Abstract
Due to a lack of high-quality water, farmers have been compelled to use sewage water for irrigation, contaminating agricultural soils with multiple heavy metals. For the remediation of contaminated soil, plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR), pressmud (PM), and iron (III) oxide were used to improve the growth and phytostabilization potential of chickpea grown in contaminated soil. Contaminated soil was collected from a nearby field, receiving sewage and factory water over the last 60 years. Chickpea seeds were inoculated with metal-tolerant (lead and cadmium) rhizobacterial and rhizobial strains. It was observed that combined application of rhizobia, rhizobacteria, iron oxide, and pressmud improved shoot fresh weight (87%), root fresh weight (47.9%), root length (47.9%), nodules plant−1 (2.58 folds), photosynthetic rate (63%) and grain yield (39%) of chickpea as compared to respective untreated control in contaminated soil. Moreover, a significant decrease in the lead (75.8 and 68.1%) and cadmium (81 and 72%) concentrations due to the combined application of rhizobacteria, rhizobia, iron oxide, and pressmud was observed in shoot and root of chickpea than respective control, respectively. It can be concluded that the contaminated soil with mixed metals can be remediated, and the growth and yield of chickpea can be improved.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Combined rhizobia, rhizobacteria, iron oxide and pressmud improved chickpea shoot fresh weight by 87% compared with the untreated control in contaminated soil.
- Taxon
- chickpea
Cicer arietinumt0 - Treatment
- combined application of rhizobia, rhizobacteria, iron oxide, and pressmude1
- Interactor
- rhizobiae1symbiont
- Second interactor
- rhizobacteriaHyphomicrobialese1symbiont
- Outcome
- shoot fresh weighte1
- Direction
- improvede1
- Value
- 87%e1
- Comparator
- respective untreated controle1
- Setting
- contaminated soile1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“growth of chickpea”
e1“combined application of rhizobia, rhizobacteria, iron oxide, and pressmud improved shoot fresh weight (87%), root fresh weight (47.9%), root length (47.9%), nodules plant−1 (2.58 folds), photosynthetic rate (63%) and grain yield (39%) of chickpea as compared to respective untreated control in contaminated soil”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined amendments improved chickpea root fresh weight by 47.9% compared with the untreated control in contaminated soil.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- combined application of rhizobia, rhizobacteria, iron oxide, and pressmude1
- Interactor
- rhizobiae1symbiont
- Second interactor
- rhizobacteriaHyphomicrobialese1symbiont
- Outcome
- root fresh weighte1
- Direction
- improvede1
- Value
- 47.9%e1
- Comparator
- respective untreated controle1
- Setting
- contaminated soile1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“growth of chickpea”
e1“combined application of rhizobia, rhizobacteria, iron oxide, and pressmud improved shoot fresh weight (87%), root fresh weight (47.9%), root length (47.9%), nodules plant−1 (2.58 folds), photosynthetic rate (63%) and grain yield (39%) of chickpea as compared to respective untreated control in contaminated soil”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined amendments improved chickpea root length by 47.9% compared with the untreated control in contaminated soil.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- combined application of rhizobia, rhizobacteria, iron oxide, and pressmude1
- Interactor
- rhizobiae1symbiont
- Second interactor
- rhizobacteriaHyphomicrobialese1symbiont
- Outcome
- root lengthe1
- Direction
- improvede1
- Value
- 47.9%e1
- Comparator
- respective untreated controle1
- Setting
- contaminated soile1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“growth of chickpea”
e1“combined application of rhizobia, rhizobacteria, iron oxide, and pressmud improved shoot fresh weight (87%), root fresh weight (47.9%), root length (47.9%), nodules plant−1 (2.58 folds), photosynthetic rate (63%) and grain yield (39%) of chickpea as compared to respective untreated control in contaminated soil”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined amendments increased chickpea nodule number 2.58-fold compared with the untreated control in contaminated soil.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- combined application of rhizobia, rhizobacteria, iron oxide, and pressmude1
- Interactor
- rhizobiae1symbiont
- Second interactor
- rhizobacteriaHyphomicrobialese1symbiont
- Outcome
- nodulese1
- Direction
- improvede1
- Value
- 2.58 foldse1
- Comparator
- respective untreated controle1
- Setting
- contaminated soile1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“growth of chickpea”
e1“combined application of rhizobia, rhizobacteria, iron oxide, and pressmud improved shoot fresh weight (87%), root fresh weight (47.9%), root length (47.9%), nodules plant−1 (2.58 folds), photosynthetic rate (63%) and grain yield (39%) of chickpea as compared to respective untreated control in contaminated soil”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined amendments improved chickpea photosynthetic rate by 63% compared with the untreated control in contaminated soil.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- combined application of rhizobia, rhizobacteria, iron oxide, and pressmude1
- Interactor
- rhizobiae1symbiont
- Second interactor
- rhizobacteriaHyphomicrobialese1symbiont
- Outcome
- photosynthetic ratee1
- Direction
- improvede1
- Value
- 63%e1
- Comparator
- respective untreated controle1
- Setting
- contaminated soile1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“growth of chickpea”
e1“combined application of rhizobia, rhizobacteria, iron oxide, and pressmud improved shoot fresh weight (87%), root fresh weight (47.9%), root length (47.9%), nodules plant−1 (2.58 folds), photosynthetic rate (63%) and grain yield (39%) of chickpea as compared to respective untreated control in contaminated soil”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined amendments increased chickpea grain yield by 39% compared with the untreated control in contaminated soil.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- combined application of rhizobia, rhizobacteria, iron oxide, and pressmude1
- Interactor
- rhizobiae1symbiont
- Second interactor
- rhizobacteriaHyphomicrobialese1symbiont
- Outcome
- grain yielde1
- Direction
- improvede1
- Value
- 39%e1
- Comparator
- respective untreated controle1
- Setting
- contaminated soile1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“growth of chickpea”
e1“combined application of rhizobia, rhizobacteria, iron oxide, and pressmud improved shoot fresh weight (87%), root fresh weight (47.9%), root length (47.9%), nodules plant−1 (2.58 folds), photosynthetic rate (63%) and grain yield (39%) of chickpea as compared to respective untreated control in contaminated soil”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined amendments decreased lead concentration in chickpea shoot by 75.8% compared with the respective control.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Organ / stage
- shoote2
- Treatment
- combined application of rhizobacteria, rhizobia, iron oxide, and pressmude2
- Interactor
- rhizobiae2symbiont
- Second interactor
- rhizobacteriaHyphomicrobialese2symbiont
- Outcome
- leade2
- Direction
- decreasee2
- Value
- 75.8e2
- Comparator
- respective controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“growth of chickpea”
e2“a significant decrease in the lead (75.8 and 68.1%) and cadmium (81 and 72%) concentrations due to the combined application of rhizobacteria, rhizobia, iron oxide, and pressmud was observed in shoot and root of chickpea than respective control”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined amendments decreased lead concentration in chickpea root by 68.1% compared with the respective control.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Organ / stage
- roote2
- Treatment
- combined application of rhizobacteria, rhizobia, iron oxide, and pressmude2
- Interactor
- rhizobiae2symbiont
- Second interactor
- rhizobacteriaHyphomicrobialese2symbiont
- Outcome
- leade2
- Direction
- decreasee2
- Value
- 68.1%e2
- Comparator
- respective controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“growth of chickpea”
e2“a significant decrease in the lead (75.8 and 68.1%) and cadmium (81 and 72%) concentrations due to the combined application of rhizobacteria, rhizobia, iron oxide, and pressmud was observed in shoot and root of chickpea than respective control”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined amendments decreased cadmium concentration in chickpea shoot by 81% compared with the respective control.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Organ / stage
- shoote2
- Treatment
- combined application of rhizobacteria, rhizobia, iron oxide, and pressmude2
- Interactor
- rhizobiae2symbiont
- Second interactor
- rhizobacteriaHyphomicrobialese2symbiont
- Outcome
- cadmiume2
- Direction
- decreasee2
- Value
- 81e2
- Comparator
- respective controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“growth of chickpea”
e2“a significant decrease in the lead (75.8 and 68.1%) and cadmium (81 and 72%) concentrations due to the combined application of rhizobacteria, rhizobia, iron oxide, and pressmud was observed in shoot and root of chickpea than respective control”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined amendments decreased cadmium concentration in chickpea root by 72% compared with the respective control.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Organ / stage
- roote2
- Treatment
- combined application of rhizobacteria, rhizobia, iron oxide, and pressmude2
- Interactor
- rhizobiae2symbiont
- Second interactor
- rhizobacteriaHyphomicrobialese2symbiont
- Outcome
- cadmiume2
- Direction
- decreasee2
- Value
- 72%e2
- Comparator
- respective controle2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“growth of chickpea”
e2“a significant decrease in the lead (75.8 and 68.1%) and cadmium (81 and 72%) concentrations due to the combined application of rhizobacteria, rhizobia, iron oxide, and pressmud was observed in shoot and root of chickpea than respective control”
The same questions in other papers
inoculation · physiology: photosynthesis · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →inoculation · nutrient: content · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
56 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
59 papers more in this group
See all 63 papers →inoculation · symbiosis · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
109 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
110 papers more in this group
See all 114 papers →inoculation · growth · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
134 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
148 papers more in this group
See all 152 papers →inoculation · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
199 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
213 papers more in this group
See all 217 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.