Paper · 2014 · Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo

Inoculation of sugarcane with diazotrophic bacteria

Nivaldo Schultz; Jeferson Alves da Silva; Jailson Silva Sousa; et al.

3
claims
5
verbatim quotes
83
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

The sugarcane industry, a strategic crop in Brazil, requires technological improvements in production efficiency to increase the crop energy balance. Among the various currently studied alternatives, inoculation with diazotrophic bacteria proved to be a technology with great potential. In this context, the efficiency of a mixture of bacterial inoculant was evaluated with regard to the agronomic performance and N nutrition of sugarcane. The experiment was carried out on an experimental field of Embrapa Agrobiologia, in Seropédica, Rio de Janeiro, using a randomized block, 2 × 3 factorial design (two varieties and three treatments) with four replications, totaling 24 plots. The varieties RB867515 and RB72454 were tested in treatments consisting of: inoculation with diazotrophic bacteria, N-fertilized control with 120 kg ha-1 N and absolute control (no inoculation and no N fertilizer). The inoculum was composed of five strains of five diazotrophic species. The yield, dry matter accumulation, total N in the shoot dry matter and the contribution of N by biological fixation were evaluated, using the natural 15N abundance in non-inoculated sugarcane as reference. The bacterial inoculant increased the stalk yield of variety RB72454 similarly to fertilization with 120 kg ha-1 N in the harvests of plant-cane and first ratoon crops, however the contribution of biological N fixation was unchanged by inoculation, indicating that the benefits of the inoculant in sugarcane may have resulted from plant growth promotion.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 3

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bacterial inoculation increased RB72454 stalk yield similarly to nitrogen fertilization in plant-cane and first ratoon harvests.

Taxon
sugarcanet0
Material
RB72454e0
Organ / stage
plant-cane and first ratoon cropse0
Treatment
bacterial inoculante0
Interactor
diazotrophic bacteriat0symbiont
Outcome
stalk yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
fertilization with 120 kg ha-1 Ne0

Verbatim

e0

“The bacterial inoculant increased the stalk yield of variety RB72454 similarly to fertilization with 120 kg ha-1 N in the harvests of plant-cane and first ratoon crops”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1175–1342 · show in text ↑
t0

“sugarcane with diazotrophic bacteria”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 15–51 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Inoculation left biological nitrogen fixation unchanged.

Taxon
sugarcanet0
Treatment
inoculatione0
Interactor
diazotrophic bacteriat0symbiont
Outcome
contribution of biological N fixatione0
Direction
unchangede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“the contribution of biological N fixation was unchanged by inoculation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1352–1422 · show in text ↑
t0

“sugarcane with diazotrophic bacteria”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 15–51 · show in text ↑
Mechanismhypothesisoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Growth promotion may explain the inoculant benefit.

Taxon
sugarcanee0
Outcome
benefits of the inoculante0
Qualifier
plant growth promotione0

Verbatim

e0

“the benefits of the inoculant in sugarcane may have resulted from plant growth promotion”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1440–1528 · show in text ↑

inoculation · symbiosis · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 1 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. no effect
See all 4 papers →

inoculation · yield · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results

50 papers: 47 positive, 3 negative or no effect

46 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

46 papers more in this group

See all 50 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.