt accumulation beyond intended concentrations. Pots were arranged in a completely randomized design with eight replicates per treatment in the screenhouse.
Bioscience Evidence 2026, Vol.16, No.1, 1-11 http://bioscipublisher.com/index.php/be 3 2.5 Data collection Plant height was measured from the surface of the soil to the plant apical bud using a meter rule. Stem girth was measured at the 2 cm point from the base of the plants using a digital vernier caliper. Leaf length and breadth were measured using a meter rule, and leaf area was calculated. The number of leaves and ears were counted manually on each plant. Ear length and diameter were measured using a meter rule, and a vernier caliper respectively. Root growth was determined by measuring the root length using a meter rule after uprooting, and the number of roots was counted manually. Fresh and dry mass of plant parts were assessed using an electronic weighing balance. 2.6 Laboratory analysis of maize grains Dried maize grains were ground into fine powder for analysis. Fiber content was determined by boiling the sample in 1.25%H2SO4 and 1.25% NaOH, followed by washing and drying. Other parameters of proximate composition were analyzed using the standard methods of AOAC (1985) in which the mixture was boiled until a clear solution was obtained and allowed to cool at room temperature. The resulting solution was quantitatively transferred into a calibrated flask and completed to 25 mL with distilled water. Moisture, crude protein, crude fat, carbohydrate and ash contents were calculated using relevant formulas. N was analyzed using the macro Kjeldahl method, while P was determined using ammonium-vanadomolybdate reagent and a calibration curve. Potassium contents were assayed through flame emission photometry, and calcium contents by Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) titration. 2.7 Statistical analysis All data collected were subjected to One-Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), version 27.0. Where significant differences were observed among treatment means, Tukey’s Honest Significant Difference (HSD) test was used at a 95% confidence level to perform post-hoc comparisons, and values presented as mean ± standard error (SE). 3Results 3.1 Soil used for planting The soil used for planting was a sandy clay loam adequate for maize cultivation with physico-chemical characteristics shown in Table 1. Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of soil used for planting Parameter Value Sand (%) 57.50 Clay (%) 29.37 Silt (%) 13.13 Soil textural class Sandy clay loam Soil pH 6.53 Electrical conductivity EC (%) 0.39 Organic matter (%) 1.56 Available N (mg/kg) 0.17 Available P (mg/) kg 20.11 Available K (cmol/kg) 0.22 Available Na (cmol/kg) 0.37 Available Ca (cmol/kg) 5.78 Available Al (cmol/kg) 20.58 Available Mg (cmol/kg) 2.23 3.2 Plant survival and growth Table 2 shows the influence of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) on the plant height, stem girth, number of leaves, leaf length, leaf breadth, leaf area, number of roots, root length and the number of tassels of Zeamays under salt stress. While all plants survived, salinity reduced plant height in both hydrogen peroxide treated and untreated plants (Figure 1). However, no significant difference was observed between the control and the salinity treated plants with hydrogen peroxide application at lower levels, though at 250 mM NaCl, H2O2 treated plants maintained
Bioscience Evidence 2026, Vol.16, No.1, 1-11 http://bioscipublisher.com/index.php/be 4 123.52 cm compared to 112.19 cm without H2O2. In contrast, plants exposed to salt stress without hydrogen peroxide were generally shorter than the control, with significant reductions occurring at higher NaCl concentrations (200~250 mM). Table 2 Growth parameters of Zeamays under salinity treatments with and without Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) application Parameters With and withoutHP Salinity treatment (mM NaCl) 0 50 100 150 200 250 Survival (%) 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Plant height (cm) WHP 160.76±2.69c 119.69±0.29b 119.40±0.30b 114.69±0.87ab 113.99±0.50ab 112.19±0.29ab PHP 173.08±1.26c 150.12±0.47b 123.76±0.28ab 118.52±0.26a 120.62±0.25a 123.52±0.27a Stem girth (cm) WHP 27.23±0.08a 22.83±0.22a 21.13±0.21a 19.76±0.27ab 18.49±0.06ab 18.11±0.13ab PHP 25.30±0.06a 22.95±0.08a 22.12±0.08a 18.52±0.05a 17.57±0.04a 17.55±0.03a Number of leaves WHP 13.00±0.00a 12.75±0.16a 12.63±0.18a 12.00±0.19a 11.25±0.16a 10.87±0.13a PHP 13.00±0.00a 14.00±0.00a 12.75±0.16a 12.00±0.00a 12.00±0.00a 12.00±0.00a Leaf length (cm) WHP 25.35±0.04a 21.43±0.13a 20.35±0.05a 19.79±0.23a 19.49±0.15a 20.71±1.28a PHP 23.53±0.18a 20.05±0.06ab 19.52±0.05ab 19.70±0.00ab 19.78±0.23ab 19.46±0.05ab Leaf breadth (cm) WHP 9.80±0.05a 7.98±0.04a 7.6±0.03a 7.25±0.02a 7.20±0.04a 7.07±0.03a PHP 9.58±0.05a 9.13±0.04a 7.93±0.0.3a 7.46±0.42a 7.31±0.03a 7.36±0.04a Leaf area (cm2) WHP 133.02±0.67a 124.15±0.39ab 114.74±0.25b 107.82±0.78b 109.10±0.31b 105.25±0.16b PHP 127.51±0.74a 124.48±0.39a 114.28±0.32ab 107.00±0.11b 104.230.16b 103.99±0.08b Number of roots WHP 32.25±0.59a 31.88±0.30a 26.25±0.45ab 19.87±0.44ab 23.50±0.65ab 22.88±0.67ab PHP 32.25±0.49a 28.62±1.49b 23.25±0.37bc 20.37±0.50bc 22.75±0.31bc 22.50±0.27bc Root length (cm) WHP 64.66±2.87a 44.17±0.56b 42.03±0.79b 40.87±2.63b 33.53±0.46c 37.73±4.39c PHP 66.76±2.04a 55.48±0.63b 54.68±1.84b 43.30±0.10bc 36.40±1.27bc 45.88±0.69bc Number of tassels WHP 11.38±0.26a 11.50±0.19a 11.37±0.18a 11.25±0.16a 11.12±0.23a 12.38±0.18a PHP 11.63±0.26a 11.37±0.18a 11.25±0.16a 11.50±0.19a 11.62±0.26a 11.75±0.25a Note: Values are mean ± standard error of 8 replicates (Tukey HSD test at p≤0.05). Mean with the same alphabet(s) along the row are not significantly different from each other. PHP: plus hydrogen peroxide (H2O2); WHP: without hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) Figure 1 Effect of salinity stress with hydrogen peroxide (A) and without hydrogen peroxide (B) onZeamays growth Stem girth was influenced by salinity, with hydrogen peroxide treated plants showing minor improvements at 50~150 mM NaCl compared to the control. However, at 200~250 mM NaCl, stem girth declined, though the reduction was less than without hydrogen peroxide. Without hydrogen peroxide, stem girth generally decreased under salinity, with significant reductions observed at higher NaCl levels. Leaf production was also affected by salinity. At lower concentrations (50~100 mM NaCl), plants produced similar or slightly fewer leaves than the control, though the change was not significant. However, at higher concentrations (150~250 mM NaCl), leaf production declined, though the reduction was not significantly different from the control in many cases. Similarly, in plants grown without hydrogen peroxide, the number of leaves
Bioscience Evidence 2026, Vol.16, No.1, 1-11 http://bioscipublisher.com/index.php/be 5 decreased under salinity, with more pronounced reductions at 200~250 mM NaCl compared to the control. Leaf length, breadth, and area followed similar trends, with hydrogen peroxide providing partial mitigation, resulting in less severe declines than without it, likely due to improved osmotic regulation. The number of tassels remained relatively stable under salinity, with hydrogen peroxide having a negligible effect, indicating reproductive initiation was less impacted than vegetative growth. At the end of the experiment, root growth parameters (number and length) varied depending on hydrogen peroxide treatment and salt concentration. At 50~150 mM NaCl, plants treated with hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) had better root development compared to those without. However, at 200~250 mM NaCl, root parameters declined more sharply without hydrogen peroxide(H2O2). 3.3 Plant biomass Salinity stress significantly reduced the vegetative biomass (fresh and dry weights of roots, stems, and leaves) of Zea mays in both hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) treated (PHP) and without hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) (WHP) plants, with reductions intensifying at higher NaCl concentrations (200~250 mM) as shown in Table 3. Without hydrogen peroxide, fresh and dry weights of roots, stems, and leaves decreased markedly, reflecting impaired cell division and photosynthetic efficiency due to osmotic stress and ion toxicity. For instance, at 250 mM NaCl, root dry weight was significantly lower compared to the control. In contrast, H2O2 treated plants exhibited less severe biomass reductions across all salinity levels. At 50~150 mM NaCl, hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) treated (PHP) sustained higher fresh and dry weights for roots, stems, and leaves compared to without hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) (WHP) plants, indicating improved water retention and metabolic activity. At 250 mM NaCl, hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) treated (PHP) plants still showed higher biomass than without hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) (WHP), though not fully restored to control levels. This suggests hydrogen peroxide mitigated salinity induced stress by enhancing antioxidant defenses and osmotic adjustment, partially preserving biomass accumulation as shown in Table 3. Table 3 Vegetative biomass of Zeamays under salinity treatments with and without Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) application Growth parameters (g) With and withoutHP Salinity treatment (mM NaCl) 0 50 100 150 200 250 Leaf fresh weight WHP 64.91±1.05a 47.60±0.81b 46.85±0.58b 39.28±1.00bc 39.65±0.29bc 30.90±5.35c PHP 61.90±3.09a 47.56±1.48b 37.50±1.59bc 46.96±1.07bc 41.13±0.78bc 44.32±0.35b Stem fresh weight WHP 142.63±1.30a 105.31±0.81b 103.30±1.45b 54.22±0.22c 38.05±1.03c 35.15±0.57c PHP 149.90±0.39a 113.56±0.82b 102.98±0.13b 61.92±0.41c 41.58±0.36d 35.03±0.38d Root fresh weight WHP 52.84±0.15a 37.94±1.50b 33.45±0.41b 24.45±0.58c 28.26±0.94c 28.13±0.43c PHP 55.13±0.57a 42.77±0.62b 43.05±0.81b 34.20±0.71c 32.62±0.81c 35.28±0.59c Leaf dry weight WHP 39.98±2.10a 32.87±1.93a 28.12±1.56bc 21.11±0.78bc 17.78±0.17c 15.41±0.16c PHP 30.16±0.49a 30.66±0.23a 29.72±0.17a 23.00±0.19b 15.92±0.11bc 15.07±0.17bc Stem dry weight WHP 72.20±0.44a 65.62±0.85b 52.10±0.53b 35.26±0.69c 31.21±1.55c 22.36±0.46d PHP 69.12±0.52a 68.03±0.50a 64.25±0.32a 57.47±1.31b 27.80±0.53c 27.75±0.21c Root dry weight WHP 33.47±0.38a 29.36±0.66b 22.27±0.18b 20.19±0.32b 24.61±0.84b 25.11±0.59b PHP 34.15±0.55a 23.25±0.41b 23.66±0.83b 25.10±1.31b 24.66±0.65b 23.23±0.42b Total biomass WHP 145.24±2.21a 128.58±2.0b 102.80±1.52c 76.63±1.16d 73.71±1.69d 62.90±0.71d PHP 133.43±0.72a 121.92±0.77ab 117.65±0.88ab 105.57±0.97ab 68.38±0.93c 65.71±0.47c Note: Values are mean ± standard error of 8 replicates (Tukey HSD test at p≤0.05). Mean with the same alphabet(s) along the row are not significantly different from each other. PHP: plus hydrogen peroxide (H2O2); WHP: without hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) 3.4 Yield parameter Salinity significantly reduced yield components, including ear number, ear length, grain number, and grain weight per plant (Table 4), with the most pronounced effects at 250 mM NaCl. Without hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) (WHP), the number of grains per plant dropped from 226.25 in the control to 84.50 at 250 mM, reflecting disrupted assimilate allocation and kernel development due to salinity stress.
Bioscience Evidence 2026, Vol.16, No.1, 1-11 http://bioscipublisher.com/index.php/be 6 Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) treated (PHP) plants showed improved yield parameters across all salinity levels. At 250 mM NaCl, PHP maintained grain numbers at 88.12 per plant, a slight but notable improvement over without hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) (WHP). Ear number and weight were also less reduced in Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) treated (PHP) plants, particularly at moderate salinities (50~150 mM), suggesting hydrogen peroxide supported reproductive development by reducing oxidative damage and improving nutrient mobilization. However, at higher salinities, the mitigation was partial, indicating limits to H2O2 protective capacity under severe stress. Table 4 Yield parameters of Zeamays under salinity treatments with and without Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) application Parameters With and withoutHP Salinity treatment (mM NaCl) 0 50 100 150 200 250 Number of ears WHP 2.38±0.18a 2.38±0.18a 2.13±0.23a 1.50±0.19b 1.38±0.18b 1.38±0.18a PHP 2.50±0.18a 2.38±0.18a 2.37±0.18a 2.12±0.13a 1.50±0.18ab 1.50±0.18ab Ear length (cm) WHP 19.63±1.01a 18.21±0.65a 14.75±0.80b 13.62±0.42b 13.25±0.59b 12.12±0.30b PHP 17.87±0.52a 17.37±0.46a 15.62±0.18a 16.00±0.33a 12.25±0.36ab 11.00±0.27ab Ear diameter (cm) WHP 13.50±0.13a 14.23±0.08a 14.61±0.22a 13.02±0.60a 12.15±0.94a 14.08±0.19a PHP 29.43±15.36a 13.02±0.24b 11.86±0.87b 13.21±0.59b 12.61±0.47b 11.98±0.97b Ear fresh weight (g) WHP 307.62±159.77a 93.57±2.30b 85.62±0.65c 75.73±0.76b 72.41±1.41b 73.41±1.29b PHP 146.57±1.12a 120.91±1.59b 119.75±11.22b 108.08±1.36c 93.58±0.78c 94.58±0.84c Ear dry weight (g) WHP 106.91±1.53a 86.83±0.79b 75.17±0.83b 69.61±1.39b 65.88±1.41b 43.60±0.27c PHP 107.56±0.39a 82.96±0.32b 81.68±0.39b 68.12±0.33bc 70.01±0.30bc 50.05±1.67c Number of grains WHP 226.25±13.13a 217.38±2.71a 212.13±1.42a 175.50±0.82ab 146.00±11.72ab 84.50±3.85b PHP 262.75±13.23a 217.62±12.11ab 169.87±14.84b 177.75±17.14b 111.37±1.50bc 88.12±5.05c Grain fresh weight (g) WHP 139.41±1.04a 124.63±0.86a 133.10±1.83a 91.76±0.40ab 92.67±5.56ab 75.65±0.87ab PHP 139.73±0.75a 134.12±0.63a 133.70±1.15a 130.07±0.31a 92.11±2.15b 85.57±2.24b Grain dry weight (g) WHP 55.78±0.68a 52.87±0.52a 54.26±0.75a 54.01±1.28a 49.36±0.27a 38.89±5.30ab PHP 55.60±0.50a 53.71±0.23a 52.83±0.39a 53.58±0.44a 54.90±0.24a 51.83±0.32a 1000 grain weight (g) WHP 30.88±0.64a 25.25±1.03ab 20.13±0.48ab 22.13±0.52ab 22.75±1.16ab 23.88±1.62ab PHP 31.25±0.70a 27.25±1.58ab 23.63±1.45ab 21.12±1.30ab 20.50±0.85ab 18.25±1.15c Note: Values are mean ± standard error of 8 replicates (Tukey HSD test at p≤0.05). Mean with the same alphabet(s) along the row are not significantly different from each other. PHP: plus hydrogen peroxide (H2O2); WHP: without hydrogen peroxide (H2O2). 3.5 Nutritional and proximate composition Table 5 shows that salinity stress without hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) (WHP) led to significant reductions in grain proximate components. Protein content decreased from 15.14% in the control to 13.44% at 250 mM NaCl, fat from 1.88% to 1.74%, and crude fiber from 3.40% to 2.74%. Concurrently, moisture and ash contents increased, likely due to disrupted metabolic processes and ion accumulation. Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) treated (PHP) plants maintained higher proximate values under salinity stress. At 250 mM NaCl, protein was sustained at 14.31%, fat at 2.41%, and crude fiber at 2.80%, closer to control levels. This indicates hydrogen peroxide helped stabilize metabolic pathways, reducing the impact of salinity on nutrient synthesis and storage. 3.6 Grain nutritional composition Salinity without hydrogen peroxide plants increased Na+ and Cl- accumulation in grains while reducing key nutrients like potassium, phosphorus, and magnesium, reflecting ion imbalances and impaired nutrient uptake. Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) treated (PHP) mitigated these effects, with lower Na+ and Cl- accumulation and better retention of essential nutrients as shown in (Table 5) (e.g., higher potassium levels at all salinities). This suggests hydrogen peroxide improved ion homeostasis, likely through enhanced antioxidant enzyme activity. 3.7 Leaf total chlorophyll content Table 6 shows that the chlorophyll content declined significantly under salinity stress without hydrogen peroxide, with the lowest levels at 250 mM NaCl due to pigment degradation and chloroplast damage. Hydrogen peroxide
Bioscience Evidence 2026, Vol.16, No.1, 1-11 http://bioscipublisher.com/index.php/be 7 treated plants preserved higher chlorophyll content across all salinity levels, supporting sustained photosynthetic capacity and contributing to better grain quality. Table 5 Grain nutritional and proximate compositions of Zea mays under salinity treatments with and without hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) application Proximate (%) and nutritional (mg/kg) composition With and withoutHP Salinity treatment (mM NaCl) 0 50 100 150 200 250 Moisture WHP 7.11±0.11a 7.82±0.22a 8.14±0.11a 8.83±0.28a 8.03±0.55a 8.74±0.27a PHP 7.10±0.10a 8.87±0.34a 8.01±0.18a 8.82±0.18a 9.39±0.02a 9.84±0.28a Fat WHP 1.88±0.13a 1.83±0.03a 2.04±0.08a 2.02±0.02a 1.82±0.06a 1.74±0.05a PHP 1.78±0.11a 1.75±0.06a 1.58±0.02a 1.83±0.19a 1.89±0.02a 2.41±0.11b Ash WHP 3.22±0.22a 4.94±0.07a 2.79±1.59a 4.20±0.21a 3.76±0.18a 4.06±0.05a PHP 3.22±0.27a 3.91±0.11a 3.77±0.17a 4.14±0.12a 3.73±0.13a 3.89±0.21a Crude fibre WHP 3.40±0.01b 2.48±0.23a 2.92±0.09ab 2.55±0.26ab 3.08±0.07ab 2.74±0.09ab PHP 2.99±0.02a 2.83±0.08a 2.97±0.04a 2.21±0.23a 2.67±0.08a 2.80±0.23a Crude protein WHP 15.14±0.58b 11.21±0.23ab 11.50±0.51ab 10.36±0.38ab 12.48±0.31ab 13.44±0.57ab PHP 15.17±0.58a 12.24±0.24b 13.50±0.51b 10.96±0.01b 14.50±0.63b 14.31±0.34b Carbohydrate WHP 69.26±0.81a 71.72±0.12a 72.61±0.97a 72.03±0.55a 70.83±1.03a 69.28±0.65a PHP 69.29±0.83a 70.40±0.56a 70.17±0.14a 72.03±0.26a 67.82±0.79a 66.76±0.07a Nitrogen (N) WHP 5.07±0.01a 3.80±0.15b 3.90±0.20b 3.52±0.00b 4.25±0.02ab 4.28±0.10ab PHP 5.10±0.00a 4.15±0.00a 4.58±0.01a 3.72±0.02a 4.92±0.02a 4.85±0.02a Potassium (k) WHP 329.80±0.30a 331.50±0.60a 328.15±0.25a 329.80±0.30a 331.50±0.60a 328.15±0.25a PHP 329.80±0.30a 335.05±0.45a 336.50±0.30a 339.95±0.35a 342.80±0.30a 333.50±0.20a Calcium (Ca) WHP 10.45±0.25a 11.05±0.65a 11.00±0.10a 11.45±0.25a 12.05±0.35a 12.50±0.40a PHP 10.47±0.25a 5.50±0.30ab 7.80±0.30ab 10.30±0.10a 11.15±0.75a 12.70±0.20a Phosphorus (P) WHP 318.45±0.05a 320.45±0.05a 317.15±0.25a 318.45±0.05a 320.45±0.05a 317.15±0.25a PHP 316.55±0.05a 318.15±0.05a 316.15±0.25a 322.80±0.30a 320.85±0.25a 318.75±0.15a Note: Values are mean ± standard error of 8 replicates (Tukey HSD test at p≤0.05). Mean with the same alphabet(s) along the column are not significantly different from each other. PHP: plus hydrogen peroxide (H2O2); WHP: without hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) Overall, hydrogen peroxide application consistently reduced the adverse effects of salinity on Zea mays by approximately 10%~20% across biomass, yield, and nutritional/proximate composition metrics, particularly at moderate salinity levels. However, under severe stress (250 mM NaCl), mitigation was partial, indicating that while hydrogen peroxide enhances resilience, it does not fully counteract extreme salinity effects. 4 Discussion The results of this study clearly show that hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) serves as an effective agent in reducing the harmful impacts of salinity stress on Zea mays (maize). This aligns well with the established understanding that HP functions as a key signaling molecule in plants’ responses to various abiotic stresses. At low concentrations, HP acts not as a damaging oxidant but as a regulator that triggers protective mechanisms, such as activating antioxidant systems, modulating gene expression, and facilitating cellular acclimation to adverse conditions like high salt levels. One prominent benefit observed from this experiment was H2O2 capacity to lessen the salinity induced decline in plant height. Specifically, plants treated with HP reached an average height of 123.52 cm under 250 mM NaCl stress, in contrast to only 112.19 cm in untreated stressed plants. This improvement reflects H2O2 contributions to processes like osmotic adjustment where plants accumulate compatible solutes to maintain cell turgor and enhanced scavenging of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which otherwise accumulate excessively under salt stress and cause cellular damage. Such effects are supported by prior research demonstrating H2O2 involvement in these protective pathways in plants facing osmotic challenges (Qureshi et al., 2022; Zulfiqar et al., 2022).
Bioscience Evidence 2026, Vol.16, No.1, 1-11 http://bioscipublisher.com/index.php/be 8 However, the benefits were not uniform across all growth metrics. While plant height showed clear gains, other parameters like leaf number and stem girth exhibited only limited or no significant enhancement from H2O2 treatment. This pattern points to species-specific sensitivities in maize or concentration dependent responses of H2O2, where the applied dose or timing may optimally influence certain traits but not others. Comparable variability has been documented in different crops exposed to salinity or related stresses, highlighting that H2O2 efficacy can vary based on plant type, stress severity, and application details (Roque et al., 2024; Thomas et al., 2025). Table 6 Leaf chlorophyll contents of Zeamays under salinity treatments with and without hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) application Salinity treatment (mM NaCl) With or without HP Chlorophyll (mg/L) Total chlorophyll (mg/L) A b 0 WHP 22.25 48.00 70.24 50 10.16 22.04 32.20 100 10.14 22.53 32.67 150 10.77 25.42 36.18 200 11.08 26.76 37.85 250 10.07 22.16 32.23 0 PHP 24.62 47.81 72.43 50 21.83 25.69 47.54 100 18.33 24.91 43.24 150 13.13 27.00 40.13 200 12.35 18.64 30.98 250 15.11 19.58 34.69 Note: PHP: plus hydrogen peroxide (H2O2); WHP: without hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) Positive effects extended to vegetative biomass and root development, where H2O2 application led to noticeable improvements. These outcomes likely stem from better nutrient uptake and water retention capabilities under saline conditions, as salt stress typically disrupts ion balance and water availability, impairing root function and overall growth. Similar enhancements in biomass and root systems have been reported in other species like Mungbean and Tomato when H2O2 mitigates salt stress (Nehela et al., 2021). At moderate salinity levels (50~150 mM NaCl), H2O2 treated maize plants displayed approximately 10%~15% higher biomass than untreated counterparts. This advantage is attributable to strengthened antioxidant defenses which neutralize excess ROS and improved osmotic regulation, allowing plants to maintain physiological balance more effectively. These mechanisms tie directly into H2O2 broader role in orchestrating physiological adjustments during abiotic challenges (Ranjan et al., 2023; Saidi et al., 2024). In terms of yield components, H2O2 positively affected key reproductive traits, most notably grain number per plant. Under severe stress at 250 mM NaCl, treated plants retained 88.12 grains per plant, compared to 84.50 in untreated plants. This indicates that H2O2 helps sustain reproductive development by minimizing oxidative damage to floral tissues and improving the allocation of assimilates (photosynthates) toward grain formation. Such protective influences on yield have been noted in maize and related crops under salinity (Rehan et al., 2025; Zhao et al., 2025). Nevertheless, the mitigation was only partial at higher salinity levels (200~250 mM NaCl), suggesting that HP protective effects have boundaries under extreme conditions. Severe stress can generate overwhelming ROS levels or cause profound ion toxicity (e.g., excessive Na+ accumulation), which may exceed H2O2 capacity to fully counteract (Sachdev et al., 2021). Beyond growth and yield, H2O2 helped preserve grain quality attributes. Proximate composition, such as protein content, remained more stable in treated plants (14.31% with H2O2 versus 13.44% without at 250 mM NaCl). Nutritional elements, including better potassium retention, were also maintained. These outcomes reflect H2O2 influence on metabolic stability, enabling continued synthesis of essential compounds and better ion homeostasis despite saline disruption. Related observations in other studies emphasize H2O2 contribution to nutrient metabolism and balanced ion regulation under stress (Saritha et al., 2020; Yadesa and Diro, 2023).
Bioscience Evidence 2026, Vol.16, No.1, 1-11 http://bioscipublisher.com/index.php/be 9 Additionally, H2O2 treated plants showed superior chlorophyll retention, which supports greater photosynthetic efficiency. Salinity often degrades chlorophyll and impairs light-harvesting complexes, reducing carbon fixation and energy production. By preserving chlorophyll, H2O2 indirectly bolsters carbohydrate synthesis and translocation, ultimately contributing to improved grain quality. This pattern mirrors findings in maize and pea subjected to salt stress, where maintained photosynthetic pigments enhance overall plant performance (Zahra et al., 2022; Stefanov et al., 2024). Overall, this investigation addresses an important knowledge gap regarding maize specific applications of H2O2 under salinity, drawing parallels to how other modulators like salicylic acid have been used successfully in different crops (Elsisi et al., 2024). The findings position H2O2 as a promising, sustainable tool for boosting maize resilience in saline prone agricultural areas, where soil salinization is increasingly driven by climate change, poor irrigation practices, and other factors (Singh, 2022). That said, the incomplete protection at very high salinity levels underscores the need for additional studies to fine tune H2O2 concentrations, application timing (e.g., priming versus foliar sprays), and methods to achieve optimal results under severe conditions. Such optimization could further enhance its practical utility in saline agriculture. 5 Conclusion and Recommendations In conclusion, these screenhouse-based results indicate that hydrogen peroxide shows promise as a signaling molecule capable of partially alleviating salinity stress effects on maize, potentially contributing to improved resilience in saline environments and supporting food security in affected areas (as highlighted in global assessments of salt-affected soils). However, the evidence remains preliminary and context-specific to controlled conditions. The study demonstrates that salinity stress markedly impairs Zea mays (maize) growth, yield, grain nutritional quality, and leaf chlorophyll content, with the strongest negative impacts observed at 250 mM NaCl. Key parameters such as plant height, leaf production, stem girth, root development, biomass accumulation, grain number (declining from 226.25 to 84.50 per plant at 250 mM NaCl without mitigation), and grain proximate composition (e.g., protein decreasing from 15.14% to 13.44%, fat from 1.88% to 1.74%, crude fiber from 3.40% to 2.74%) were progressively reduced, consistent with effects of osmotic stress and ion toxicity. Chlorophyll content also declined, likely due to chloroplast damage affecting photosynthetic capacity. Based on this research the application of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) consistently alleviated these adverse effects across the tested salinity levels (50~250 mM NaCl). Treated plants showed improvements, including greater plant height (123.52 cm vs. 112.19 cm at 250 mM NaCl), higher biomass (approximately 10%~15% increase), increased grain number (88.12 vs. 84.50 per plant), enhanced grain quality (e.g., protein at 14.31%, fat at 2.41%, crude fiber at 2.80%), and better maintenance of chlorophyll content, which may support improved photosynthetic efficiency. These observations align with prior research indicating that exogenous H2O2, often applied as a priming or foliar treatment, can enhance antioxidant defenses, protect chloroplast ultrastructure, modulate metabolites, and improve physiological performance under salt stress in maize. Nonetheless, H2O2 mitigation did not completely restore parameters to non-stressed control levels, especially under severe salinity (250 mM NaCl), suggesting inherent limitations in extreme conditions. Field validation under natural saline soils, along with further exploration of optimal application methods, concentrations, physiological/biochemical mechanisms (e.g., antioxidant enzyme responses, ionic homeostasis), and possible integration with other amendments or interventions, would be essential to strengthen any practical recommendations for maize production in salt-affected regions. Author’s contribution O. Kekere was the experimental designer, and J. K. Afolabi was executor of the study; J. K. Afolabi completed data analysis and wrote the first draft of the paper; J. K. Afolabi participated in the experimental design and analysis of experimental results; O. Kekere was the project conceptualizer and leader, guiding experimental design, data analysis, paper writing and revision. The paper was read and received the approval of both authors for publication in the journal.
Bioscience Evidence 2026, Vol.16, No.1, 1-11 http://bioscipublisher.com/index.php/be 10 References Aizaz M., Ullah R., Ullah T., Sami R., Aljabri M., Althaqafi M.M., Al-Farga A., and Qari, S.H., 2024, Insights into physiological and biochemical responses of Zea mays L. under salinity stress, Emirates Journal of Food and Agriculture, 36: 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3897/ejfa.2024.127665 Al Otaibi F.A., Alghamdi S.A. and Abo-Elyousr K.A.M., 2024, The influence of salinity on plant growth and amendment strategies, Sohag Journal of Sciences, 9(3): 261-267. https://doi.org/10.21608/sjsci.2024.258471.1168 Association of Official Analytical Chemists [AOAC], 1985, Official methods of analysis of analytical chemists, 15th Edition, Vol. 2, Published by Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Inc, Virginia, USA, pp.69-83. Chattha M.U., Ul Hassan M.U., Khan I., Nawaz M., Shah A. N., Sattar A., Hashem M., Alamri S., Aslam M.T., Alhaithloul H.A.S., Hassan M.U. and Qari S.H., 2022, Hydrogen peroxide priming alleviates salinity induced toxic effect in maize by improving antioxidant defense system, ionic homeostasis, photosynthetic efficiency and hormonal crosstalk, Molecular Biology Reports, 49(6): 5611-5624. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11033-022-07535-6 Elsisi M., Elshiekh M., Sabry N., Aziz M., Attia K., Islam F., Chen J., and Abdelrahman M., 2024, The genetic orchestra of salicylic acid in plant resilience to climate change induced abiotic stress: Critical review, Stress Biology, 4(1): 31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44154-024-00160-2 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 2021a, Highlights of threats of soil salinization to global food security, Retrieved fro. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) 2021b, Global map of salt- affected soils. https://library.unccd.int/Details/books/1791 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) 2023, The state of food and agriculture 2023: realizing the promise of climate-resilient agriculture, Rome. https://www.fao.org/documents/card/en/c/cc7722en Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) 2024, World Food and Agriculture -Statistical Yearbook 2024, Rome. https://doi.org/10.4060/cd2971en Galani Y.J.H., Ligowe I.S., Kieffer M., Kamalongo D., Kambwiri A.M., Kuwali P., Thierfelder C., Dougill A.J., Gong Y.Y., and Orfila C., 2022, Conservation agriculture affects grain and nutrient yields of maize (Zea mays L.) and can impact food and nutrition security in Sub-saharan Africa, Frontiers in Nutrition, 8: 804663. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2021.804663 Haque M.A., Rafii M.F., Yusoff M.M., Ali N.S., Yusuff O., Datta D.R., Anisuzzaman M., and Ikbal M.F., 2021, Advanced breeding strategies and future perspectives of salinity tolerance in rice, Agronomy, 11(8): 1-23. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11081631 Iqbal H., Yaning C., Waqas M., Raza S. T., Shareef M., and Ahmad Z., 2023, Salinity and exogenous HP improve gas exchange, osmoregulation, and antioxidant metabolism in quinoa under drought stress, Physiologia Plantarum, 175(6): e14057. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppl.14057 Irin I. J. and Hasanuzzaman M., 2024, Organic amendments: enhancing plant tolerance to salinity and metal stress for improved agricultural productivity. Stresses, 4(1): 185-209. https://doi.org/10.3390/stresses4010011 Islam M. S., Islam M. R., Hasan M. K., Hafeez A. G., Chowdhury M.K., Pramanik M.H., Iqbal M. A., Erman M., Barutcular C., Konuskan O., Dubey A., Kumar A., and Sabagh A.E., 2024, Salinity stress in maize: consequences, tolerance mechanism, and management strategies, OBM Genetics, 8(2): 1-41. https://doi.org/10.21926/obm.genet.2402232 Kesawat M.S., Satheesh N., Kherawat B.S., Kumar A., Kim H., Chung S., and Kumar M., 2023, Regulation of reactive oxygen species during salt stress in plants and their crosstalk with other signaling molecules - current perspectives and future directions, Plants, 12(4): 1-37. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12040864 Kihara J., Sileshi G.W., Bolo P., Mutambu D., Senthilkumar K., Sila A., Devkota M., and Saito K., 2024, Maize-grain zinc and iron concentrations as influenced by agronomic management and biophysical factors: a meta-analysis, Food Security, 16: 1147-1173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-024-01478-5 Maitra S., and Singh V., 2021, Invited review on 'maize in the 21st century' emerging trends of maize biorefineries in the 21st century: scientific and technological advancements in biofuel and bio-sustainable market, Journal of Cereal Science, 101: 103272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcs.2021.103272 Nehela Y., Mazrou Y.S.A., Alshaal T., Rady A.M.S., El-Sherif A.M.A., Omara A.A.E., Abd El-Monem A.M., and Hafez E.M., 2021, The integrated amendment of sodic-saline sods using biochar and plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria enhances maize (Zea mays L.) resilience to water salinity, Plants, 10: 1-21. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10091960 Ogunniyi A.I., Omotoso S.O., Salinan K.K., Omotayo Social Indicators Research A.O., Olagunju K.O., and Aremu A.O., 2021, Socio-economic drivers of food security among rural households in Nigeria: evidence from smallholder maize farmers, Social Indicators Research, 155(2): 583-599. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-020-02590-7 Owonubi G., and George V.A., 2019, Assessment of soil salinity under irrigation farming along the Delimi River of the Jos Plateau, International Journal of Recent Innovations in Academic Research, 3(8): 108-113.
Bioscience Evidence 2026, Vol.16, No.1, 1-11 http://bioscipublisher.com/index.php/be 11 Qureshi M. K., Gawronski P., Munir S., Jindal S. and Kerchev P., 2022, Hydrogen peroxide-induced stress acclimation in plants, Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, 79(2): 41-56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00018-022-04156-x Ranjan D., Kumar S., Mishra S., Sherpa D. and Kumari S., 2023, Seed priming with HP confers better yield in mungbean by ameliorating the harmful effect of saline-alkaline stress, International Journal of Environment and Climate Change, 13(8): 1651-1661. https://doi.org/10.9734/ijecc/2023/v13i82116 Rehan M., Kamara M.M., and Barakat H., 2025, Comparative analysis of physiological parameters, antioxidant defense, ion regulation, and gene expression in two distinct maize hybrids under salt stress at seedling stage, Life, 15: 1-20. https://doi.org/10.3390/life15040591 Roque I.A., Soares L.A.D.A., De Lima G.S., Lopes I.A.P., De Andrade Silva L., Dantas M.V., Torres A.A.F. and De Lima V.L.A., 2024, Okra cultivation under irrigation with saline water and foliar application of hydrogen peroxide, Ambiente E Agua - an Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Science, 19: 1-17. https://doi.org/10.4136/ambi-agua.2980 Sachdev S., Ansari S.A., Ansari M.I., Fujita M., and Hasanuzzaman M., 2021, Abiotic stress and reactive oxygen species: generation, signaling, and defense mechanisms, Antioxidants, 10 (2): 1-37. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox10020277 Saidi W., Beltayef H., Kalleli F., Mechri M., Hashem A., Alenazi M.M., Abd Allah E.F., Cruz C., and Hamdi M.M., 2024, HP seed priming to alleviate the salinity effect in tomato (Solanum lycopersicon), Pakistan Journal of Botany, 56(6): 2059-2066. https://doi.org/10.30848/PJB2024-6(24) Saritha A., Ramanjaneyulu A.V., Nagula S., and Umarani E., 2020, Nutritional importance and value addition in maize, Research Today, 2(9): 974-977. Singh A., 2022, Soil salinity: A global threat to sustainable development, Soil Use and Management, 38(1): 39-67. https://doi.org/10.1111/sum.12772 Stefanov M.A., Rashkov G.D., Borisova P.B., and Apostolova E.L., 2024, Changes in photosystem II complex and physiological activities in pea and maize plants in response to salt stress, Plants, 13(7): 1-17. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13071025 Syed A., Sarwar G., Shah S.H., and Muhammad S., 2021, Soil salinity research in 21st century in Pakistan: its impact on availability of plant nutrients, growth and yield of crops, Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 52(3): 183-200. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2020.1854294 Thomas P.G., Bhattarai S.P., Balsys R.J., Walsh K.B., and Midmore D.J., 2025, Continuous injection of hydrogen peroxide in drip irrigation-application to field crops, Agronomy, 15: 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15020385 Yadesa L. and Diro D., 2023, Nutritional and specialty maize production, consumption, and promising impact on Ethiopia's food and nutrition security: a review, EAS Journal of Nutrition and Food Sciences, 5(5): 142-157. https://doi.org/10.36349/easjnfs.2023.v05i05.003 Zahra N., Al Hinai M.S., Hafeez M.B., Rehman A., Wahida A., Siddique K.H.M., and Muhammad Farooq M., 2022, Regulation of photosynthesis under salt stress and associated tolerance mechanisms, Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, 178: 55-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2022.03.003 Zhao S., Huang G., Yang S., Wang C., Wang J., Zhao Y., Duan M., Zhang Y. and Guo X., 2025, Precise 3D geometric phenotyping and phenotype interaction network construction of maize kernels, Frontiers in Plant Science, 16: 1438594. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2025.1438594 Zhu J., Cai Y., Wakisaka M., Yang Z., Yin Y., Fang W., Xu Y., Omura T., Yu R., and Zheng A.L.T., 2023, Mitigation of oxidative stress damage caused by abiotic stress to improve biomass yield of microalgae: a review, Science of the Total Environment, 896: 165200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.165200 Zulfiqar F., Nafees M., Chen J., Darras A., Ferrante A., Hancock J. T., Ashraf M., Zaid A., Latif N., Corpas F.J., Altaf M.A., and Siddique K.H.M., 2022, Chemical priming enhances plant tolerance to salt stress, Frontiers in Plant Science, 13: 946922. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.946922
Bioscience Evidence 2026, Vol.16, No.1, 12-22 http://bioscipublisher.com/index.php/be 12 Research Insight Open Access Effects of Water Deficit Irrigation on Quality of Pear Minghua Li 1, Xingzhu Feng 2 1 Cuixi Academy of Biotechnology, Zhuji, 311800, Zhejiang, China 2 Hainan Institute of Biotechnology, Haikou, 570206, Hainan, China Corresponding email: xingzhu.feng@hibio.org Bioscience Evidence, 2026, Vol.16, No.1 doi: 10.5376/be.2026.16.0002 Received: 28 Nov., 2025 Accepted: 22 Jan., 2026 Published: 25 Feb., 2026 Copyright © 2026 Li and Feng, This is an open access article published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Preferred citation for this article: Li M.H., and Feng X.Z., 2026, Effects of water deficit irrigation on quality of pear, Bioscience Evidence, 16(1): 12-22 (doi: 10.5376/be.2026.16.0002) Abstract This study focuses on the effects of moderate deficit irrigation on pear fruit quality and provides a systematic analysis. Based on a review of global pear orchard irrigation patterns and technological developments, it summarizes the implementation methods and outcomes of deficit irrigation under different climatic conditions, cultivar types, and cultivation management practices. Applying moderate water deficit at appropriate growth stages of fruit trees can not only effectively save water resources, but also improve, to some extent, the soluble solid content, sugar–acid ratio, and flavor quality of the fruit, while enhancing storage performance. Deficit irrigation regulates fruit physical traits, chemical composition, and aroma compound formation, and its effects are jointly influenced by multiple factors such as cultivar, rootstock, soil type, and climate conditions. The study proposes suitable irrigation regulation strategies and simple, farmer-friendly technical approaches, emphasizing the importance of coordinated water–fertilizer management and low-cost monitoring methods. Moderate deficit irrigation is a practical technique that balances water saving and quality improvement, and it is of great significance for enhancing resource use efficiency and promoting sustainable development in the pear industry. Keywords Pear (Pyrus spp.); Deficit irrigation; Fruit quality; Water use efficiency; Sustainable agriculture 1 Introduction Pear (Pyrus spp.) is one of the most widely cultivated temperate fruit trees in the world, playing an important role in horticultural production and rural economies in regions such as Europe, China, and South America. As consumers increasingly demand better sensory and nutritional quality, pear growers are not only under pressure to maintain stable yields, but also to improve fruit appearance, texture, flavor, and storage performance. Climate change, more frequent droughts, and competition for limited freshwater resources are making traditional irrigation methods harder to sustain. Agriculture accounts for about 70% of global freshwater withdrawals, and fruit trees are usually irrigated to avoid water stress, especially in semi-arid and arid regions where rainfall is insufficient or unstable (Vélez-Sánchez et al., 2023). In many major pear-producing areas, current irrigation management mainly relies on supplying all or nearly all crop evapotranspiration (ETc) through surface or subsurface drip irrigation, micro-sprinkler irrigation, furrow irrigation, or flood irrigation. Full irrigation at 100% ETc or maintaining relatively high soil moisture thresholds (such as 80% of field capacity) is commonly used as a reference or “safe” strategy when comparing deficit irrigation treatments (Zhang et al., 2022). The rapid development of pressurized irrigation systems, especially drip irrigation, has greatly improved the precision of water supply. However, in practice, it often leads to “insurance irrigation,” where excessive water is applied to avoid potential yield loss (Vandermaesen et al., 2021). Under conventional management, irrigation amounts are often close to or even exceed ETc in order to maintain vigorous vegetative growth and larger fruit size. Deficit irrigation refers to the intentional application of water below crop water requirements without causing unacceptable reductions in yield or quality. Regulated deficit irrigation (RDI) is one of the most commonly used approaches in fruit trees. It applies moderate water deficit during phenological stages that are less sensitive to water stress, while maintaining near-full irrigation during critical periods such as rapid fruit enlargement. In pear production, moderate deficit irrigation is usually implemented as applying 50%-80% ETc at specific growth stages, or maintaining soil moisture at about 60%~70% of field capacity, rather than applying it throughout the entire
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjQ4ODYzNA==