Paper · 2004 · Canadian Journal of Plant Science

Endophytic rhizobia in barley, wheat and canola roots

N. Z. Lupwayi; G. W. Clayton; K. G. Hanson; et al.

8
claims
16
verbatim quotes
82
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Endophytic rhizobia have been shown to improve the nutrition of nonlegume crops. The objective of this work was to investigate the effects of field pea (Pisum sativum)-based crop rotations on endophytic rhizobia in roots of cereal and oilseed crops. Barley (Hordeum vulgare), wheat (Triticum aestivum) and canola (Brassica rapa) were each grown (a) following inoculated peas, (b) following uninoculated peas or (c) in monoculture. At flag-leaf or flowering growth stage, populations of endophytic rhizobia were usually in the order: crop following uninoculated peas (up to 7244 cells g -1 root DM) > crop following inoculated peas (up to 1660 cells g -1 root DM) > crop grown in monoculture (< 10 cells g -1 root DM). At one of three sites, there were significant positive correlations between endophytic rhizobia and crop N and yield. Populations of rhizobia in bulk soil, rhizosphere, or rhizoplane of nonlegume roots were greater where nonlegume crops were preceded by peas (inoculated or uninoculated) than where they were grown in monoculture. Significant positive correlations between populations of these rhizobia outside roots and crop N or yields were observed at each site. Key words: Crop rotation, inoculation, nitrogen fixation, plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR), rhizosphere

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Endophytic rhizobia were most abundant after uninoculated peas, then inoculated peas, and least in monoculture.

Treatment
crop following uninoculated pease0
Interactor
rhizobiae0symbiont
Outcome
populations of endophytic rhizobiae0
Direction
>e0
Value
up to 7244 cells g -1 root DMe0
Comparator
crop grown in monoculturee0

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“populations of endophytic rhizobia were usually in the order: crop following uninoculated peas (up to 7244 cells g -1 root DM) > crop following inoculated peas (up to 1660 cells g -1 root DM) > crop grown in monoculture (< 10 cells g -1 root DM).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 471–717 · show in text ↑
t0

“barley, wheat and canola”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 23–47 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Endophytic rhizobia after inoculated peas reached 1660 cells per root dry mass.

Interactor
rhizobiat0symbiont
Outcome
crop following inoculated pease0
Value
up to 1660 cells g -1 root DMe0

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“crop following inoculated peas (up to 1660 cells g -1 root DM)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 600–662 · show in text ↑
t0

“Endophytic rhizobia in barley, wheat and canola roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–53 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Endophytic rhizobia in monoculture were below 10 cells per root dry mass.

Interactor
rhizobiat0symbiont
Outcome
crop grown in monoculturee0
Value
< 10 cells g -1 root DMe0

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“crop grown in monoculture (< 10 cells g -1 root DM)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 665–716 · show in text ↑
t0

“Endophytic rhizobia in barley, wheat and canola roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–53 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Endophytic rhizobia correlated positively with crop nitrogen at one of three sites.

Interactor
rhizobiae0symbiont
Outcome
crop Ne0
Direction
positivee0
Qualifier
one of three sitese0

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“At one of three sites, there were significant positive correlations between endophytic rhizobia and crop N and yield.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 718–835 · show in text ↑
t0

“Endophytic rhizobia in barley, wheat and canola roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–53 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Endophytic rhizobia correlated positively with crop yield at one of three sites.

Interactor
rhizobiae0symbiont
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
positivee0
Qualifier
one of three sitese0

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“At one of three sites, there were significant positive correlations between endophytic rhizobia and crop N and yield.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 718–835 · show in text ↑
t0

“Endophytic rhizobia in barley, wheat and canola roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–53 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Preceding peas increased rhizobia in bulk soil, rhizosphere and rhizoplane compared with monoculture.

Treatment
preceded by peas (inoculated or uninoculated)e0
Interactor
rhizobiae0symbiont
Outcome
Populations of rhizobia in bulk soil, rhizosphere, or rhizoplane of nonlegume rootse0
Direction
greatere0
Comparator
monoculturee0

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Populations of rhizobia in bulk soil, rhizosphere, or rhizoplane of nonlegume roots were greater where nonlegume crops were preceded by peas (inoculated or uninoculated) than where they were grown in monoculture.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 836–1048 · show in text ↑
t0

“Endophytic rhizobia in barley, wheat and canola roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–53 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Rhizobia outside roots correlated positively with crop nitrogen at every site.

Interactor
rhizobiae0symbiont
Outcome
crop Ne0
Direction
positivee0

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Significant positive correlations between populations of these rhizobia outside roots and crop N or yields were observed at each site.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1049–1183 · show in text ↑
t0

“Endophytic rhizobia in barley, wheat and canola roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–53 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Rhizobia outside roots correlated positively with crop yield at every site.

Interactor
rhizobiae0symbiont
Outcome
yieldse0
Direction
positivee0

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Significant positive correlations between populations of these rhizobia outside roots and crop N or yields were observed at each site.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1049–1183 · show in text ↑
t0

“Endophytic rhizobia in barley, wheat and canola roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–53 · show in text ↑

inoculation · pest · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results

7 papers: 2 positive, 5 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
    Inoculation increased rape seed infestation by the fungus.

    GRAY LEAF SPOT OF RAPE IN MANITOBA · 1959 · compared with uninoculated plants

    Opposite direction

  2. negative
  3. negative

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 papers →

inoculation · pest · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results

9 papers: 8 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 papers →

inoculation · pest · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

24 papers: 22 positive, 2 negative or no effect

21 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. 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.