Intervention effectmodel-written summary

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

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

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

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
Co-inoculation of 23-B with Mesorhizobiume0
Interactor
MesorhizobiumMesorhizobiume0symbiont
Outcome
all growth parameterse0
Direction
enhancede0

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

t0

“chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 120–128
e0

“Co-inoculation of 23-B with Mesorhizobium enhanced all growth parameters under water stress”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1384–1475

Title

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

Sharma Palika; Khanna Veena; Kumari Poonam African Journal of Microbiology Research 2013. doi:10.5897/ajmr2013.5918

Other claims from this paper (2)

Record rev-fb0cba95ecc6de3dde00264d6194ef9dd7e347ee132518f55b2e392307678f1a · schema claims-v0.9 · position 3 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
  2. positive
  3. positive
  4. positive
  5. positive
  6. positive
  7. positive
  8. positive

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

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.