Abstract
Abstract Bare‐root‐dip treatment or soil drench with Pseudomonas aeruginosa strain IE‐6S + and P. fluorescens CHA0 significantly suppressed Rhizoctonia solani and the bacterial efficacy was more pronounced in the presence of low inoculum level of the fungus. The two bacteria afforded better protection to tomato roots against R. solani during early growth stages of the roots. There was a significant difference in the level of protection between root‐dip treatment and soil drench with both the bacterial inoculants. The ability of the antagonistic bacteria to induce systemic resistance against R. solani was demonstrated in split‐root trials, where the root system of a single tomato plant was spatially divided into two separate parts. Root infection caused by R. solani was substantially lower in both bacterized and non‐bacterized halves. However, the level of protection was greater in the bacteria‐treated half compared with the bacteria‐free half. Viable and dead cells of the two bacteriashowed similar activity against R. solani , while the culture filtrate of P. fluorescens induced systemic resistance of a higher degree towards R. solani compared with P.aeruginosa . In general, populations of the two bacteria in the rhizosphere declined by tenfold at each harvest and colonization of P. aeruginosa was slightly greater compared with that by P. fluorescens . Initially (day 0), both the bacterial inoculants had almost a similar pattern of rhizosphere colonization, whereasat first (day 7) and second harvest (day 14) P.aeruginosa colonized more heavily than P. fluorescens . At final harvest (day 21), the two bacteria did not differ significantly in their colonization pattern. Whereas P.fluorescens specifically colonized the rhizosphere, P.aeruginosa also colonized the inner root tissues of tomato.
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 14
Claim · model-written summary
Root dip or soil drench with either bacterium significantly suppressed R. solani.
- Taxon
- tomato
Solanum lycopersicume1 - Treatment
- Bare‐root‐dip treatment or soil drench with Pseudomonas aeruginosa strain IE‐6S + and P. fluorescens CHA0e0
- Interactor
- Rhizoctonia solani
Rhizoctonia solanie0pathogen - Second interactor
- Pseudomonas aeruginosa strain IE‐6S +
Pseudomonas aeruginosae0biocontrol_agent - Outcome
- Rhizoctonia solanie0
- Direction
- suppressede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Bare‐root‐dip treatment or soil drench with Pseudomonas aeruginosa strain IE‐6S + and P. fluorescens CHA0 significantly suppressed Rhizoctonia solani”
e1“tomato roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Protection was more pronounced at a low fungal inoculum level.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- low inoculum level of the funguse0
- Outcome
- bacterial efficacye0
- Direction
- more pronouncede0
- Qualifier
- low inoculum level of the funguse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the bacterial efficacy was more pronounced in the presence of low inoculum level of the fungus”
e1“tomato roots”
Claim · model-written summary
The bacteria protected tomato roots better during early root growth.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Organ / stage
- early growth stages of the rootse0
- Interactor
- R. solaniRhizoctonia solanie0pathogen
- Outcome
- protection to tomato roots against R. solanie0
- Direction
- bettere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The two bacteria afforded better protection to tomato roots against R. solani during early growth stages of the roots.”
Claim · model-written summary
Root dip and soil drench differed significantly in protection.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- root‐dip treatmente0
- Outcome
- level of protectione0
- Comparator
- soil drenche0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There was a significant difference in the level of protection between root‐dip treatment and soil drench with both the bacterial inoculants.”
e1“tomato roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Split root trials demonstrated systemic resistance in tomato.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Interactor
- R. solaniRhizoctonia solanie0pathogen
- Outcome
- systemic resistance against R. solanie0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The ability of the antagonistic bacteria to induce systemic resistance against R. solani was demonstrated in split‐root trials, where the root system of a single tomato plant was spatially divided into two separate parts.”
Claim · model-written summary
Root infection was substantially lower in bacterized and non bacterized halves.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- bacterized and non‐bacterized halvese0
- Interactor
- R. solaniRhizoctonia solanie0pathogen
- Outcome
- Root infection caused by R. solanie0
- Direction
- lowere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Root infection caused by R. solani was substantially lower in both bacterized and non‐bacterized halves.”
e1“tomato plant”
Claim · model-written summary
Protection was greater in the treated root half than the untreated half.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- bacteria‐treated halfe0
- Outcome
- level of protectione0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Comparator
- bacteria‐free halfe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the level of protection was greater in the bacteria‐treated half compared with the bacteria‐free half.”
e1“tomato plant”
Claim · model-written summary
Viable and dead bacterial cells showed similar activity against R. solani.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- Viablee0
- Interactor
- R. solaniRhizoctonia solanie0pathogen
- Outcome
- activity against R. solanie0
- Direction
- similare0
- Comparator
- dead cellse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Viable and dead cells of the two bacteriashowed similar activity against R. solani”
e1“tomato plant”
Claim · model-written summary
P. fluorescens culture filtrate induced stronger systemic resistance than P. aeruginosa filtrate.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- culture filtrate of P. fluorescense0
- Interactor
- R. solaniRhizoctonia solanie0pathogen
- Second interactor
- P. fluorescens
.JPG?width=60)
Pseudomonas fluorescense0biocontrol_agent - Outcome
- systemic resistancee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- P.aeruginosae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.JPG?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“the culture filtrate of P. fluorescens induced systemic resistance of a higher degree towards R. solani compared with P.aeruginosa”
e1“tomato plant”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizosphere populations of both bacteria declined tenfold at each harvest.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Outcome
- populations of the two bacteria in the rhizospheree0
- Direction
- declinede0
- Value
- tenfolde0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“populations of the two bacteria in the rhizosphere declined by tenfold at each harvest”
e1“inner root tissues of tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
P. aeruginosa colonized more heavily than P. fluorescens on days 7 and 14.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Outcome
- P.aeruginosa colonizede0
- Direction
- more heavilye0
- Comparator
- P. fluorescense0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“at first (day 7) and second harvest (day 14) P.aeruginosa colonized more heavily than P. fluorescens”
e1“inner root tissues of tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
The bacteria did not differ significantly in colonization at day 21.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Outcome
- colonization patterne0
- Direction
- did not differe0
- Qualifier
- day 21e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“At final harvest (day 21), the two bacteria did not differ significantly in their colonization pattern.”
e1“inner root tissues of tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
P. fluorescens colonized the rhizosphere specifically.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Interactor
- P.fluorescensPseudomonas fluorescense0biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- colonized the rhizospheree0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“P.fluorescens specifically colonized the rhizosphere”
e1“inner root tissues of tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
P. aeruginosa also colonized internal tomato root tissues.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Interactor
- P.aeruginosaPseudomonas aeruginosae0biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- colonized the inner root tissuese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“P.aeruginosa also colonized the inner root tissues of tomato”
The same questions in other papers
Pseudomonas aeruginosa · Rhizoctonia solani · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
pathogen product · Rhizoctonia solani · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
application · Rhizoctonia solani · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
inoculation · control · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
21 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- positive
20 papers more in this group
See all 24 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.