Abstract
Rhizobacteria are promising as biotechnological methods to improve soil fertility and legume production under field conditions. A field experiment, organized in a randomized complete block design with three replications, was conducted to evaluate the effects of inoculation with plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) in combination with Rhizobium on nodulation, growth, yield components, nutrient and protein content of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris cv. Nebraska) as a model legume plant. The effect of co-inoculation of Rhizobium and PGPR on soil microbial activity and availability of soil N, P, and Fe was also investigated. Three PGPR strains (Micrococcus agilis KMe7, Serratia marcescens BM1 and Pseudomonas fluorescens TW2) were selected based on their ability to produce indole acetic acid and siderophores as well solubilization of inorganic phosphate. Generally, the results obtained from this study indicated that the co-inoculation of Rhizobium with each of the three tested PGPR significantly increased (P <0.05) the nodulation (nodule number and nodule dry weight), root and shoot dry weight as compared to Rhizobium-inoculated alone and uninoculated control plants at 70 days after sowing. The uptake of N, P, K, and Fe in shoot tissues increased significantly in the co-inoculation treatment and plant growth was enhanced as compared with the single inoculation treatment and uninoculated control. Co-inoculation with Rhizobium and PGPR significantly increased soil dehydrogenase activity compared with single inoculation. Additionally, co-inoculation of Rhizobium and PGPR also had a positive effect on the composition of the rhizosphere microbial populations and significantly increased populations of bacteria, phosphate solubilizing bacteria and siderophores producing bacteria as compared with individual inoculation. The results show that the dual inoculation of PGPR and Rhizobium significantly increased common bean yield and yield components (pods per plant, seeds per pod, and 100-seed weight as well as straw, seed, and biological yields) compared with single inoculation and uninoculated control. Results showed that the best co-inoculation treatment was Rhizobium + Pseudomonas fluorescens with relative increase of seed, straw, and biological yield reaching 19.6, 35.4 and 22.2%, respectively, over the Rhizobium alone treatment. Finally, co-inoculation significantly increased the percentage of protein in common bean seeds as compared with single inoculation or uninoculated control. These results indicate that co-inoculation with PGPR and Rhizobium had a positive effect on common bean nodulation, growth, soil nutrients status, nutrients uptake, and yield. The present study concluded that PGPR can be used to promote legume plants in Egypt and to increase soil fertility when it is inoculated with symbiotic N2-fixing bacteria
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
Co-inoculation increased common bean nodule number and dry weight versus Rhizobium alone and uninoculated plants at 70 days.
- Taxon
- common bean
Phaseolus vulgarise1 - Organ / stage
- 70 days after sowinge0
- Treatment
- co-inoculation of Rhizobium with each of the three tested PGPRe0
- Second interactor
- PGPRe0symbiont
- Outcome
- nodule number and nodule dry weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- Rhizobium-inoculated alone and uninoculated control plantse0
RhizobiumOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the co-inoculation of Rhizobium with each of the three tested PGPR significantly increased (P <0.05) the nodulation (nodule number and nodule dry weight), root and shoot dry weight as compared to Rhizobium-inoculated alone and uninoculated control plants at 70 days after sowing”
e1“common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris cv. Nebraska)”
Claim · model-written summary
Co-inoculation increased root and shoot dry weight versus Rhizobium alone and uninoculated plants at 70 days.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise1
- Treatment
- co-inoculation of Rhizobium with each of the three tested PGPRe0
- Second interactor
- PGPRe0symbiont
- Outcome
- root and shoot dry weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- Rhizobium-inoculated alone and uninoculated control plantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the co-inoculation of Rhizobium with each of the three tested PGPR significantly increased (P <0.05) the nodulation (nodule number and nodule dry weight), root and shoot dry weight as compared to Rhizobium-inoculated alone and uninoculated control plants at 70 days after sowing”
e1“common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris cv. Nebraska)”
Claim · model-written summary
Co-inoculation significantly increased shoot uptake of N, P, K and Fe versus single inoculation and uninoculated controls.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise1
- Treatment
- co-inoculation treatmente0
- Second interactor
- PGPRe2symbiont
- Outcome
- uptake of N, P, K, and Fe in shoot tissuese0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- single inoculation treatment and uninoculated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The uptake of N, P, K, and Fe in shoot tissues increased significantly in the co-inoculation treatment and plant growth was enhanced as compared with the single inoculation treatment and uninoculated control.”
e1“common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris cv. Nebraska)”
e2“The effect of co-inoculation of Rhizobium and PGPR on soil microbial activity”
Claim · model-written summary
Co-inoculation enhanced plant growth versus single inoculation and uninoculated controls.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise1
- Treatment
- co-inoculation treatmente0
- Second interactor
- PGPRe2symbiont
- Outcome
- plant growthe0
- Direction
- enhancede0
- Comparator
- single inoculation treatment and uninoculated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The uptake of N, P, K, and Fe in shoot tissues increased significantly in the co-inoculation treatment and plant growth was enhanced as compared with the single inoculation treatment and uninoculated control.”
e1“common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris cv. Nebraska)”
e2“The effect of co-inoculation of Rhizobium and PGPR on soil microbial activity”
Claim · model-written summary
Co-inoculation increased soil dehydrogenase activity versus single inoculation.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise1
- Treatment
- Co-inoculation with Rhizobium and PGPRe0
- Second interactor
- PGPRe0symbiont
- Outcome
- soil dehydrogenase activitye0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- single inoculatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Co-inoculation with Rhizobium and PGPR significantly increased soil dehydrogenase activity compared with single inoculation.”
e1“common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris cv. Nebraska)”
Claim · model-written summary
Co-inoculation increased rhizosphere populations of bacteria, phosphate solubilizing bacteria and siderophore producing bacteria versus individual inoculation.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise1
- Treatment
- co-inoculation of Rhizobium and PGPRe0
- Second interactor
- PGPRe0symbiont
- Outcome
- populations of bacteria, phosphate solubilizing bacteria and siderophores producing bacteriae0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- individual inoculatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“co-inoculation of Rhizobium and PGPR also had a positive effect on the composition of the rhizosphere microbial populations and significantly increased populations of bacteria, phosphate solubilizing bacteria and siderophores producing bacteria as compared with individual inoculation.”
e1“common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris cv. Nebraska)”
Claim · model-written summary
Co-inoculation increased common bean pods per plant, seeds per pod and 100-seed weight versus single inoculation and uninoculated controls.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise0
- Treatment
- dual inoculation of PGPR and Rhizobiume0
- Second interactor
- PGPRe0symbiont
- Outcome
- pods per plant, seeds per pod, and 100-seed weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- single inoculation and uninoculated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the dual inoculation of PGPR and Rhizobium significantly increased common bean yield and yield components (pods per plant, seeds per pod, and 100-seed weight as well as straw, seed, and biological yields) compared with single inoculation and uninoculated control.”
Claim · model-written summary
Co-inoculation increased common bean straw, seed and biological yields versus single inoculation and uninoculated controls.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise0
- Treatment
- dual inoculation of PGPR and Rhizobiume0
- Second interactor
- PGPRe0symbiont
- Outcome
- straw, seed, and biological yieldse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- single inoculation and uninoculated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the dual inoculation of PGPR and Rhizobium significantly increased common bean yield and yield components (pods per plant, seeds per pod, and 100-seed weight as well as straw, seed, and biological yields) compared with single inoculation and uninoculated control.”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobium plus Pseudomonas fluorescens increased seed yield by 19.6% over Rhizobium alone.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise1
- Treatment
- Rhizobium + Pseudomonas fluorescense0
- Second interactor
- Pseudomonas fluorescens
.JPG?width=60)
Pseudomonas fluorescense0symbiont - Outcome
- seede0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 19.6e0
- Comparator
- Rhizobium alone treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.JPG?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“the best co-inoculation treatment was Rhizobium + Pseudomonas fluorescens with relative increase of seed, straw, and biological yield reaching 19.6, 35.4 and 22.2%, respectively, over the Rhizobium alone treatment.”
e1“common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris cv. Nebraska)”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobium plus Pseudomonas fluorescens increased straw yield by 35.4% over Rhizobium alone.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise1
- Treatment
- Rhizobium + Pseudomonas fluorescense0
- Second interactor
- Pseudomonas fluorescensPseudomonas fluorescense0symbiont
- Outcome
- strawe0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 35.4e0
- Comparator
- Rhizobium alone treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the best co-inoculation treatment was Rhizobium + Pseudomonas fluorescens with relative increase of seed, straw, and biological yield reaching 19.6, 35.4 and 22.2%, respectively, over the Rhizobium alone treatment.”
e1“common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris cv. Nebraska)”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobium plus Pseudomonas fluorescens increased biological yield by 22.2% over Rhizobium alone.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise1
- Treatment
- Rhizobium + Pseudomonas fluorescense0
- Second interactor
- Pseudomonas fluorescensPseudomonas fluorescense0symbiont
- Outcome
- biological yielde0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 22.2%e0
- Comparator
- Rhizobium alone treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the best co-inoculation treatment was Rhizobium + Pseudomonas fluorescens with relative increase of seed, straw, and biological yield reaching 19.6, 35.4 and 22.2%, respectively, over the Rhizobium alone treatment.”
e1“common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris cv. Nebraska)”
Claim · model-written summary
Co-inoculation increased seed protein percentage versus single inoculation and uninoculated controls.
- Taxon
- common beanPhaseolus vulgarise0
- Treatment
- co-inoculatione0
- Second interactor
- PGPRe1symbiont
- Outcome
- percentage of protein in common bean seedse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- single inoculation or uninoculated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“co-inoculation significantly increased the percentage of protein in common bean seeds as compared with single inoculation or uninoculated control.”
e1“The effect of co-inoculation of Rhizobium and PGPR on soil microbial activity”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors conclude that PGPR inoculated with symbiotic nitrogen-fixing bacteria can promote legumes and soil fertility in Egypt.
Verbatim
e0“PGPR can be used to promote legume plants in Egypt and to increase soil fertility when it is inoculated with symbiotic N2-fixing bacteria”
The same questions in other papers
Rhizobium · symbiosis · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- positive
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →Rhizobium · growth · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results
21 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- negative
20 papers more in this group
See all 24 papers →Rhizobium · yield · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results
33 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- no effect
34 papers more in this group
See all 38 papers →Rhizobium · pest · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
Pseudomonas fluorescens · yield · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →inoculation · growth · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Results differ
105 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
122 papers more in this group
See all 126 papers →inoculation · pest · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- no effect
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 papers →inoculation · Rhizobium · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
19 papers more in this group
See all 23 papers →8 of 11 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.