Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Inoculation with bacterial isolate MSA39 increased root dry weight of wheat by 122-144%

A claim from Growth Suppression of Chenopodium album Weed and Growth Promotion Effect on Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) by Inoculation of δ-Aminolevulinic Acid Producing Rhizobacteria · 2018

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Inoculation with bacterial isolate MSA39 increased root dry weight of wheat by 122-144%

Treatment
Inoculation of bacterial isolate MSA39e6
Interactor
bacterial isolate MSA39e6symbiont
Outcome
RDWe6
Direction
increasee6
Value
122-144%e6

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingQualifier

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e6

“Inoculation of bacterial isolate MSA39 caused 43-53% decrease in root dry weight (RDW) and 31-47% decrease in shoot dry weight (SDW) of Chenopodium album at 60 and 90 days of plant growth, whereas its inoculation showed 122-144% increase in RDW and 205-124% increase in SDW of wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1383–1665

Title

Growth Suppression of Chenopodium album Weed and Growth Promotion Effect on Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) by Inoculation of δ-Aminolevulinic Acid Producing Rhizobacteria

Aakanksha Khandelwal; Anju Sehrawat; Satyavir S. Sindhu International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 2018. doi:10.20546/ijcmas.2018.702.235

Other claims from this paper (9)

Record rev-d64ce2d552aba20a84a13da095421e5e71f3d40757974964deb159630b492cbc · schema claims-v0.9 · position 8 in the model’s answer

inoculation · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

532 papers: 476 positive, 56 negative or no effect

475 papers in the same direction as this claim · 55 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

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

523 papers more in this group

See all 532 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.