Abstract
The role of preparations supporting plant growth is mainly to reduce the harmful effects of various stress factors on plants and to ensure high yields of good quality. This experiment compared the effect of the mineral stimulator Tytanit and the biological preparation Effective Microorganisms (EM) on the physiological and biochemical activity, as well as the yield of the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). The photosynthetic pigments, free proline and malondialdehyde were assayed and compared at three phenological phases of the bean: 15 BBCH, 24 BBCH, 65 BBCH. The yield parameters included the average number of pods per plant, as well as their fresh and dry mass. Additionally, the nutrient content in the pods was determined according to the atomic absorption spectrometry method. The study revealed a positive effect of both preparations on increasing the content of chlorophyll a, b, and the carotenoids in the bean leaves. Plants treated with Tytanit were characterised by the highest content of malondialdehyde and proline, while EM maintained the aldehyde content on a similar level compared to the untreated plants and significantly reduced the proline content. Both preparations significantly decreased the Mn, Mg, P, and Ca content in the pods and did not have a substantial impact on the yield.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc. 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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Both preparations increased chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b and carotenoids in bean leaves.
- Taxon
- common bean
Phaseolus vulgarise1 - Treatment
- both preparationse0
- Outcome
- content of chlorophyll a, b, and the carotenoidse0
- Direction
- increasinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“positive effect of both preparations on increasing the content of chlorophyll a, b, and the carotenoids in the bean leaves”
e1“the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Tytanit-treated plants had the highest malondialdehyde content.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise1
- Treatment
- Tytanite0
- Outcome
- content of malondialdehydee0
- Direction
- higheste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plants treated with Tytanit were characterised by the highest content of malondialdehyde and proline”
e1“the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Tytanit-treated plants had the highest proline content.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise1
- Treatment
- Tytanite0
- Outcome
- prolinee0
- Direction
- higheste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plants treated with Tytanit were characterised by the highest content of malondialdehyde and proline”
e1“the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
EM kept aldehyde content similar to untreated plants.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise1
- Treatment
- EMe0
- Outcome
- aldehyde contente0
- Direction
- similar levele0
- Comparator
- untreated plantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“EM maintained the aldehyde content on a similar level compared to the untreated plants”
e1“the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
EM significantly reduced proline content.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise1
- Treatment
- EMe0
- Outcome
- proline contente0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- untreated plantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“EM maintained the aldehyde content on a similar level compared to the untreated plants and significantly reduced the proline content”
e1“the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Both preparations significantly decreased Mn, Mg and P in pods.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise1
- Organ / stage
- podse0
- Treatment
- Both preparationse0
- Outcome
- Mn, Mg, Pe0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Both preparations significantly decreased the Mn, Mg, P, and Ca content in the pods”
e1“the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Both preparations significantly decreased Ca in pods.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise1
- Organ / stage
- podse0
- Treatment
- Both preparationse0
- Outcome
- Ca contente0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Both preparations significantly decreased the Mn, Mg, P, and Ca content in the pods”
e1“the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Neither preparation substantially affected yield.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise1
- Treatment
- Both preparationse0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- did not have a substantial impacte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Both preparations significantly decreased the Mn, Mg, P, and Ca content in the pods and did not have a substantial impact on the yield”
e1“the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)”
The same questions in other papers
inoculation · molecular: metabolites · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
11 papers more in this group
See all 15 papers →inoculation · physiology: osmolytes · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
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.