Abstract
The association of maize with the N 2 ‐fixing bacteria Azospirillum brasilense was examined under controlled environment and field conditions to evaluate possible benefits for agriculture in temperate regions. Koch's postulates were established by inoculating, reisolating, and reinoculating sterile Zea mays L. plants. Under such artificial conditions, although nitrogenase activity was observed, there was no benefit for the plant. In greenhouse experiments inoculation o| Z. mays with Azospirillum showed slight increases in plant N and dry weight. Four field experiments were carried out with numerous Z. mays lines, and other grass species. In two experiments inoculation with A. brasilense showed increases in plant weight and percent N and the mean difference due to inoculation corresponded to 14 and 15 kg N/ha. Inoculation with Azospirillum produced no consistant beneficial effect, in either yield or increased plant N content. Our data suggest that an increased understanding of plant root‐rhizosphere N 2 ‐fixing bacterial interactions is required before any consistant, significant beneficial N 2 ‐fixing association can be developed.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Artificial inoculation produced nitrogenase activity without plant benefit.
Not reportedTaxonTreatmentComparator
Verbatim
e0“Under such artificial conditions, although nitrogenase activity was observed, there was no benefit for the plant”
Claim · model-written summary
Greenhouse inoculation slightly increased maize plant nitrogen.
- Treatment
- inoculation o| Z. mays with Azospirillume0
- Interactor
- Azospirillum
Azospirillume0symbiont - Outcome
- plant Ne0
- Direction
- slight increasese0
- Setting
- greenhousee0
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In greenhouse experiments inoculation o| Z. mays with Azospirillum showed slight increases in plant N and dry weight”
Claim · model-written summary
Greenhouse inoculation slightly increased maize dry weight.
- Treatment
- inoculation o| Z. mays with Azospirillume0
- Interactor
- AzospirillumAzospirillume0symbiont
- Outcome
- dry weighte0
- Direction
- slight increasese0
- Setting
- greenhousee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In greenhouse experiments inoculation o| Z. mays with Azospirillum showed slight increases in plant N and dry weight”
Claim · model-written summary
In two field experiments inoculation increased plant weight.
- Treatment
- inoculation with A. brasilensee0
- Interactor
- A. brasilense
Azospirillum brasilensee0symbiont - Outcome
- plant weighte0
- Direction
- increasese0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In two experiments inoculation with A. brasilense showed increases in plant weight and percent N and the mean difference due to inoculation corresponded to 14 and 15 kg N/ha”
Claim · model-written summary
In two field experiments inoculation increased plant percent nitrogen, corresponding to 14 and 15 kg N/ha.
- Treatment
- inoculation with A. brasilensee0
- Interactor
- A. brasilenseAzospirillum brasilensee0symbiont
- Outcome
- percent Ne0
- Direction
- increasese0
- Value
- 14 and 15 kg N/hae0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In two experiments inoculation with A. brasilense showed increases in plant weight and percent N and the mean difference due to inoculation corresponded to 14 and 15 kg N/ha”
Claim · model-written summary
Azospirillum inoculation had no consistent benefit for yield.
- Treatment
- Inoculation with Azospirillume0
- Interactor
- AzospirillumAzospirillume0symbiont
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- no consistant beneficial effecte0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Inoculation with Azospirillum produced no consistant beneficial effect, in either yield or increased plant N content”
Claim · model-written summary
Azospirillum inoculation had no consistent benefit for plant nitrogen content.
- Treatment
- Inoculation with Azospirillume0
- Interactor
- AzospirillumAzospirillume0symbiont
- Outcome
- plant N contente0
- Direction
- no consistant beneficial effecte0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Inoculation with Azospirillum produced no consistant beneficial effect, in either yield or increased plant N content”
Claim · model-written summary
Authors recommend more understanding of root-rhizosphere fixing interactions before developing a consistent beneficial association.
- Outcome
- increased understanding of plant root‐rhizosphere N 2 ‐fixing bacterial interactionse0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“an increased understanding of plant root‐rhizosphere N 2 ‐fixing bacterial interactions is required before any consistant, significant beneficial N 2 ‐fixing association can be developed”
The same questions in other papers
Azospirillum brasilense · growth · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
40 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
45 papers more in this group
See all 49 papers →Azospirillum · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 47 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
48 papers more in this group
See all 52 papers →Azospirillum · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
12 papers more in this group
See all 16 papers →Azospirillum · growth · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
27 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
24 papers more in this group
See all 28 papers →inoculation · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
17 papers in the same direction as this paper · 288 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
302 papers more in this group
See all 306 papers →inoculation · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
58 papers in the same direction as this paper · 479 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
534 papers more in this group
See all 538 papers →inoculation · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
634 papers in the same direction as this paper · 61 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
695 papers more in this group
See all 699 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.