Effect of gibberellic acid and nitrogen on carbonic anhydrase activity and mustard biomass

In mustard(Brassica juncea L.) addition of 20 mM nitrogen (in the form of NaNO₃) inhibited after 50 d the activities of carbonic anhydrase and nitrate reductase and net photosynthetic rate. However, when nitrogen was applied in association with the foliar spray of gibberellic acid, the inhibition was reversed and the above parameters and also leaf area index and dry mass were enhanced.     

Carbonic Anhydrase,Photosynthesis, and Seed Yield in Mustard Plants Treated with Phytohormones

The leaves of 30-d-old plants of Brassica juncea Czern & Coss cv. Varuna were sprayed with 10^–6 M aqueous solutions of indole-3-yl-acetic acid (IAA), gibberellic acid (GA₃), kinetin (KIN), and abscisic acid (ABA) or 10^–8 M of 28-homobrassinolide (HBR). All the phytohormones, except ABA, improved the vegetative growth and seed yield at harvest, compared with those sprayed with deionised water (control). HBR was most prominent in its effect, generating 32, 30, 36, 70, 25, and 29 % higher values for dry mass, chlorophyll content, carbonic anhydrase (E.C. 4.2.1.1) activity, and net photosynthetic rate in 60-d-old plants, pods per plant, and seed yield at harvest, over the control, respectively. The order of response to various hormones was HBR > GA₃ > IAA > KIN > control > ABA.     

Design and Construction of Aroyl‐Hydrazone Derivatives: Synthesis,Crystal Structure,Molecular Docking and Their Biological Activities

Here, we report the synthesis and characterization of four new aroyl‐hydrazone derivatives L₁ – L₄ , and their structural as well as biological activities have been explored. In addition to docking with bovine serum albumin (BSA) and duplex DNA, the experimental results demonstrate the effective binding of L₁ – L₄ with BSA protein and calf thymus DNA (ct‐DNA) which is in agreement with the docking results. Further biological activities of L₁ – L₄ have been examined through molecular docking with different proteins which are involved in the propagation of viral or cancer diseases. L₁ shows best binding affinity with influenza A virus polymerase PB2 subunit (2VY7) with binding energy ?11.42 kcal/mol and inhibition constant 4.23 nm , whereas L₂ strongly bind with the hepatitis C virus NS5B polymerase (2WCX) with binding energy ?10.47 kcal/mol and inhibition constant 21.06 nm . Ligand L₃ binds strongly with TGF‐beta receptor 1 (3FAA) and L₄ with cancer‐related EphA2 protein kinases (1MQB) with binding energy ?10.61 kcal/mol, ?10.02 kcal/mol and inhibition constant 16.67 nm and 45.41 nm , respectively. The binding energies of L₁ – L₄ are comparable with binding energies of their proven inhibitors. L₁ , L₃ and L₄ can be considered as both 3FAA and 1MQB dual targeting anticancer agents, while L₁ and L₃ are both 2VY7 and 2WCX dual targeting antiviral agents. On the other side, L₂ and L₄ target only one virus related target (2WCX). Furthermore, the geometry optimizations of L₁ – L₄ were performed via density functional theory (DFT). Moreover, all four ligands ( L₁ – L₄ ) were characterized by NMR, FT‐IR, ESI‐MS, elemental analysis and their molecular structures were validated by single crystal X‐ray diffraction studies.