Abstract
The success of beneficial bacteria in improving the crop growth and yield depends on an adequate plant-bacteria interaction. In this work, the capability of Azospirillium brasilense Sp7, Pseudomonas putida KT2440, Acinetobacter sp. EMM02, and Sphingomonas sp. OF178A to interact with six maize varieties was evaluated by both single-bacterium application and consortium application. The bacterial consortium efficiently colonized the rhizosphere of the autochthonous yellow and H48 hybrid varieties. Bacterial colonization by the consortium was higher than under single-bacterium colonization. The two maize varieties assayed under greenhouse conditions showed increased plant growth compared to the control. The effect of consortium inoculation plus 50% fertilization was compared with the 100% nitrogen fertilization under field conditions using the autochthonous yellow maize. Inoculation with the consortium plus 50% urea produced a similar grain yield compared to 100% urea fertilization. However, a biomass decrease was observed in plants inoculated with the consortium plus 50% urea compared to the other treatments. Furthermore, the safety of these bacteria was evaluated in a rat model after oral administration. Animals did not present any negative effects, after bacterial administration. In conclusion, the bacterial consortium offers a safety alternative that can reduce chemical fertilization by half while producing the same crop yield obtained with 100% fertilization. Decreased chemical fertilization could avoid contamination and reduce the cost in agricultural practices.
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 6
Claim · model-written summary
The bacterial consortium efficiently colonized the rhizosphere of the autochthonous yellow and H48 hybrid maize varieties.
- Material
- autochthonous yellow and H48 hybrid varietiese0
- Interactor
- bacterial consortiume0symbiont
- Outcome
- efficiently colonized the rhizospheree0
Zea maysNot reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Different Varieties of Maize”
e0“The bacterial consortium efficiently colonized the rhizosphere of the autochthonous yellow and H48 hybrid varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Bacterial colonization by the consortium was higher than under single-bacterium colonization.
- Treatment
- consortiume0
- Interactor
- consortiume0symbiont
- Outcome
- Bacterial colonizatione0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- single-bacterium colonizatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Different Varieties of Maize”
e0“Bacterial colonization by the consortium was higher than under single-bacterium colonization”
Claim · model-written summary
The two maize varieties assayed under greenhouse conditions showed increased plant growth compared to the control.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The two maize varieties assayed under greenhouse conditions showed increased plant growth compared to the control”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculation with the consortium plus 50% urea produced a similar grain yield to 100% urea fertilization.
- Treatment
- Inoculation with the consortium plus 50% ureae0
- Interactor
- consortiume0symbiont
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- similare0
- Comparator
- 100% urea fertilizatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Different Varieties of Maize”
e0“Inoculation with the consortium plus 50% urea produced a similar grain yield compared to 100% urea fertilization”
Claim · model-written summary
A biomass decrease was observed in plants inoculated with the consortium plus 50% urea compared to the other treatments.
- Treatment
- inoculated with the consortium plus 50% ureae0
- Interactor
- consortiume0symbiont
- Outcome
- biomasse0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Comparator
- the other treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Different Varieties of Maize”
e0“a biomass decrease was observed in plants inoculated with the consortium plus 50% urea compared to the other treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
The bacterial consortium can reduce chemical fertilization by half while producing the same crop yield as 100% fertilization.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Different Varieties of Maize”
e0“the bacterial consortium offers a safety alternative that can reduce chemical fertilization by half while producing the same crop yield obtained with 100% fertilization”
The same questions in other papers
inoculation · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
58 papers in the same direction as this paper · 479 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
534 papers more in this group
See all 538 papers →inoculation · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
63 papers in the same direction as this paper · 635 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
695 papers more in this group
See all 699 papers →nitrogen · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
128 papers in the same direction as this paper · 619 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
744 papers more in this group
See all 748 papers →nitrogen · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
278 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1,906 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- positive
2,181 papers more in this group
See all 2,185 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.