Abstract
The problem in the production of biofertilizers is that raw materials are cheap, easy to get and apply. Another problem is determining the viability of the consortium microbes in a biofertilizer formulation. This study aims to determine the bacterial viability of various liquid media originating from organic waste as a liquid biofertilizer carrier. Three indigenous bacterial strains under consortium for phosphate soluble (Pantoea ananatis strain 53 (BC32)), non-symbiostic Nitrogen fixation (Bacillus licheniformis strain S45) and stabilizing soil aggregate (Pseudomonas plecoglossidastrain PR19) were added to liquid biofertilizer. The study evaluated 10 treatments using a randomized design with three replicates. The treatments are as follows: Peptone,molasses, Compost wash from seaweed waste, Vermiwash, molasses + glycerol, compost wash from seaweed waste + glycerol, vermiwash + glycerol, molasses + PEG (PolyEthylene Glycols)1%, compost wash seaweed waste + PEG 1%, and Vermiwash + PEG 1%. This biofertilizer formulation (liquid) was kept for 16 weeks at optimumpH 5.5. VP3 (Vermiwash made from vermicompost + PEG 1%) treatment showed thebest viability of bacterial strains during the 16-week storage period. The pathogenicitytest using green bean seeds Vima-1 showed that all liquid formulations of biological fertilizers with the three consortium bacterial isolates did not show signs of diseases and demonstrated better growth than the control treatment. Compared to other treatments, the best growth of bacterial strains was detected with MP2 (Molasses + glycerol) treatment. Formulations using vermiwash and PEG appear to maintain bacterial viability in the formulation effectively. However, the formulation of molasses and glycerol exerts a stimulating effect on sprouts growth.
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 5
Claim · model-written summary
The VP3 formulation (vermiwash from vermicompost with PEG 1%) showed the best viability of bacterial strains during 16 weeks of storage.
- Taxon
- green beant0
- Treatment
- Vermiwash made from vermicompost + PEG 1%e0
- Interactor
- bacterial strainse0symbiont
- Outcome
- viability of bacterial strainse0
- Direction
- beste0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
t0“Green Bean Growth”
e0“VP3 (Vermiwash made from vermicompost + PEG 1%) treatment showed thebest viability of bacterial strains during the 16-week storage period”
Claim · model-written summary
The molasses and glycerol formulation gave the best growth of bacterial strains compared with other treatments.
Verbatim
t0“Green Bean Growth”
e1“Compared to other treatments, the best growth of bacterial strains was detected with MP2 (Molasses + glycerol) treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
All liquid formulations with the three consortium bacterial isolates gave better green bean growth than the control treatment.
Verbatim
t0“Green Bean Growth”
e2“The pathogenicity test using green bean seeds Vima-1 showed that all liquid formulations of biological fertilizers with the three consortium bacterial isolates did not show signs of diseases and demonstrated better growth than the control treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
The molasses and glycerol formulation has a stimulating effect on sprout growth of green bean.
- Taxon
- green beant0
- Treatment
- the formulation of molasses and glycerole3
- Outcome
- sprouts growthe3
- Direction
- stimulating effecte3
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
t0“Green Bean Growth”
e3“the formulation of molasses and glycerol exerts a stimulating effect on sprouts growth”
Claim · model-written summary
In the pathogenicity test, green bean seedlings treated with the liquid formulations did not show signs of disease.
Verbatim
t0“Green Bean Growth”
e4“did not show signs of diseases”
The same questions in other papers
glycerol · growth · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
molasses · growth · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
drought · growth · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Results differ
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 59 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
61 papers more in this group
See all 65 papers →inoculation · growth · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Results differ
105 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
122 papers more in this group
See all 126 papers →fertilization · growth · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results
120 papers in the same direction as this paper · 22 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
139 papers more in this group
See all 143 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.