Abstract
Legume-cereal intercropping is well known in traditional dry land agriculture. Here, we tested whether finger millet, a shallow-rooted cereal, can profit from neighboring pigeon pea, a deep-rooted legume, in the presence of “biofertilization” with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) and plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR), under drought conditions. We conducted a greenhouse experiment using compartmented microcosms. Pigeon pea was grown in a deep compartment with access to a moist substrate layer at the bottom, whereas finger millet was grown in a neighboring shallow compartment, separated by 25-µm nylon mesh, without access to the moist substrate layer. In the presence of a common mycorrhizal network (CMN), with or without PGPR, a drought condition had little negative effect on the biomass production of the finger millet plant whereas in absence of biofertilization, finger millet biomass production was less than half compared to well-watered condition. Biofertilization strongly increased nitrogen and phosphorus uptake by both plants, both under well-watered and drought conditions. In the presence of AMF, both plants also acquired 15N and 33P, offered in a labeling compartment accessible to fungal hyphae but not to roots. Our results show that “biofertilization” with AMF alleviates the negative effects of drought condition on finger millet, indicating that the CMN connecting pigeon pea and finger millet exert clearly a positive influence in this simulated intercropping system.
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 5
Claim · model-written summary
Under drought, finger millet biomass showed little negative effect when a common mycorrhizal network was present, with or without PGPR.
- Taxon
- finger millet
Eleusine coracanae1 - Treatment
- drought conditione1
- Interactor
- common mycorrhizal networke1symbiont
- Second interactor
- PGPRe1symbiont
- Outcome
- biomass productione1
- Direction
- little negative effecte1
- Setting
- greenhouse experimente6
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“whether finger millet, a shallow-rooted cereal, can profit from neighboring pigeon pea, a deep-rooted legume”
e1“In the presence of a common mycorrhizal network (CMN), with or without PGPR, a drought condition had little negative effect on the biomass production of the finger millet plant”
e6“We conducted a greenhouse experiment using compartmented microcosms”
Claim · model-written summary
Without biofertilization, finger millet biomass under drought was less than half that under well-watered conditions.
- Taxon
- finger milletEleusine coracanae2
- Treatment
- absence of biofertilizatione2
- Outcome
- biomass productione2
- Direction
- less than halfe2
- Comparator
- well-watered conditione2
Not reportedValue
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“in absence of biofertilization, finger millet biomass production was less than half compared to well-watered condition”
Claim · model-written summary
Biofertilization strongly increased nitrogen and phosphorus uptake by finger millet and pigeon pea under both well-watered and drought conditions.
- Taxon
- finger milletEleusine coracanae0
- Treatment
- Biofertilizatione3
- Outcome
- nitrogen and phosphorus uptakee3
- Direction
- strongly increasede3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“whether finger millet, a shallow-rooted cereal, can profit from neighboring pigeon pea, a deep-rooted legume”
e3“Biofertilization strongly increased nitrogen and phosphorus uptake by both plants, both under well-watered and drought conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Biofertilization with AMF alleviates the negative effects of drought on finger millet.
- Taxon
- finger milletEleusine coracanae4
- Treatment
- with AMFe4
- Interactor
- AMFe4symbiont
- Outcome
- negative effects of drought conditione4
- Direction
- alleviatese4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“whether finger millet, a shallow-rooted cereal, can profit from neighboring pigeon pea, a deep-rooted legume”
e4“with AMF alleviates the negative effects of drought condition on finger millet”
Claim · model-written summary
In the presence of AMF, finger millet and pigeon pea acquired 15N and 33P from the labeling compartment.
- Taxon
- finger milletEleusine coracanae0
- Interactor
- AMFe5symbiont
- Outcome
- acquired 15N and 33Pe5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“whether finger millet, a shallow-rooted cereal, can profit from neighboring pigeon pea, a deep-rooted legume”
e5“In the presence of AMF, both plants also acquired 15N and 33P, offered in a labeling compartment accessible to fungal hyphae but not to roots”
The same questions in other papers
drought · yield · Eleusine coracana (finger millet)Positive and negative results
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 papers →inoculation · yield · Eleusine coracana (finger millet)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 →inoculation · nutrient: content · Eleusine coracana (finger millet)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 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.