Paper · 1999 · New Phytologist

Colonization of wheat para‐nodules by the N2‐fixing cyanobacterium Nostoc sp. strain 2S9B

M. GANTAR; J. ELHAI

7
claims
14
verbatim quotes
35
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

The treatment of wheat roots with 2,4‐dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4‐D) led to the formation of tumour‐like structures, para ‐nodules, which were readily colonized by cyanobacteria. The amount of cyanobacteria found on 2,4‐D treated roots was 3.6 times higher than that found on untreated roots. Cyanobacteria penetrated the para ‐ nodules by migrating in between loosely arranged cells that covered their surfaces or by penetrating the space at the junction of root and para ‐nodule. In plants treated with 2,4‐D and co‐cultivated with cyanobacteria in medium without combined nitrogen, the rate of acetylene reduction was three times that seen in untreated but colonized roots. Addition of 2,4‐D itself did not change the rate of acetylene reduction in free‐living culture of Nostoc sp. strain 2S9B. In plants treated with 2,4‐D and co‐cultivated with Nostoc sp. strain 2S9B in medium without combined nitrogen the nitrogen content of roots but not shoots was significantly increased.

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 7

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

2,4-D induced tumour-like para-nodules on wheat roots.

Organ / stage
rootse0
Treatment
2,4‐dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4‐D)e0
Outcome
formation of tumour‐like structures, para ‐nodulese0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The treatment of wheat roots with 2,4‐dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4‐D) led to the formation of tumour‐like structures, para ‐nodules”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–134 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cyanobacteria on treated wheat roots were 3.6 times higher than on untreated roots.

Treatment
2,4‐D treated rootse0
Interactor
cyanobacteriaCyanobacteriotae0symbiont
Outcome
amount of cyanobacteriae0
Direction
highere0
Value
3.6 timese0
Comparator
untreated rootse0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The amount of cyanobacteria found on 2,4‐D treated roots was 3.6 times higher than that found on untreated roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 183–295 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–21 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cyanobacteria penetrated wheat para-nodules between surface cells or at the root junction.

Interactor
CyanobacteriaCyanobacteriotae0symbiont
Outcome
Cyanobacteria penetrated the para ‐ nodulese0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Cyanobacteria penetrated the para ‐ nodules by migrating in between loosely arranged cells that covered their surfaces or by penetrating the space at the junction of root and para ‐nodule”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 297–484 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–21 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Acetylene reduction in 2,4-D-treated colonized wheat roots was three times untreated colonized roots without combined nitrogen.

Treatment
2,4‐De0
Interactor
cyanobacteriaCyanobacteriotae0symbiont
Outcome
rate of acetylene reductione0
Value
three timese0
Qualifier
medium without combined nitrogene0
Comparator
untreated but colonized rootse0

Not reportedDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In plants treated with 2,4‐D and co‐cultivated with cyanobacteria in medium without combined nitrogen, the rate of acetylene reduction was three times that seen in untreated but colonized roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 486–679 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–21 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

2,4-D did not change acetylene reduction in free-living Nostoc culture.

Treatment
2,4‐De0
Interactor
Nostoc sp. strain 2S9BNostoc sp.e0symbiont
Outcome
rate of acetylene reductione0
Direction
did not changee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Nostoc sp.
Nostoc sp. · Interactor · picture of its genus (no picture of exactly this name)Victor M. Vicente Selvas · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Addition of 2,4‐D itself did not change the rate of acetylene reduction in free‐living culture of Nostoc sp. strain 2S9B”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 681–801 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–21 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

2,4-D and Nostoc significantly increased nitrogen in wheat roots.

Treatment
2,4‐De0
Interactor
Nostoc sp. strain 2S9BNostoc sp.e0symbiont
Outcome
nitrogen content of rootse0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Nostoc sp.
Nostoc sp. · Interactor · picture of its genus (no picture of exactly this name)Victor M. Vicente Selvas · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In plants treated with 2,4‐D and co‐cultivated with Nostoc sp. strain 2S9B in medium without combined nitrogen the nitrogen content of roots but not shoots was significantly increased”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 803–986 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–21 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

2,4-D and Nostoc did not increase nitrogen in wheat shoots.

Treatment
co‐cultivated with Nostoc sp. strain 2S9Be1
Interactor
Nostoc sp. strain 2S9BNostoc sp.e1symbiont
Outcome
nitrogen content of roots but not shootse0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Nostoc sp.
Nostoc sp. · Interactor · picture of its genus (no picture of exactly this name)Victor M. Vicente Selvas · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the nitrogen content of roots but not shoots was significantly increased”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 914–986 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–21 · show in text ↑
e1

“co‐cultivated with Nostoc sp. strain 2S9B”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 836–877 · show in text ↑

Nostoc · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect

2 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 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.