Paper · 2013

Response of groundnut cultivars to inoculation with indigenous AM Fungi and alien Rhizobium strain under greenhouse conditions.

M. A. Hadad; G. A. Elhassan

2
claims
3
verbatim quotes
4
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Legumes may respond to non-rhizobial inoculants such as Arbuscular Mycorrhizal (AM) fungi either through an effect on plant growth or, in addition, through an effect on the function of the legume Bradyrhizobium symbiosis. AM fungi and Bradyrhizobium positively affected peanut plant growth yield and nutrients uptake in greenhouse and field. The performance of the AMF alone or in combinations with Bradyrhizobium strains was significantly better than that of the bacteria alone in terms plant height; top dry weight and root dry weight.

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 2

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

AM fungi and Bradyrhizobium positively affected peanut growth, yield and nutrient uptake.

Treatment
AM fungi and Bradyrhizobiume0
Interactor
AM fungiGlomeromycotae0symbiont
Second interactor
BradyrhizobiumBradyrhizobiume0symbiont
Outcome
plant growth yield and nutrients uptakee0
Direction
positively affectede0
Setting
greenhouse and fielde0

Not reportedComparator

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

Arachis hypogaea
Arachis hypogaea · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗
Bradyrhizobium
Bradyrhizobium · Second interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)Louisa Howard - Dartmouth Electron Microscope Facility · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“AM fungi and Bradyrhizobium positively affected peanut plant growth yield and nutrients uptake in greenhouse and field.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 222–341 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

AMF alone or with Bradyrhizobium outperformed bacteria alone on plant height, top dry weight and root dry weight.

Treatment
AMF alone or in combinations with Bradyrhizobium strainse0
Interactor
AMFe0symbiont
Second interactor
Bradyrhizobium strainse0symbiont
Outcome
plant height; top dry weight and root dry weighte0
Direction
bettere0
Comparator
bacteria alonee0

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

Arachis hypogaea
Arachis hypogaea · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The performance of the AMF alone or in combinations with Bradyrhizobium strains was significantly better than that of the bacteria alone in terms plant height; top dry weight and root dry weight.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 342–537 · show in text ↑
e1

“AM fungi and Bradyrhizobium positively affected peanut plant growth yield and nutrients uptake in greenhouse and field.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 222–341 · show in text ↑

Bradyrhizobium · growth · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Results agree

6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

mycorrhiza · growth · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results

19 papers: 18 positive, 1 negative or no effect

17 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

15 papers more in this group

See all 19 papers →

mycorrhiza · Glomeromycota · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Results agree

6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 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.