Abstract
ABSTRACT A pot experiment was conducted to investigate the effects of Glomus mosseae and Rhizobium on Medicago sativa grown on three types of coal mine substrates, namely a mixture of coal wastes and sands (CS), coal wastes and fly ash (CF), and fly ash (FA). Inoculation with Rhizobium alone did not result in any growth response but G. mosseae alone displayed a significant effect on plant growth. G. mosseae markedly increased the survival rate of M. sativa in CS substrate. In CF and FA substrates the respective oven dry weights of M. sativa inoculated with G. mosseae were 1.8 and 5.1 times higher than those without inoculation. Based on nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) uptake and legume growth, the results also show that dual inoculation in CS and CF substrates elicited a synergistic effect. This indicates that inoculation with arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi may be a promising approach for revegetation of coal mine substrates.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobium inoculation alone did not elicit an alfalfa growth response.
- Taxon
- Alfalfa
Medicago sativat0 - Treatment
- Inoculation with Rhizobium alonee0
- Outcome
- growth responsee0
- Direction
- did not resulte0
RhizobiumNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Inoculation with Rhizobium alone did not result in any growth response”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
G. mosseae inoculation alone significantly affected alfalfa growth.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- G. mosseae alonee0
- Interactor
- G. mosseae
Funneliformis mosseaee0symbiont - Outcome
- plant growthe0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“G. mosseae alone displayed a significant effect on plant growth”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
G. mosseae markedly increased alfalfa survival on CS substrate.
- Taxon
- M. sativaMedicago sativae0
- Treatment
- G. mosseaee0
- Interactor
- G. mosseaeFunneliformis mosseaee0symbiont
- Outcome
- survival rate of M. sativae0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Setting
- CS substratee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“G. mosseae markedly increased the survival rate of M. sativa in CS substrate”
Claim · model-written summary
In CF substrate, G. mosseae inoculation raised alfalfa dry weight 1.8 times above uninoculated plants.
- Taxon
- M. sativaMedicago sativae0
- Treatment
- inoculated with G. mosseaee0
- Interactor
- G. mosseaeFunneliformis mosseaee0symbiont
- Outcome
- oven dry weights of M. sativae0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 1.8e0
- Comparator
- without inoculatione0
- Setting
- CFe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In CF and FA substrates the respective oven dry weights of M. sativa inoculated with G. mosseae were 1.8 and 5.1 times higher than those without inoculation”
Claim · model-written summary
In FA substrate, G. mosseae inoculation raised alfalfa dry weight 5.1 times above uninoculated plants.
- Taxon
- M. sativaMedicago sativae0
- Treatment
- inoculated with G. mosseaee0
- Interactor
- G. mosseaeFunneliformis mosseaee0symbiont
- Outcome
- oven dry weights of M. sativae0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 5.1e0
- Comparator
- without inoculatione0
- Setting
- FAe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In CF and FA substrates the respective oven dry weights of M. sativa inoculated with G. mosseae were 1.8 and 5.1 times higher than those without inoculation”
Claim · model-written summary
Dual inoculation showed a synergistic effect on nutrient uptake and legume growth in CS and CF substrates.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- dual inoculatione0
- Outcome
- nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) uptakee0
- Direction
- synergistic effecte0
- Setting
- CS and CF substratese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Based on nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) uptake and legume growth, the results also show that dual inoculation in CS and CF substrates elicited a synergistic effect”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors propose AM fungal inoculation for revegetating coal mine substrates.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- inoculation with arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungie0
- Interactor
- arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungie0symbiont
- Outcome
- promising approach for revegetation of coal mine substratese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“inoculation with arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi may be a promising approach for revegetation of coal mine substrates”
t0“Alfalfa”
The same questions in other papers
Rhizobium · growth · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results
7 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →inoculation · nutrient: content · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Results differ
38 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
41 papers more in this group
See all 45 papers →inoculation · growth · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 121 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
133 papers more in this group
See all 137 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.