Abstract
We study the effect of plant growth–promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) along with Mesorhizobium sp. BHURC02 on nodulation, plant growth, yield, and nutrient content of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) under field conditions. A similar study has been conducted for nodulation and plant growth of chickpea in pot experiment under glasshouse conditions. The treatment combination of Mesorhizobium sp. BHURC02 and Pseudomonas fluorescens BHUPSB06 statistically significantly increased nodule number plant–1, dry weight of nodule plant–1, and root and shoot dry weights plant–1 over the control under a glasshouse experiment. The maximum significant increase in nodule number, dry matter, and nutrient content were recorded in co-inoculation of Mesorhizobium sp. BHURC02 and P. fluorescens BHUPSB06 followed by co-inoculation of Mesorhizobium sp., Azotobacter chroococcum, and Bacillus megatrium BHUPSB14 over uninoculated control in a 2-year field study. Hence, co-inoculation of Mesorhizobium sp. and P. fluorescens may be effective indigenous PGPR for chickpea production.
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 5
Claim · model-written summary
Mesorhizobium and Pseudomonas co-inoculation significantly increased nodule number and dry weight.
- Taxon
- chickpea
Cicer arietinumt0 - Treatment
- Mesorhizobium sp. BHURC02 and Pseudomonas fluorescens BHUPSB06e0
- Interactor
- Mesorhizobium sp. BHURC02
.jpg?width=60)
Mesorhizobium sp. BHURC02e0symbiont - Second interactor
- Pseudomonas fluorescens BHUPSB06
.JPG?width=60)
Pseudomonas fluorescense0symbiont - Outcome
- nodule number plant–1, dry weight of nodule plant–1e0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- controle0
- Setting
- glasshouse experimente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
.JPG?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“The treatment combination of Mesorhizobium sp. BHURC02 and Pseudomonas fluorescens BHUPSB06 statistically significantly increased nodule number plant–1, dry weight of nodule plant–1, and root and shoot dry weights plant–1 over the control under a glasshouse experiment”
t0“Chickpea”
Claim · model-written summary
The same combination significantly increased root and shoot dry weights in glasshouse pots.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- Mesorhizobium sp. BHURC02 and Pseudomonas fluorescens BHUPSB06e0
- Interactor
- Mesorhizobium sp. BHURC02Mesorhizobium sp. BHURC02e0symbiont
- Second interactor
- Pseudomonas fluorescens BHUPSB06Pseudomonas fluorescense0symbiont
- Outcome
- root and shoot dry weights plant–1e0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- controle0
- Setting
- glasshouse experimente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The treatment combination of Mesorhizobium sp. BHURC02 and Pseudomonas fluorescens BHUPSB06 statistically significantly increased nodule number plant–1, dry weight of nodule plant–1, and root and shoot dry weights plant–1 over the control under a glasshouse experiment”
t0“Chickpea”
Claim · model-written summary
Mesorhizobium plus P. fluorescens produced maximum significant increases in field nodule number, dry matter and nutrient content over controls.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- co-inoculation of Mesorhizobium sp. BHURC02 and P. fluorescens BHUPSB06e0
- Interactor
- Mesorhizobium sp. BHURC02Mesorhizobium sp. BHURC02e0symbiont
- Second interactor
- P. fluorescens BHUPSB06Pseudomonas fluorescense0symbiont
- Outcome
- nodule number, dry matter, and nutrient contente0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Comparator
- uninoculated controle0
- Setting
- field studye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The maximum significant increase in nodule number, dry matter, and nutrient content were recorded in co-inoculation of Mesorhizobium sp. BHURC02 and P. fluorescens BHUPSB06 followed by co-inoculation of Mesorhizobium sp., Azotobacter chroococcum, and Bacillus megatrium BHUPSB14 over uninoculated control in a 2-year field study”
t0“Chickpea”
Claim · model-written summary
Mesorhizobium, Azotobacter and Bacillus co-inoculation ranked second for field nodules, dry matter and nutrient content.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- co-inoculation of Mesorhizobium sp., Azotobacter chroococcum, and Bacillus megatrium BHUPSB14e0
- Interactor
- Mesorhizobium sp.Mesorhizobiume0symbiont
- Second interactor
- Azotobacter chroococcumAzotobacter chroococcume0symbiont
- Outcome
- followed bye0
- Direction
- followed bye0
- Qualifier
- Bacillus megatrium BHUPSB14e0
- Comparator
- uninoculated controle0
- Setting
- field studye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“followed by co-inoculation of Mesorhizobium sp., Azotobacter chroococcum, and Bacillus megatrium BHUPSB14 over uninoculated control in a 2-year field study”
t0“Chickpea”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors suggest Mesorhizobium and P. fluorescens co-inoculation for chickpea production.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Interactor
- Mesorhizobium sp.Mesorhizobiume0symbiont
- Second interactor
- P. fluorescensPseudomonas fluorescense0symbiont
- Outcome
- co-inoculation of Mesorhizobium sp. and P. fluorescense0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“co-inoculation of Mesorhizobium sp. and P. fluorescens may be effective indigenous PGPR for chickpea production”
The same questions in other papers
Pseudomonas fluorescens · symbiosis · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →Mesorhizobium · growth · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree
17 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →Pseudomonas fluorescens · growth · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree
18 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
15 papers more in this group
See all 19 papers →Mesorhizobium · symbiosis · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree
21 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
18 papers more in this group
See all 22 papers →inoculation · symbiosis · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
109 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
110 papers more in this group
See all 114 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.