Paper · 2008 · Organic Eprints (International Centre for Research in Organic Food Systems, and Research Institute of Organic Agriculture)

Natural biofertilizers for organic agriculture: productivity and nutrient uptake of Medicago sativa inoculated with different arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi.

Luciano Avio; Elisa Pellegrino; Enrico Bonari; et al.

2
claims
4
verbatim quotes
2
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Arbuscular mycorrhizas are symbiotic associations that play a key role in plant nutrition by absorbing and translocating mineral nutrients from soil to host plants. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi, which are considered natural biofertilizers, show diverse levels of performance, depending on the ability of different isolates to promote plant growth and health. Here we investigated the performance of geographically different isolates of two fungal species, Glomus mosseae and G. intraradices, by assessing plant growth responses and P and N uptake in Medicago sativa, in order to select the most efficient fungi for this host plant. The four selected Glomus isolates significantly increased shoot dry weights and shoot N and P content of mycorrhizal plants, but their performances were different. In particular, G. intraradices IMA6 significantly differed from G. mosseae IMA1 in inducing larger growth responses relative to all parameters measured.

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 2

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Four selected Glomus isolates significantly increased shoot dry weight and shoot N and P content of mycorrhizal Medicago sativa.

Taxon
Medicago sativaMedicago sativat0
Treatment
Glomus isolatese0
Interactor
Glomus isolatese0symbiont
Outcome
shoot dry weights and shoot N and P contente0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Medicago sativa
Medicago sativa · TaxonDrepanostoma · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

t0

“nutrient uptake of Medicago sativa inoculated with different arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 65–154 · show in text ↑
e0

“The four selected Glomus isolates significantly increased shoot dry weights and shoot N and P content of mycorrhizal plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 632–755 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Glomus intraradices IMA6 induced significantly larger growth responses in Medicago sativa than Glomus mosseae IMA1.

Taxon
Medicago sativaMedicago sativat0
Treatment
G. intraradices IMA6e1
Interactor
G. intraradices IMA6Rhizophagus intraradicese1symbiont
Second interactor
G. mosseae IMA1Funneliformis mosseaee1symbiont
Outcome
growth responsese1
Direction
largere1
Comparator
G. mosseae IMA1e1

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

Medicago sativa
Medicago sativa · TaxonDrepanostoma · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗
Funneliformis mosseae
Funneliformis mosseae · Second interactor · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categorySamson90 · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“nutrient uptake of Medicago sativa inoculated with different arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 65–154 · show in text ↑
e1

“G. intraradices IMA6 significantly differed from G. mosseae IMA1 in inducing larger growth responses relative to all parameters measured”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 811–947 · show in text ↑

Rhizophagus intraradices · growth · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
See all 2 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.