Abstract
Arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) symbiosis confers numerous benefits to host plants, including improved plant growth and nutrient acquisition efficiency. An experiment was conducted to evaluate the effect of AM fungi ( Glomus intraradices and G. mosseae ) in the presence of humic acid (HA) spray treatments (0, 100, 400, and 1000 mgL −1 ) on nutrient (N, P, K, Fe, and Zn) uptake, visual quality and chlorophyll content, root growth and architecture, and colonization of perennial ryegrass ( Lolium perenne L.) Speedygreen mixture. The results revealed that HA did not affect plant growth significantly; instead arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal (AMF) colonization improved dry and fresh weights. Mycorrhizal inoculations significantly increased visual quality (13 and 15% in inoculated plants compared to non‐inoculated ones) that might be at least partly due to elevated total chlorophyll content. The AM inoculation and HA treatment resulted in improved root architecture rather than root biomass production. Neither HA treatments nor mycorrhizal inoculation affected N and Fe contents of the leaves; however P, K, and Zn concentrations improved by AM inoculation. More roots were colonized by G. intraradices than by G. mosseae . These results suggest that AM inoculation is beneficial in enhancing uptake of some nutrients and root development of ryegrass possibly leading to less fertilizer input and more drought resistance.
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Humic acid did not significantly affect plant growth.
- Taxon
- perennial ryegrass
Lolium perennet0 - Treatment
- HAe0
- Outcome
- plant growthe0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“HA did not affect plant growth significantly; instead arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal (AMF) colonization improved dry and fresh weights.”
t0“perennial ryegrass”
Claim · model-written summary
AMF colonization improved dry and fresh weights.
- Taxon
- perennial ryegrassLolium perennet0
- Interactor
- arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal (AMF)e0symbiont
- Outcome
- dry and fresh weightse0
- Direction
- improvede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal (AMF) colonization improved dry and fresh weights.”
t0“perennial ryegrass”
Claim · model-written summary
Mycorrhizal inoculation raised visual quality by 13 and 15 percent.
- Taxon
- perennial ryegrassLolium perennet0
- Treatment
- Mycorrhizal inoculationse0
- Outcome
- visual qualitye0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 13 and 15%e0
- Comparator
- non‐inoculated onese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mycorrhizal inoculations significantly increased visual quality (13 and 15% in inoculated plants compared to non‐inoculated ones) that might be at least partly due to elevated total chlorophyll content.”
t0“perennial ryegrass”
Claim · model-written summary
Elevated chlorophyll may partly explain the higher visual quality.
- Taxon
- perennial ryegrassLolium perennet0
- Outcome
- visual qualitye0
- Qualifier
- elevated total chlorophyll contente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mycorrhizal inoculations significantly increased visual quality (13 and 15% in inoculated plants compared to non‐inoculated ones) that might be at least partly due to elevated total chlorophyll content.”
t0“perennial ryegrass”
Claim · model-written summary
AM inoculation improved root architecture.
- Taxon
- perennial ryegrassLolium perennet0
- Treatment
- AM inoculatione0
- Outcome
- root architecturee0
- Direction
- improvede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The AM inoculation and HA treatment resulted in improved root architecture rather than root biomass production.”
t0“perennial ryegrass”
Claim · model-written summary
HA treatment improved root architecture.
- Taxon
- perennial ryegrassLolium perennet0
- Treatment
- HA treatmente0
- Outcome
- root architecturee0
- Direction
- improvede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The AM inoculation and HA treatment resulted in improved root architecture rather than root biomass production.”
t0“perennial ryegrass”
Claim · model-written summary
Neither humic acid nor mycorrhizal inoculation changed leaf N and Fe content.
- Taxon
- perennial ryegrassLolium perennet0
- Treatment
- HA treatmentse0
- Outcome
- N and Fe contents of the leavese0
- Direction
- affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Neither HA treatments nor mycorrhizal inoculation affected N and Fe contents of the leaves; however P, K, and Zn concentrations improved by AM inoculation.”
t0“perennial ryegrass”
Claim · model-written summary
Mycorrhizal inoculation did not change leaf N and Fe content.
- Taxon
- perennial ryegrassLolium perennet0
- Treatment
- mycorrhizal inoculatione0
- Outcome
- N and Fe contents of the leavese0
- Direction
- affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Neither HA treatments nor mycorrhizal inoculation affected N and Fe contents of the leaves; however P, K, and Zn concentrations improved by AM inoculation.”
t0“perennial ryegrass”
Claim · model-written summary
AM inoculation improved P, K and Zn concentrations.
- Taxon
- perennial ryegrassLolium perennet0
- Treatment
- AM inoculatione0
- Outcome
- P, K, and Zn concentrationse0
- Direction
- improvede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Neither HA treatments nor mycorrhizal inoculation affected N and Fe contents of the leaves; however P, K, and Zn concentrations improved by AM inoculation.”
t0“perennial ryegrass”
Claim · model-written summary
G. intraradices colonized more roots than G. mosseae.
- Taxon
- perennial ryegrassLolium perennet0
- Interactor
- G. intraradicesRhizophagus intraradicese0symbiont
- Outcome
- roots were colonized by G. intraradicese0
- Direction
- Moree0
- Comparator
- G. mosseaee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“More roots were colonized by G. intraradices than by G. mosseae .”
t0“perennial ryegrass”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors suggest AM inoculation could reduce fertilizer input.
- Outcome
- less fertilizer inpute0
LoliumOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“AM inoculation is beneficial in enhancing uptake of some nutrients and root development of ryegrass possibly leading to less fertilizer input and more drought resistance.”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors suggest AM inoculation could increase drought resistance.
- Outcome
- more drought resistancee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“AM inoculation is beneficial in enhancing uptake of some nutrients and root development of ryegrass possibly leading to less fertilizer input and more drought resistance.”
The same questions in other papers
other · growth · Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →other · nutrient: content · Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass)Positive and negative results
7 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →mycorrhiza · growth · Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass)Positive and negative results
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
11 papers more in this group
See all 15 papers →inoculation · growth · Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass)Positive and negative results
14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- positive
13 papers more in this group
See all 17 papers →inoculation · quality: general · Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
mycorrhiza · nutrient: content · Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass)Results agree
6 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →inoculation · nutrient: content · Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass)Results agree
10 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 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.