Abstract
Pot experiments with different root barriers between maize and soybean were carried out to investigate the effects of rhizobium,arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and interaction of rhizobium and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on nitrogen uptake in a soybean/maize intercropping system.The results show that under the dual inoculation with Glomus mosseae and soybean rhizobium SH212,biomasses,nitrogen contents of soybean and associated maize are significantly increased.On the average,the nitrogen uptakes by soybean/maize intercropping system inoculated with both microorganisms are increased 22.6%,24.0% and 54.9% compared to those of the inoculated with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi,rhizobium and control respectively.Soybean facilitates nitrogen uptake of the intercropping maize.Arbuscular mycorrhizal colonization of the intercropping maize and nodule numbers of the intercropping soybean are increased significantly.These are the main reasons that net increases of nitrogen uptake by maize under the mesh barrier and no barrier treatments are 1.8 and 2.6 times than that of the control.And the net increases of N uptake by maize under the dual inoculation treatments are 1.3 and 1.7 times than that of the control respectively.These results suggest that the inoculation with both microorganisms in the intercropping system could improve soil nutrition efficiency and enhance productivity of the intercropping system by the synergy effects of rhizobium and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi.
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
Dual inoculation with Glomus mosseae and soybean rhizobium SH212 significantly increased soybean biomass and nitrogen content.
- Taxon
- soybean
Glycine maxe0 - Treatment
- dual inoculation with Glomus mosseae and soybean rhizobium SH212e0
- Interactor
- Glomus mosseae
Funneliformis mosseaee0symbiont - Second interactor
- soybean rhizobium SH212e0symbiont
- Outcome
- biomasses,nitrogen contentse0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“under the dual inoculation with Glomus mosseae and soybean rhizobium SH212,biomasses,nitrogen contents of soybean and associated maize are significantly increased”
Claim · model-written summary
Dual inoculation with Glomus mosseae and soybean rhizobium SH212 significantly increased biomass and nitrogen content of the associated maize.
- Treatment
- dual inoculation with Glomus mosseae and soybean rhizobium SH212e0
- Interactor
- Glomus mosseaeFunneliformis mosseaee0symbiont
- Second interactor
- soybean rhizobium SH212e0symbiont
- Outcome
- biomasses,nitrogen contentse0
- Direction
- increasede0
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“under the dual inoculation with Glomus mosseae and soybean rhizobium SH212,biomasses,nitrogen contents of soybean and associated maize are significantly increased”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen uptake by the soybean/maize intercropping system with both microorganisms was 22.6% higher than with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi alone.
- Taxon
- soybean/maize intercropping systeme1
- Treatment
- inoculated with both microorganismse1
- Interactor
- arbuscular mycorrhizal fungie1symbiont
- Outcome
- nitrogen uptakese1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 22.6%e1
- Comparator
- inoculated with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungie1
RhizobiumOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“On the average,the nitrogen uptakes by soybean/maize intercropping system inoculated with both microorganisms are increased 22.6%,24.0% and 54.9% compared to those of the inoculated with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi,rhizobium and control respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen uptake by the soybean/maize intercropping system with both microorganisms was 24.0% higher than with rhizobium alone.
- Taxon
- soybean/maize intercropping systeme1
- Treatment
- inoculated with both microorganismse1
- Interactor
- arbuscular mycorrhizal fungie1symbiont
- Outcome
- nitrogen uptakese1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 24.0%e1
- Comparator
- rhizobiume1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“On the average,the nitrogen uptakes by soybean/maize intercropping system inoculated with both microorganisms are increased 22.6%,24.0% and 54.9% compared to those of the inoculated with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi,rhizobium and control respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen uptake by the soybean/maize intercropping system with both microorganisms was 54.9% higher than the control.
- Taxon
- soybean/maize intercropping systeme1
- Treatment
- inoculated with both microorganismse1
- Interactor
- arbuscular mycorrhizal fungie1symbiont
- Outcome
- nitrogen uptakese1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 54.9%e1
- Comparator
- controle1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“On the average,the nitrogen uptakes by soybean/maize intercropping system inoculated with both microorganisms are increased 22.6%,24.0% and 54.9% compared to those of the inoculated with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi,rhizobium and control respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Under the mesh barrier, net nitrogen uptake increase by maize was 1.8 times that of the control.
- Treatment
- mesh barriere2
- Outcome
- net increases of nitrogen uptakee2
- Direction
- increasese2
- Value
- 1.8e2
- Qualifier
- times than that of the controle2
- Comparator
- controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“net increases of nitrogen uptake by maize under the mesh barrier and no barrier treatments are 1.8 and 2.6 times than that of the control”
Claim · model-written summary
Under the no-barrier treatment, net nitrogen uptake increase by maize was 2.6 times that of the control.
- Treatment
- no barriere2
- Outcome
- net increases of nitrogen uptakee2
- Direction
- increasese2
- Value
- 2.6e2
- Qualifier
- times than that of the controle2
- Comparator
- controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“net increases of nitrogen uptake by maize under the mesh barrier and no barrier treatments are 1.8 and 2.6 times than that of the control”
Claim · model-written summary
Under the dual inoculation treatments, net nitrogen uptake increase by maize was 1.3 times that of the control (first of the two values given).
- Treatment
- dual inoculation treatmentse3
- Outcome
- net increases of N uptakee3
- Direction
- increasese3
- Value
- 1.3e3
- Qualifier
- times than that of the control respectivelye3
- Comparator
- controle3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“And the net increases of N uptake by maize under the dual inoculation treatments are 1.3 and 1.7 times than that of the control respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Under the dual inoculation treatments, net nitrogen uptake increase by maize was 1.7 times that of the control (second of the two values given).
- Treatment
- dual inoculation treatmentse3
- Outcome
- net increases of N uptakee3
- Direction
- increasese3
- Value
- 1.7e3
- Qualifier
- times than that of the control respectivelye3
- Comparator
- controle3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“And the net increases of N uptake by maize under the dual inoculation treatments are 1.3 and 1.7 times than that of the control respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Soybean intercropping facilitates nitrogen uptake by the intercropped maize.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“Soybean facilitates nitrogen uptake of the intercropping maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Arbuscular mycorrhizal colonization of the intercropped maize increased significantly under intercropping.
Verbatim
e5“Arbuscular mycorrhizal colonization of the intercropping maize and nodule numbers of the intercropping soybean are increased significantly”
Claim · model-written summary
Nodule numbers of the intercropped soybean increased significantly under intercropping.
Verbatim
e5“Arbuscular mycorrhizal colonization of the intercropping maize and nodule numbers of the intercropping soybean are increased significantly”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculation with both microorganisms could enhance productivity of the soybean/maize intercropping system through synergy between rhizobium and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi.
- Taxon
- soybean/maize intercropping systeme1
- Treatment
- inoculation with both microorganismse6
- Second interactor
- arbuscular mycorrhizal fungie6symbiont
- Outcome
- productivity of the intercropping systeme6
- Direction
- enhancee6
- Qualifier
- by the synergy effectse6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“On the average,the nitrogen uptakes by soybean/maize intercropping system inoculated with both microorganisms are increased 22.6%,24.0% and 54.9% compared to those of the inoculated with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi,rhizobium and control respectively”
e6“inoculation with both microorganisms in the intercropping system could improve soil nutrition efficiency and enhance productivity of the intercropping system by the synergy effects of rhizobium and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi”
The same questions in other papers
Funneliformis mosseae · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 papers →Glycine max · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
24 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
22 papers more in this group
See all 26 papers →Funneliformis mosseae · nutrient: content · Glycine max (soybean)Results agree
5 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →inoculation · nutrient: content · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
169 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- negative
175 papers more in this group
See all 179 papers →inoculation · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
287 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
302 papers more in this group
See all 306 papers →trap barrier · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
6 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 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.