Paper · 2006

Effects of Bio-control Bacterium and Fulvic Acid on Cotton Growth and Verticillium Wilt

Lin Ling

14
claims
18
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Effects of endophytic bacterial strain 73a,antagonistic bacterial strain JB52 and fulvic acid on growth,yield and verticillium wilt of cotton were investigated through single and combine applications,respectively.Results showed that strains 73a and JB52 could promote growth of cotton seedlings and increase yield of seed cotton.Endophytic bacterial strain 73a was the best among all treatments.Height and fresh weight of individual cotton seedlings were increased up to 29.9% and 45.2% respectively by the application with strain 73a in pots.Yield of seed cotton was increased up to 11.5% and the control efficiency against verticillium wilt of cotton was up to 50% by the application with strain 73a in field.Fulvic acid had no efficiency on growth of cotton seedlings in pots or yield of cotton in field,but it could control verticillium wilt of cotton in field.The efficiency of single application with strain 73a was stronger than combine application with strain 73a and strain JB52 and combine application with strain 73a and fulvic acid.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher.

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 14

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Strain 73a promoted cotton seedling growth.

Treatment
strains 73ae0
Interactor
strains 73ae0symbiont
Outcome
growth of cotton seedlingse0
Direction
promotee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“strains 73a and JB52 could promote growth of cotton seedlings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 233–294 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Strain JB52 promoted cotton seedling growth.

Treatment
JB52e0
Interactor
JB52e0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
growth of cotton seedlingse0
Direction
promotee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“strains 73a and JB52 could promote growth of cotton seedlings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 233–294 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Strain 73a increased seed cotton yield.

Treatment
strains 73ae0
Interactor
strains 73ae0symbiont
Outcome
yield of seed cottone0
Direction
increasee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“strains 73a and JB52 could promote growth of cotton seedlings and increase yield of seed cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 233–328 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Strain JB52 increased seed cotton yield.

Treatment
JB52e0
Interactor
JB52e0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
yield of seed cottone0
Direction
increasee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“strains 73a and JB52 could promote growth of cotton seedlings and increase yield of seed cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 233–328 · show in text ↑
Observationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Strain 73a was the best treatment overall.

Interactor
bacterial strain 73ae0symbiont
Outcome
best among all treatmentse0
Direction
beste0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Endophytic bacterial strain 73a was the best among all treatments.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 329–395 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–58 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Strain 73a increased cotton seedling height by up to 29.9% in pots.

Treatment
application with strain 73ae0
Interactor
strain 73ae0symbiont
Outcome
Heighte0
Direction
increasede0
Value
29.9%e0
Setting
potse0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Height and fresh weight of individual cotton seedlings were increased up to 29.9% and 45.2% respectively by the application with strain 73a in pots.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 395–543 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Strain 73a increased cotton seedling fresh weight by up to 45.2% in pots.

Treatment
application with strain 73ae0
Interactor
strain 73ae0symbiont
Outcome
fresh weighte0
Direction
increasede0
Value
45.2%e0
Setting
potse0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Height and fresh weight of individual cotton seedlings were increased up to 29.9% and 45.2% respectively by the application with strain 73a in pots.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 395–543 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Strain 73a increased seed cotton yield by up to 11.5% in the field.

Treatment
application with strain 73ae0
Interactor
strain 73ae0symbiont
Outcome
Yield of seed cottone0
Direction
increasede0
Value
11.5%e0
Setting
fielde0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Yield of seed cotton was increased up to 11.5% and the control efficiency against verticillium wilt of cotton was up to 50% by the application with strain 73a in field.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 543–711 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Strain 73a controlled cotton Verticillium wilt with up to 50% efficiency in the field.

Treatment
application with strain 73ae0
Interactor
verticilliumVerticilliume0pathogen
Second interactor
strain 73ae0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
control efficiency against verticillium wilt of cottone0
Direction
controle0
Value
50%e0
Setting
fielde0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Yield of seed cotton was increased up to 11.5% and the control efficiency against verticillium wilt of cotton was up to 50% by the application with strain 73a in field.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 543–711 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fulvic acid did not improve cotton seedling growth in pots.

Treatment
Fulvic acide0
Outcome
growth of cotton seedlingse0
Direction
no efficiencye0
Setting
potse0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Fulvic acid had no efficiency on growth of cotton seedlings in pots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 711–778 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fulvic acid did not improve cotton yield in the field.

Treatment
Fulvic acide0
Outcome
yield of cottone0
Direction
no efficiencye0
Setting
fielde0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Fulvic acid had no efficiency on growth of cotton seedlings in pots or yield of cotton in field”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 711–806 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fulvic acid controlled cotton Verticillium wilt in the field.

Treatment
Fulvic acide1
Interactor
verticilliumVerticilliume0pathogen
Outcome
verticillium wilt of cottone0
Direction
controle0
Setting
fielde0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“it could control verticillium wilt of cotton in field.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 811–865 · show in text ↑
e1

“Fulvic acid had no efficiency”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 711–740 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Strain 73a alone was more effective than combined 73a and JB52.

Treatment
single application with strain 73ae0
Interactor
strain 73ae0symbiont
Second interactor
strain JB52e0biocontrol_agent
Outcome
efficiencye0
Direction
strongere0
Comparator
combine application with strain 73a and strain JB52e0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The efficiency of single application with strain 73a was stronger than combine application with strain 73a and strain JB52”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 865–987 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–58 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Strain 73a alone was more effective than combined 73a and fulvic acid.

Treatment
single application with strain 73ae0
Interactor
strain 73ae0symbiont
Outcome
efficiencye0
Direction
strongere0
Comparator
combine application with strain 73a and fulvic acide0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The efficiency of single application with strain 73a was stronger than combine application with strain 73a and strain JB52 and combine application with strain 73a and fulvic acid.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 865–1044 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–58 · show in text ↑

other · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ

18 papers: 15 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

14 papers more in this group

See all 18 papers →

other · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

20 papers: 17 positive, 3 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

16 papers more in this group

See all 20 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.