Abstract
Soybean/maize intercropping has remarkable advantages in increasing crop yield and nitrogen (N) efficiency. However, little is known about the contributions of rhizobia or arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) to yield increases and N acquisition in the intercropping system. Plus, the mechanisms controlling carbon (C) and N allocation in intercropping systems remain unsettled. In the present study, a greenhouse experiment combined with 15N and 13C labeling was conducted using various inoculation and nutrient treatments. The results showed that co-inoculation with AMF and rhizobia dramatically increased biomass and N content of soybean and maize, and moderate application of N and phosphorus largely amplified the effect of co-inoculation. Maize had a competitive advantage over soybean only under co-inoculation and moderate nutrient availability conditions, indicating that the effects of AMF and rhizobia in intercropping systems are closely related to nutrient status. Results from 15N labeling showed that the amount of N transferred from soybean to maize in co-inoculations was 54% higher than that with AMF inoculation alone, with this increased N transfer partly resulting from symbiotic N fixation. The results from 13C labeling showed that 13C content increased in maize shoots and decreased in soybean roots with AMF inoculation compared to uninoculated controls. Yet, with co-inoculation, 13C content increased in soybean. These results indicate that photosynthate assimilation is stimulated by AM symbiosis in maize and rhizobial symbiosis in soybean, but AMF inoculation leads to soybean investing more carbon than maize into common mycorrhizal networks (CMNs). Overall, the results herein demonstrate that the growth advantage of maize when intercropped with soybean is due to acquisition of N by maize via CMNs while this crop contributes less C into CMNs than soybean under co-inoculation conditions.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 15
Claim · model-written summary
Co-inoculation with AMF and rhizobia dramatically increased biomass and N content of soybean.
- Taxon
- soybean
Glycine maxe1 - Treatment
- co-inoculation with AMF and rhizobiae1
- Interactor
- AMFe1symbiont
- Second interactor
- rhizobiae1symbiont
- Outcome
- biomass and N contente1
- Direction
- dramatically increasede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“co-inoculation with AMF and rhizobia dramatically increased biomass and N content of soybean and maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Co-inoculation with AMF and rhizobia dramatically increased biomass and N content of maize.
- Treatment
- co-inoculation with AMF and rhizobiae1
- Interactor
- AMFe1symbiont
- Second interactor
- rhizobiae1symbiont
- Outcome
- biomass and N contente1
- Direction
- dramatically increasede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“co-inoculation with AMF and rhizobia dramatically increased biomass and N content of soybean and maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Moderate application of N and phosphorus largely amplified the effect of co-inoculation in soybean/maize intercropping.
- Taxon
- Soybean/MaizeGlycine max
Zea mayst0 - Treatment
- moderate application of N and phosphoruse1
- Outcome
- effect of co-inoculatione1
- Direction
- amplifiede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“moderate application of N and phosphorus largely amplified the effect of co-inoculation”
t0“Soybean/Maize Intercropping System”
Claim · model-written summary
Under co-inoculation and moderate nutrient availability, maize had a competitive advantage over soybean.
- Treatment
- co-inoculation and moderate nutrient availability conditionse1
- Outcome
- competitive advantage over soybeane1
- Direction
- had a competitive advantagee1
- Comparator
- soybeane1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Maize had a competitive advantage over soybean only under co-inoculation and moderate nutrient availability conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
The amount of N transferred from soybean to maize in co-inoculations was 54% higher than with AMF inoculation alone.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe1
- Treatment
- co-inoculationse1
- Outcome
- amount of N transferrede1
- Direction
- highere1
- Value
- 54%e1
- Comparator
- AMF inoculation alonee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“the amount of N transferred from soybean to maize in co-inoculations was 54% higher than that with AMF inoculation alone”
Claim · model-written summary
The increased N transfer from soybean to maize partly results from symbiotic N fixation.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe1
- Outcome
- increased N transfere1
- Qualifier
- partly resulting from symbiotic N fixatione1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“the amount of N transferred from soybean to maize in co-inoculations was 54% higher than that with AMF inoculation alone, with this increased N transfer partly resulting from symbiotic N fixation”
Claim · model-written summary
AMF inoculation increased 13C content in maize shoots compared with uninoculated controls.
- Organ / stage
- shootse1
- Treatment
- AMF inoculatione1
- Interactor
- AMFe1symbiont
- Outcome
- 13C contente1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Comparator
- uninoculated controlse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“13C content increased in maize shoots and decreased in soybean roots with AMF inoculation compared to uninoculated controls”
Claim · model-written summary
AMF inoculation decreased 13C content in soybean roots compared with uninoculated controls.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe1
- Organ / stage
- rootse1
- Treatment
- AMF inoculatione1
- Interactor
- AMFe1symbiont
- Outcome
- 13C contente1
- Direction
- decreasede1
- Comparator
- uninoculated controlse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“13C content increased in maize shoots and decreased in soybean roots with AMF inoculation compared to uninoculated controls”
Claim · model-written summary
With co-inoculation, 13C content increased in soybean.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe1
- Treatment
- co-inoculatione1
- Outcome
- 13C contente1
- Direction
- increasede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“with co-inoculation, 13C content increased in soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
AM symbiosis stimulated photosynthate assimilation in maize.
- Treatment
- AM symbiosise1
- Interactor
- AMe1symbiont
- Outcome
- photosynthate assimilatione1
- Direction
- stimulatede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“photosynthate assimilation is stimulated by AM symbiosis in maize and rhizobial symbiosis in soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobial symbiosis stimulated photosynthate assimilation in soybean.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe1
- Treatment
- rhizobial symbiosise1
- Interactor
- rhizobiale1symbiont
- Outcome
- photosynthate assimilatione1
- Direction
- stimulatede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“photosynthate assimilation is stimulated by AM symbiosis in maize and rhizobial symbiosis in soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
AMF inoculation leads soybean to invest more carbon than maize into common mycorrhizal networks.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe1
- Treatment
- AMF inoculatione1
- Interactor
- AMFe1symbiont
- Outcome
- investing more carbone1
- Direction
- moree1
- Comparator
- maizee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“AMF inoculation leads to soybean investing more carbon than maize into common mycorrhizal networks”
Claim · model-written summary
The growth advantage of maize in intercropping is due to N acquisition by maize via common mycorrhizal networks.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“the growth advantage of maize when intercropped with soybean is due to acquisition of N by maize via CMNs”
Claim · model-written summary
Under co-inoculation, maize contributes less C into common mycorrhizal networks than soybean.
- Treatment
- co-inoculation conditionse1
- Outcome
- contributes less C into CMNse1
- Direction
- lesse1
- Comparator
- soybeane1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“the growth advantage of maize when intercropped with soybean is due to acquisition of N by maize via CMNs while this crop contributes less C into CMNs than soybean under co-inoculation conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Effects of AMF and rhizobia in soybean/maize intercropping are closely related to nutrient status.
- Taxon
- Soybean/MaizeGlycine maxZea mayst0
- Treatment
- nutrient statuse1
- Interactor
- AMFe1symbiont
- Second interactor
- rhizobiae1symbiont
- Outcome
- effects of AMF and rhizobiae1
- Direction
- closely relatede1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Soybean/Maize Intercropping System”
e1“indicating that the effects of AMF and rhizobia in intercropping systems are closely related to nutrient status”
The same questions in other papers
mycorrhiza · physiology: photosynthesis · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
29 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
27 papers more in this group
See all 31 papers →mycorrhiza · molecular: metabolites · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
37 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
39 papers more in this group
See all 43 papers →inoculation · molecular: metabolites · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
66 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- negative
71 papers more in this group
See all 75 papers →mycorrhiza · growth · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
78 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- negative
83 papers more in this group
See all 87 papers →inoculation · molecular: metabolites · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
116 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
125 papers more in this group
See all 129 papers →mycorrhiza · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
168 papers in the same direction as this paper · 17 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- no effect
184 papers more in this group
See all 188 papers →inoculation · growth · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
322 papers in the same direction as this paper · 33 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
354 papers more in this group
See all 358 papers →inoculation · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
634 papers in the same direction as this paper · 61 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- no effect
695 papers more in this group
See all 699 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.