Abstract
Inoculation effects of Mesorhizobium ciceri (CH-1233) and PGPR (Pseudomonas sp., LK-884) alone and in combinations with different methods (seed treatment, furrows application by mixing with soil and vermicompost) in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) were compared during rabi season of 2008-09 at Pantnagar. Mesorhizobium sp. and PGPR alone inoculation significantly increased nodule number, by 44.3 and 34.4, nodule dry weight, by 46.1 and 33.2 %, and plant dry weight, by 33.6 and 42.4 %, over uninoculated control. Their co-inoculantion gave significant increases in nodule number of 16.5 % over PGPR alone and in nodule dry weight of 36.4 % over Mesorhizobium sp. alone inoculation. This treatment also significantly improved the plant dry weight by 11.5% over Mesorhizobium sp. alone inoculation. Mesorhizobium sp. alone recorded significant increase in grain yield of 11.8 % and PGPR alone in grain and straw yields of 15.3 and 14.9 % over uninoculated control. Their dual inoculation resulted in significant increase only in straw yield of 16.6 % over Mesorhizobium sp. alone. Co- inoculation of Mesorhizobium sp. and PGPR also significantly increased N uptake by straw and available P, dehydrogenase activity (DHA) and microbial biomass carbon (MBC) in soil over Mesorhizobium sp. alone inoculation. Inoculants applied in furrows mixing with soil and vermicompost resulted in better nodulation than seed treatment. These treatments also recorded significantly more N uptake of 17.7 and 14.5 % and P uptake of 12.5 and 16.0 % by straw over seed treatment, respectively. Application of inoculants in furrows by mixing with soil was better than that mixing with vermicompost by recording significantly more available P, DHA and MBC in soil than seed treatment.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 17
Claim · model-written summary
Mesorhizobium sp. alone increased nodule number in chickpea by 44.3 over uninoculated control.
- Taxon
- chickpea
Cicer arietinumt0 - Treatment
- Mesorhizobium sp.e0
- Interactor
- Mesorhizobium sp.
.jpg?width=60)
Mesorhizobiume0symbiont - Outcome
- nodule numbere0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 44.3e0
- Comparator
- uninoculated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
t0“Effect of inoculation methods of Mesorhizobium ciceri and PGPR in chickpea (Cicer areietinum L.)”
e0“Mesorhizobium sp. and PGPR alone inoculation significantly increased nodule number, by 44.3 and 34.4, nodule dry weight, by 46.1 and 33.2 %, and plant dry weight, by 33.6 and 42.4 %, over uninoculated control”
Claim · model-written summary
PGPR alone increased nodule number in chickpea by 34.4 over uninoculated control.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- PGPRe0
- Interactor
- PGPRe0symbiont
- Outcome
- nodule numbere0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 34.4e0
- Comparator
- uninoculated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of inoculation methods of Mesorhizobium ciceri and PGPR in chickpea (Cicer areietinum L.)”
e0“Mesorhizobium sp. and PGPR alone inoculation significantly increased nodule number, by 44.3 and 34.4, nodule dry weight, by 46.1 and 33.2 %, and plant dry weight, by 33.6 and 42.4 %, over uninoculated control”
Claim · model-written summary
Mesorhizobium sp. alone increased nodule dry weight in chickpea by 46.1 over uninoculated control.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- Mesorhizobium sp.e0
- Interactor
- Mesorhizobium sp.Mesorhizobiume0symbiont
- Outcome
- nodule dry weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 46.1e0
- Comparator
- uninoculated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of inoculation methods of Mesorhizobium ciceri and PGPR in chickpea (Cicer areietinum L.)”
e0“Mesorhizobium sp. and PGPR alone inoculation significantly increased nodule number, by 44.3 and 34.4, nodule dry weight, by 46.1 and 33.2 %, and plant dry weight, by 33.6 and 42.4 %, over uninoculated control”
Claim · model-written summary
PGPR alone increased nodule dry weight in chickpea by 33.2 over uninoculated control.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- PGPRe0
- Interactor
- PGPRe0symbiont
- Outcome
- nodule dry weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 33.2e0
- Comparator
- uninoculated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of inoculation methods of Mesorhizobium ciceri and PGPR in chickpea (Cicer areietinum L.)”
e0“Mesorhizobium sp. and PGPR alone inoculation significantly increased nodule number, by 44.3 and 34.4, nodule dry weight, by 46.1 and 33.2 %, and plant dry weight, by 33.6 and 42.4 %, over uninoculated control”
Claim · model-written summary
Mesorhizobium sp. alone increased plant dry weight in chickpea by 33.6 over uninoculated control.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- Mesorhizobium sp.e0
- Interactor
- Mesorhizobium sp.Mesorhizobiume0symbiont
- Outcome
- plant dry weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 33.6e0
- Comparator
- uninoculated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of inoculation methods of Mesorhizobium ciceri and PGPR in chickpea (Cicer areietinum L.)”
e0“Mesorhizobium sp. and PGPR alone inoculation significantly increased nodule number, by 44.3 and 34.4, nodule dry weight, by 46.1 and 33.2 %, and plant dry weight, by 33.6 and 42.4 %, over uninoculated control”
Claim · model-written summary
PGPR alone increased plant dry weight in chickpea by 42.4 over uninoculated control.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- PGPRe0
- Interactor
- PGPRe0symbiont
- Outcome
- plant dry weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 42.4e0
- Comparator
- uninoculated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of inoculation methods of Mesorhizobium ciceri and PGPR in chickpea (Cicer areietinum L.)”
e0“Mesorhizobium sp. and PGPR alone inoculation significantly increased nodule number, by 44.3 and 34.4, nodule dry weight, by 46.1 and 33.2 %, and plant dry weight, by 33.6 and 42.4 %, over uninoculated control”
Claim · model-written summary
Co-inoculation of Mesorhizobium sp. and PGPR increased nodule number by 16.5 % over PGPR alone.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- co-inoculantione2
- Interactor
- Mesorhizobium sp.Mesorhizobiume2symbiont
- Second interactor
- PGPRe2symbiont
- Outcome
- nodule numbere2
- Direction
- increasese2
- Value
- 16.5 %e2
- Comparator
- PGPR alonee2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of inoculation methods of Mesorhizobium ciceri and PGPR in chickpea (Cicer areietinum L.)”
e2“Their co-inoculantion gave significant increases in nodule number of 16.5 % over PGPR alone and in nodule dry weight of 36.4 % over Mesorhizobium sp. alone inoculation”
Claim · model-written summary
Co-inoculation of Mesorhizobium sp. and PGPR increased nodule dry weight by 36.4 % over Mesorhizobium sp. alone.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- co-inoculantione2
- Interactor
- Mesorhizobium sp.Mesorhizobiume2symbiont
- Second interactor
- PGPRe2symbiont
- Outcome
- nodule dry weighte2
- Direction
- increasese2
- Value
- 36.4 %e2
- Comparator
- Mesorhizobium sp. alone inoculatione2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of inoculation methods of Mesorhizobium ciceri and PGPR in chickpea (Cicer areietinum L.)”
e2“Their co-inoculantion gave significant increases in nodule number of 16.5 % over PGPR alone and in nodule dry weight of 36.4 % over Mesorhizobium sp. alone inoculation”
Claim · model-written summary
Co-inoculation of Mesorhizobium sp. and PGPR improved plant dry weight by 11.5% over Mesorhizobium sp. alone.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- co-inoculantione2
- Interactor
- Mesorhizobium sp.Mesorhizobiume3symbiont
- Second interactor
- PGPRe2symbiont
- Outcome
- plant dry weighte3
- Direction
- improvede3
- Value
- 11.5%e3
- Comparator
- Mesorhizobium sp. alone inoculatione3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of inoculation methods of Mesorhizobium ciceri and PGPR in chickpea (Cicer areietinum L.)”
e2“Their co-inoculantion gave significant increases in nodule number of 16.5 % over PGPR alone and in nodule dry weight of 36.4 % over Mesorhizobium sp. alone inoculation”
e3“This treatment also significantly improved the plant dry weight by 11.5% over Mesorhizobium sp. alone inoculation”
Claim · model-written summary
Dual inoculation increased chickpea straw yield by 16.6 % over Mesorhizobium sp. alone.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Organ / stage
- strawe4
- Treatment
- dual inoculatione4
- Interactor
- Mesorhizobium sp.Mesorhizobiume4symbiont
- Outcome
- straw yielde4
- Direction
- increasee4
- Value
- 16.6 %e4
- Comparator
- Mesorhizobium sp. alonee4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of inoculation methods of Mesorhizobium ciceri and PGPR in chickpea (Cicer areietinum L.)”
e4“Their dual inoculation resulted in significant increase only in straw yield of 16.6 % over Mesorhizobium sp. alone”
Claim · model-written summary
Co-inoculation of Mesorhizobium sp. and PGPR increased N uptake by straw, available P, DHA and MBC in soil over Mesorhizobium sp. alone.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- Co- inoculation of Mesorhizobium sp. and PGPRe5
- Interactor
- Mesorhizobium sp.Mesorhizobiume5symbiont
- Second interactor
- PGPRe5symbiont
- Outcome
- N uptake by straw and available P, dehydrogenase activity (DHA) and microbial biomass carbon (MBC) in soile5
- Direction
- increasede5
- Comparator
- Mesorhizobium sp. alone inoculatione5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of inoculation methods of Mesorhizobium ciceri and PGPR in chickpea (Cicer areietinum L.)”
e5“Co- inoculation of Mesorhizobium sp. and PGPR also significantly increased N uptake by straw and available P, dehydrogenase activity (DHA) and microbial biomass carbon (MBC) in soil over Mesorhizobium sp. alone inoculation”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculants applied in furrows mixing with soil and vermicompost gave better nodulation in chickpea than seed treatment.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- Inoculants applied in furrows mixing with soil and vermicomposte6
- Outcome
- nodulatione6
- Direction
- bettere6
- Comparator
- seed treatmente6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of inoculation methods of Mesorhizobium ciceri and PGPR in chickpea (Cicer areietinum L.)”
e6“Inoculants applied in furrows mixing with soil and vermicompost resulted in better nodulation than seed treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculants applied in furrows mixing with soil increased N uptake by chickpea straw by 17.7 over seed treatment.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Organ / stage
- strawe7
- Treatment
- Inoculants applied in furrows mixing with soile6
- Outcome
- N uptakee7
- Direction
- moree7
- Value
- 17.7e7
- Comparator
- seed treatmente7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of inoculation methods of Mesorhizobium ciceri and PGPR in chickpea (Cicer areietinum L.)”
e6“Inoculants applied in furrows mixing with soil and vermicompost resulted in better nodulation than seed treatment”
e7“These treatments also recorded significantly more N uptake of 17.7 and 14.5 % and P uptake of 12.5 and 16.0 % by straw over seed treatment, respectively. Application of inoculants in furrows by mixing with soil was better than that mixing with vermicompost by recording significantly more available P, DHA and MBC in soil than seed treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculants applied in furrows mixing with soil and vermicompost increased N uptake by chickpea straw by 14.5 over seed treatment.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Organ / stage
- strawe7
- Treatment
- Inoculants applied in furrows mixing with soil and vermicomposte6
- Outcome
- N uptakee7
- Direction
- moree7
- Value
- 14.5e7
- Comparator
- seed treatmente7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of inoculation methods of Mesorhizobium ciceri and PGPR in chickpea (Cicer areietinum L.)”
e6“Inoculants applied in furrows mixing with soil and vermicompost resulted in better nodulation than seed treatment”
e7“These treatments also recorded significantly more N uptake of 17.7 and 14.5 % and P uptake of 12.5 and 16.0 % by straw over seed treatment, respectively. Application of inoculants in furrows by mixing with soil was better than that mixing with vermicompost by recording significantly more available P, DHA and MBC in soil than seed treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculants applied in furrows mixing with soil increased P uptake by chickpea straw by 12.5 over seed treatment.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Organ / stage
- strawe7
- Treatment
- Inoculants applied in furrows mixing with soile6
- Outcome
- P uptakee7
- Direction
- moree7
- Value
- 12.5e7
- Comparator
- seed treatmente7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of inoculation methods of Mesorhizobium ciceri and PGPR in chickpea (Cicer areietinum L.)”
e6“Inoculants applied in furrows mixing with soil and vermicompost resulted in better nodulation than seed treatment”
e7“These treatments also recorded significantly more N uptake of 17.7 and 14.5 % and P uptake of 12.5 and 16.0 % by straw over seed treatment, respectively. Application of inoculants in furrows by mixing with soil was better than that mixing with vermicompost by recording significantly more available P, DHA and MBC in soil than seed treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculants applied in furrows mixing with soil and vermicompost increased P uptake by chickpea straw by 16.0 over seed treatment.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Organ / stage
- strawe7
- Treatment
- Inoculants applied in furrows mixing with soil and vermicomposte6
- Outcome
- P uptakee7
- Direction
- moree7
- Value
- 16.0e7
- Comparator
- seed treatmente7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of inoculation methods of Mesorhizobium ciceri and PGPR in chickpea (Cicer areietinum L.)”
e6“Inoculants applied in furrows mixing with soil and vermicompost resulted in better nodulation than seed treatment”
e7“These treatments also recorded significantly more N uptake of 17.7 and 14.5 % and P uptake of 12.5 and 16.0 % by straw over seed treatment, respectively. Application of inoculants in furrows by mixing with soil was better than that mixing with vermicompost by recording significantly more available P, DHA and MBC in soil than seed treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculants applied in furrows by mixing with soil significantly increased available P, DHA and MBC in soil over seed treatment.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- Application of inoculants in furrows by mixing with soile7
- Outcome
- available P, DHA and MBC in soile7
- Direction
- moree7
- Comparator
- seed treatmente7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effect of inoculation methods of Mesorhizobium ciceri and PGPR in chickpea (Cicer areietinum L.)”
e7“These treatments also recorded significantly more N uptake of 17.7 and 14.5 % and P uptake of 12.5 and 16.0 % by straw over seed treatment, respectively. Application of inoculants in furrows by mixing with soil was better than that mixing with vermicompost by recording significantly more available P, DHA and MBC in soil than seed treatment”
The same questions in other papers
Mesorhizobium · soil: biology · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
Mesorhizobium · growth · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree
17 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →Mesorhizobium · symbiosis · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree
21 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
18 papers more in this group
See all 22 papers →fertilization · symbiosis · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results differ
42 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
44 papers more in this group
See all 48 papers →inoculation · nutrient: content · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
56 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
59 papers more in this group
See all 63 papers →fertilization · nutrient: content · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
79 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
77 papers more in this group
See all 81 papers →inoculation · symbiosis · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
109 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- no effect
110 papers more in this group
See all 114 papers →inoculation · growth · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
134 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
148 papers more in this group
See all 152 papers →8 of 10 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.