Abstract
Farm-made Beneficial Microorganisms (FBM), derived from forest litter, are an alternative to commercially available effective microorganisms. While initial field observations have been promising, scientific validation is required to confirm their effectiveness. A two-year study was conducted in Burkina Faso to evaluate the effects of FBM on soil microbial biomass and the response of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L.) and cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.). Six practices were assessed: (i) Control (no fertilization), (ii) Foliar spraying of FBM (FSW), (iii) Simple compost (SC), (iv) Simple compost with foliar FBM (SC + FSW), (v) FBM-enriched compost (EC), and (vi) Enriched compost with foliar spraying of FBM (EC + FSW). Crop growth and yield were recorded, and soil microbial biomass was measured using the phospholipid fatty acid (PLFA) method. The lowest total microbial biomass was found in the untreated and FSW plots in both the years. Among microbial groups, only gram-positive soil bacteria were unaffected by the treatments. The combination of compost with FBM significantly improved both crop growth and yield, with compost making the largest contribution. In conclusion, the study demonstrated that foliar application of FBM alone is less effective than when combined with compost.
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 6
Claim · model-written summary
Untreated and foliar FBM plots had the lowest soil microbial biomass in both years.
- Treatment
- untreated and FSW plotse0
- Outcome
- total microbial biomasse0
- Direction
- loweste0
- Qualifier
- both the yearse0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“The lowest total microbial biomass was found in the untreated and FSW plots in both the years.”
Claim · model-written summary
Gram-positive soil bacteria were unaffected by treatments.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“Among microbial groups, only gram-positive soil bacteria were unaffected by the treatments.”
Claim · model-written summary
Combining compost with FBM significantly improved crop growth.
SorghumNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The combination of compost with FBM significantly improved both crop growth and yield, with compost making the largest contribution.”
t0“sorghum and cowpea intercropping”
Claim · model-written summary
Combining compost with FBM significantly improved crop yield.
- Taxon
- cowpea
Vigna unguiculatat0 - Treatment
- combination of compost with FBMe0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- improvede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The combination of compost with FBM significantly improved both crop growth and yield, with compost making the largest contribution.”
t0“sorghum and cowpea intercropping”
Claim · model-written summary
Compost made the largest contribution to improved growth and yield.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The combination of compost with FBM significantly improved both crop growth and yield, with compost making the largest contribution.”
t0“sorghum and cowpea intercropping”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar FBM alone was less effective than FBM combined with compost.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatat0
- Treatment
- foliar application of FBM alonee0
- Outcome
- less effectivee0
- Direction
- less effectivee0
- Comparator
- combined with composte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“foliar application of FBM alone is less effective than when combined with compost.”
t0“sorghum and cowpea intercropping”
The same questions in other papers
inoculation · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results differ
98 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
112 papers more in this group
See all 116 papers →fertilization · growth · SorghumResults differ
103 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
116 papers more in this group
See all 120 papers →inoculation · growth · SorghumPositive and negative results
64 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
72 papers more in this group
See all 76 papers →fertilization · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results
274 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
288 papers more in this group
See all 292 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.