Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Bacillus inoculation increased seed germination relative to uninoculated control.

A claim from Molecular diversity and functional variability of environmental isolates of Bacillus species · 2014

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bacillus inoculation increased seed germination relative to uninoculated control.

Treatment
Bacillus (twelve isolates) inoculatede0
Interactor
Bacilluse0symbiont
Outcome
seed germinatione0
Direction
moree0
Comparator
uninoculated control treatmente0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingValueQualifier

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The in-vitro seed germination assay showed that Bacillus (twelve isolates) inoculated seeds showed more seed germination and seedling vigor rate as compared to uninoculated control treatment.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 740–931
e1

“apple rhizosphere”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 91–108

Title

Molecular diversity and functional variability of environmental isolates of Bacillus species

Ajay Kumar; Ajay Kumar; Amit Kumar; et al. SpringerPlus 2014. doi:10.1186/2193-1801-3-312

Other claims from this paper (14)

Record rev-059b17e7c9cd22819bd09d8c18bc2ec0e6e15ab23ef421614bfac48edf32ef78 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 9 in the model’s answer

inoculation · growth · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results

42 papers: 31 positive, 11 negative or no effect

30 papers in the same direction as this claim · 11 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
    Many infected seedlings had significantly reduced vigour.

    The Effect of Some Latent Virus Infections on the Growth and Cropping of Apples · 1963

    Opposite direction

  2. negative
    All virus inoculations reduced apple growth, while precocity was not always affected.

    Virus, Fertilizer and Rootstock Effects on the Growth and Precocity of Young Apple Trees · 1970

    Opposite direction

  3. negative
    Pythium inoculation produced genotype-specific shoot and root biomass reductions.

    A Phenotyping Protocol for Detailed Evaluation of Apple Root Resistance Responses Utilizing Tissue Culture Micropropagated Apple Plants · 2018 · compared with mock-inoculated

    Opposite direction

  4. negative
    Pratylenchus penetrans inoculation suppressed shoot growth in apple rootstocks.

    Effect of Soil Water Potential on Growth of Apple Trees Infected with Pratylenchus penetrans. · 1979 · compared with uninoculated

    Opposite direction

  5. no effect
    Biocontrol inoculation did not improve growth of apple and sweet cherry seedlings.

    Non-fumigant alternative soil management practices for mitigating replant disease of fruit trees : mechanisms contributing to Pratylenchus penetrans suppression · 2018

    Opposite direction

  6. no effect
    Grass and inoculation showed no apparent interaction for apple growth measurements except root lateral number.

    Effect of a Grass on Growth and Mycorrhization of Potted Apple Trees · 1985

    Opposite direction

  7. negative
    Apple seedlings grew less in steamed soil inoculated with the isolate.

    Investigations on the cause of soil sickness in fruit trees VII. An actinomycete isolated from rootlets of apple seedlings, the probable cause of specific apple replant disease · 2017

    Opposite direction

  8. no effect
    AT inoculation did not enhance Mark root mass proliferation.

    Crown Gall in Apple Rootstocks: Inoculation Above and Below Soil and Relationship to Root Mass Proliferation · 1998

    Opposite direction

33 papers more in this group

See all 42 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.