Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Co-inoculation with Mesorhizobium sp. and Enterobacter sp. promisingly improved nodule number, grain yield, and seed protein.

A claim from Effect of bio‐fertilization and edapho‐climatic conditions on chickpea nodulation, grain yields, and seed protein in a Mediterranean context: a meta‐analysis approach · 2026

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Co-inoculation with Mesorhizobium sp. and Enterobacter sp. promisingly improved nodule number, grain yield, and seed protein.

Taxon
Chickpeas ( Cicer arietinum L.)Cicer arietinumt0
Treatment
co‐inoculation of Mesorhizobium sp. and Enterobacter sp. consortiume0
Interactor
Mesorhizobium sp.Mesorhizobiume0symbiont
Second interactor
Enterobacter sp.Enterobactere0symbiont
Outcome
NN, GY, and SPe0
Direction
improvemente0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageComparatorSettingValueQualifier

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 ↗
Enterobacter
Enterobacter · Second interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“co‐inoculation of Mesorhizobium sp. and Enterobacter sp. consortium showed a promising improvement in NN, GY, and SP.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1476–1593
t0

“Chickpeas ( Cicer arietinum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 9–40

Title

Effect of bio‐fertilization and edapho‐climatic conditions on chickpea nodulation, grain yields, and seed protein in a Mediterranean context: a meta‐analysis approach

Amira Hachana; Amir Souissi; Lewis Ziska; et al. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 2026. doi:10.1002/jsfa.70430

Other claims from this paper (15)

Record rev-c756e2daf71a0bf2c4f2f9d591e25b5faa0aa0b0afd3cac4da7600d54b77cbcb · schema claims-v0.9 · position 15 in the model’s answer

Enterobacter · symbiosis · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this claim

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

Mesorhizobium · symbiosis · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree

22 papers: 22 positive, 0 negative or no effect

21 papers in the same direction as this claim

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
  4. positive
  5. positive
  6. positive
  7. positive
  8. positive

13 papers more in this group

See all 22 papers →

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

114 papers: 110 positive, 4 negative or no effect

109 papers in the same direction as this claim · 3 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
  4. positive
  5. positive
  6. positive
  7. no effect
  8. negative

105 papers more in this group

See all 114 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.