Paper · 2019 · Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology

Endophytic Bacteria Improve Root Traits, Biomass and Yield of Helianthus tuberosus L. under Normal and Deficit Water Conditi

Junthima Namwongsa; Sanun Jogloy; Nimitr Vorasoot; et al.

13
claims
24
verbatim quotes
56
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Drought is more concerned to be a huge problem for agriculture as it affects plant growth and yield. Endophytic bacteria act as plant growth promoting bacteria that have roles for improving plant growth under stress conditions. The properties of four strains of endophytic bacteria were determined under water deficit medium with 20% polyethylene glycol. Bacillus aquimaris strain 3.13 showed high 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate (ACC) deaminase production; Micrococcus luteus strain 4.43 produced indole acetic acid (IAA). Exopolysaccharide production was high in Bacillus methylotrophicus strain 5.18 while Bacillus sp. strain 5.2 did not show major properties for drought response. Inoculation of endophytic bacteria into plants, strain 3.13 and 4.43 increased height, shoot and root weight, root length, root diameter, root volume, root area and root surface of Jerusalem artichoke grown under water limitation, clearly shown in water supply at 1/3 of available water. These increases were caused by bacteria ACC deaminase and IAA production; moreover, strain 4.43 boosted leaf area and chlorophyll levels, leading to increased photosynthesis under drought at 60 days of planting. The harvest index was high in the treatment with strain 4.43 and 3.13 under 1/3 of available water, promoting tuber numbers and tuber weight. Inulin content was unchanged in the control between well-watered and drought conditions. In comparison, inulin levels were higher in the endophytic bacteria treatment under both conditions, although yields dipped under drought. Thus, the endophytic bacteria promoted in plant growth and yield under drought; they had outstanding function in the enhancement of inulin content under wellwatered condition.

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 13

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bacillus aquimaris strain 3.13 had high ACC deaminase production.

Taxon
Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
Interactor
Bacillus aquimaris strain 3.13Rossellomorea aquimarise0symbiont
Outcome
1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate (ACC) deaminase productione0
Direction
highe0

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

Helianthus tuberosus
Helianthus tuberosus · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Bacillus aquimaris strain 3.13 showed high 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate (ACC) deaminase production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 355–458 · show in text ↑
t0

“Helianthus tuberosus L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–85 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Micrococcus luteus strain 4.43 produced IAA.

Taxon
Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
Interactor
Micrococcus luteus strain 4.43Micrococcus luteuse0symbiont
Outcome
indole acetic acid (IAA)e0

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

Helianthus tuberosus
Helianthus tuberosus · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Micrococcus luteus
Micrococcus luteus · InteractorAlonnardi · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Micrococcus luteus strain 4.43 produced indole acetic acid (IAA).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 460–525 · show in text ↑
t0

“Helianthus tuberosus L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–85 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bacillus methylotrophicus strain 5.18 had high exopolysaccharide production.

Taxon
Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
Interactor
Bacillus methylotrophicus strain 5.18Bacillus velezensise0symbiont
Outcome
Exopolysaccharide productione0
Direction
highe0

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

Helianthus tuberosus
Helianthus tuberosus · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Bacillus velezensis
Bacillus velezensis · InteractorMarinka Pavlova · CC BY 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Exopolysaccharide production was high in Bacillus methylotrophicus strain 5.18”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 526–604 · show in text ↑
t0

“Helianthus tuberosus L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–85 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bacillus sp. strain 5.2 lacked major drought response properties.

Taxon
Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
Interactor
Bacillus sp. strain 5.2e0symbiont
Outcome
major properties for drought responsee0

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

Helianthus tuberosus
Helianthus tuberosus · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Bacillus sp. strain 5.2 did not show major properties for drought response.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 611–686 · show in text ↑
t0

“Helianthus tuberosus L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–85 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Strain 3.13 increased height, shoot and root weight, and root dimensions under severe water limitation.

Taxon
Jerusalem artichokeHelianthus tuberosuse0
Treatment
strain 3.13e0
Interactor
strain 3.13e0symbiont
Outcome
height, shoot and root weighte0
Direction
increasede0
Qualifier
water supply at 1/3 of available watere0

Not reportedComparator

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

Helianthus tuberosus
Helianthus tuberosus · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“strain 3.13 and 4.43 increased height, shoot and root weight, root length, root diameter, root volume, root area and root surface of Jerusalem artichoke grown under water limitation, clearly shown in water supply at 1/3 of available water.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 735–974 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Strain 4.43 increased height, shoot and root weight, and root dimensions under severe water limitation.

Taxon
Jerusalem artichokeHelianthus tuberosuse0
Treatment
4.43e0
Interactor
4.43e0symbiont
Outcome
height, shoot and root weighte0
Direction
increasede0
Qualifier
water supply at 1/3 of available watere0

Not reportedComparator

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

Helianthus tuberosus
Helianthus tuberosus · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“strain 3.13 and 4.43 increased height, shoot and root weight, root length, root diameter, root volume, root area and root surface of Jerusalem artichoke grown under water limitation, clearly shown in water supply at 1/3 of available water.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 735–974 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Strain 4.43 increased leaf area and chlorophyll levels under drought.

Taxon
Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
Treatment
strain 4.43e0
Interactor
strain 4.43e0symbiont
Outcome
leaf area and chlorophyll levelse0
Direction
boostede0
Qualifier
under drought at 60 days of plantinge0

Not reportedComparator

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

Helianthus tuberosus
Helianthus tuberosus · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“strain 4.43 boosted leaf area and chlorophyll levels, leading to increased photosynthesis under drought at 60 days of planting.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1059–1186 · show in text ↑
t0

“Helianthus tuberosus L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–85 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Strain 4.43 increased photosynthesis under drought.

Taxon
Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
Interactor
strain 4.43e0symbiont
Outcome
photosynthesise0
Direction
increasede0
Qualifier
under drought at 60 days of plantinge0

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

Helianthus tuberosus
Helianthus tuberosus · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“strain 4.43 boosted leaf area and chlorophyll levels, leading to increased photosynthesis under drought at 60 days of planting.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1059–1186 · show in text ↑
t0

“Helianthus tuberosus L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–85 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Harvest index was high with strain 4.43 under severe water deficit.

Taxon
Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
Treatment
strain 4.43e0
Interactor
strain 4.43e0symbiont
Outcome
harvest indexe0
Direction
highe0

Not reportedComparator

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

Helianthus tuberosus
Helianthus tuberosus · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The harvest index was high in the treatment with strain 4.43 and 3.13 under 1/3 of available water, promoting tuber numbers and tuber weight.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1187–1328 · show in text ↑
t0

“Helianthus tuberosus L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–85 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Harvest index was high with strain 3.13 under severe water deficit.

Taxon
Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
Treatment
3.13e0
Interactor
3.13e0symbiont
Outcome
harvest indexe0
Direction
highe0

Not reportedComparator

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

Helianthus tuberosus
Helianthus tuberosus · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The harvest index was high in the treatment with strain 4.43 and 3.13 under 1/3 of available water, promoting tuber numbers and tuber weight.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1187–1328 · show in text ↑
t0

“Helianthus tuberosus L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–85 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Control inulin content was unchanged between well-watered and drought conditions.

Taxon
Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
Treatment
drought conditionse0
Outcome
Inulin contente0
Direction
unchangede0
Comparator
well-waterede0

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

Helianthus tuberosus
Helianthus tuberosus · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Inulin content was unchanged in the control between well-watered and drought conditions.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1329–1417 · show in text ↑
t0

“Helianthus tuberosus L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–85 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bacterial treatment raised inulin levels under both water conditions.

Taxon
Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
Treatment
endophytic bacteria treatmente0
Interactor
endophytic bacteriae0symbiont
Outcome
inulin levelse0
Direction
highere0

Not reportedComparator

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

Helianthus tuberosus
Helianthus tuberosus · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“inulin levels were higher in the endophytic bacteria treatment under both conditions, although yields dipped under drought.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1433–1556 · show in text ↑
t0

“Helianthus tuberosus L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–85 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield fell under drought despite bacterial treatment.

Taxon
Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
Treatment
droughte0
Interactor
endophytic bacteriae0symbiont
Outcome
yieldse0
Direction
dippede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Helianthus tuberosus
Helianthus tuberosus · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“inulin levels were higher in the endophytic bacteria treatment under both conditions, although yields dipped under drought.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1433–1556 · show in text ↑
t0

“Helianthus tuberosus L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–85 · show in text ↑

drought · molecular: metabolites · Helianthus tuberosus (Jerusalem artichoke)Results differ

4 papers: 2 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

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

drought · yield · Helianthus tuberosus (Jerusalem artichoke)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. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative
See all 4 papers →

inoculation · molecular: metabolites · Helianthus tuberosus (Jerusalem artichoke)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 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.