Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Ps45, Ps47 and Ba1a with Mesorhizobium promoted seed emergence.

A claim from Biological Management of Vascular Wilt of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Incited by Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. ciceris by Antagonistic Rhizobacteria Co-Inoculated with Native Mesorhizobium · 2018

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Ps45, Ps47 and Ba1a with Mesorhizobium promoted seed emergence.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
Ps45, Ps47 and Ba1a inoculation alongside Mesorhizobiume0
Interactor
MesorhizobiumMesorhizobiume0symbiont
Outcome
seed emergencee0
Direction
promotinge0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Mesorhizobium
Mesorhizobium · Interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)Ninjatacoshell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Rhizobacterial isolates Ps45, Ps47 and Ba1a inoculation alongside Mesorhizobium were found effective in promoting seed emergence and in controlling the disease severity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 962–1130
t0

“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 42–71

Title

Biological Management of Vascular Wilt of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Incited by Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. ciceris by Antagonistic Rhizobacteria Co-Inoculated with Native Mesorhizobium

Suman Kumari; Veena Khanna International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 2018. doi:10.20546/ijcmas.2018.701.112

Other claims from this paper (9)

Record rev-67cd74e2c69e45cf69bd14b5810e702d5139f4985665c9cc6b1f7a197de234b4 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 9 in the model’s answer

Mesorhizobium · growth · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree

18 papers: 18 positive, 0 negative or no effect

17 papers in the same direction as this claim

  1. positive
    The same combination significantly increased root and shoot dry weights in glasshouse pots.

    Enhancement of Nodulation and Yield of Chickpea by Co-inoculation of IndigenousMesorhizobiumspp. and Plant Growth–Promoting Rhizobacteria in Eastern Uttar Pradesh · 2012 · compared with control

    Same direction

  2. positive
    Co-inoculation of 23-B with Mesorhizobium enhanced chickpea growth parameters under water stress.

    Efficacy of aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylic acid (ACC)-deaminase-producing rhizobacteria in ameliorating water stress in chickpea under axenic conditions · 2013

    Same direction

  3. positive
    MA72 plus P1S6 increased chickpea shoot dry weight by 192%.

    Co-Inoculation of Mesorhizobium ciceri with Either Bacillus sp. or Enterobacter aerogenes on Chickpea Improves Growth and Productivity in Phosphate-Deficient Soils in Dry Areas of a Mediterranean Region · 2021

    Same direction

  4. positive
    Co-inoculation of Mesorhizobium sp. with native Pseudomonas PGPR significantly improved growth and symbiotic parameters compared with single Mesorhizobium inoculants in both varieties.

    Co-inoculation ofMesorhizobiumsp. and plant growth promoting rhizobacteriaPseudomonassp. as bio-enhancer and bio-fertilizer in chickpea (Cicer arietinumL.) · 2015 · compared with single inoculants of Mesorhizobium sp.

    Same direction

  5. positive
    Mesorhizobium isolate MBD26 increased shoot dry weight by 49.52% without salt after 80 days.

    Inducing salinity tolerance in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) by inoculation of 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylic acid deaminase-containing Mesorhizobium strains · 2015

    Same direction

  6. positive
    Mesorhizobium sp. alone increased plant dry weight in chickpea by 33.6 over uninoculated control.

    Effect of inoculation methods of Mesorhizobium ciceri and PGPR in chickpea (Cicer areietinum L.) on symbiotic traits, yields, nutrient uptake and soil properties · 2013 · compared with uninoculated control

    Same direction

  7. positive
    MBD26 and RHD18 coinoculation increased plant dry weight 112.9% at 50 days without salt.

    Amelioration of salt stress in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) by coinculation of ACC deaminase-containing rhizospheric bacteria with Mesorhizobium strains · 2016 · compared with uninoculated control plants

    Same direction

  8. positive
    Treatments inoculated with Mesorhizobium sp. Cicer alone or along with Captan, Chlorpyrifos or Endosulfan showed improved plant growth and symbiotic parameters (plant height, nodulation, leghaemoglobin content, and nitrogen content) in comparison with the uninoculated control treatment

    Influence of pesticide-treated seeds on survival of Mesorhizobium sp. Cicer, symbiotic efficiency and yield in chickpea · 2012 · compared with uninoculated control treatment

    Same direction

9 papers more in this group

See all 18 papers →

inoculation · growth · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

152 papers: 135 positive, 17 negative or no effect

134 papers in the same direction as this claim · 16 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
    Rhizobacterial seed and soil treatment delayed chickpea seedling emergence relative to controls.

    Influence of temperature on plant–rhizobacteria interactions related to biocontrol potential for suppression of fusarium wilt of chickpea · 2004 · compared with nontreated controls

    Opposite directionCited by this paper

  2. positive
    PGPR plus Mesorhizobia seed treatment synergistically promoted growth relative to single bioinoculants in two chickpea varieties.

    Effect of antagonistic Rhizobacteria coinoculated with Mesorhizobium ciceris on control of fusarium wilt in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) · 2014 · compared with single bioinoculants

    Same directionCited by this paper

  3. negative
    S. rolfsii inoculation alone gave the lowest chickpea shoot and root dry biomass.

    Effect of soil amendment with Chenopodium album dry biomass and two Trichoderma species on growth of chickpea var. Noor 2009 in Sclerotium rolfsii contaminated soil · 2020 · compared with without any soil amendment

    Opposite direction

  4. no effect
    Inoculation with non-AM fungal endophytes had a neutral effect on chickpea biomass.

    Genotypic variation in the response of chickpea to arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and non-mycorrhizal fungal endophytes · 2018

    Opposite direction

  5. negative
    S. rolfsii reduced shoot dry weight by 21.4% versus negative control.

    ALLEVIATING STRESS OF SCLERTIUM ROLFSII ON GROWTH OF CHICKPEA VAR. BHAKKAR-2011 BY TRICHODERMA HARZIANUM AND T. VIRIDE · 2021 · compared with negative control

    Opposite direction

  6. negative
    Combined nematode and fungal inocula had an additive effect on chickpea growth.

    Interaction of root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne incognita with Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. Ciceri and F. solani on chickpea1 · 1987

    Opposite direction

  7. no effect
    Rhizobium inoculation did not significantly change intercepted total radiation or radiation use efficiency of chickpea compared with the non-inoculated control.

    Growth and yield response of chickpea to Rhizobium inoculation: productivity in relation to interception of radiation · 2015 · compared with non-inoculated control

    Opposite direction

  8. no effect
    Inoculated chickpea showed no increase in measured growth and development traits.

    Growth and development responses of some legume species inoculated with a mycorrhiza-based biofertilizer · 2010

    Opposite direction

143 papers more in this group

See all 152 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.