Abstract
The aim of this study was to assess the potential of commercial mycorrhizal inoculants and a rhizobial inoculant to improve soybean yield in Kenya. A promiscuous soybean variety was grown in a greenhouse pot study with two representative soils amended with either water-soluble mineral P or rock P to assess product performance. The performance of selected mycorrhizal inoculants combined with a rhizobial inoculant (Legumefix) was then assessed with farmer groups in three agroecological zones using a small-plot, randomized complete block design to assess soybean root colonization by mycorrhiza, nodulation, and plant biomass production in comparison to rhizobial inoculant alone or with water-soluble mineral P. Greenhouse results showed highly significant root colonization by commercial mycorrhizal inoculant alone (p < 0.001) and in interaction with soil type (p < 0.0001) and P source (p < 0.0001). However, no significant effect was shown in plant P uptake, biomass production, or leaf chlorophyll index. In field conditions, the effects of mycorrhizal and rhizobial inoculants in combination or alone were highly context-specific and may induce either a significant increase or decrease in root mycorrhizal colonization and nodule formation. Mycorrhizal and rhizobial inoculants in combination or alone had limited effect on plant P uptake, biomass production, leaf chlorophyll index, and grain yield. Though some mycorrhizal inoculants induced significant root colonization by mycorrhizal inoculants, this did not lead to higher soybean yield, even in soils with limited P content. Our results are further evidence that inoculant type, soil type, and P source are critical factors to evaluate commercial inoculants on a context-specific basis. However, our results highlight the need for the identification of additional targeting criteria, as inoculant type, soil type, and P source alone were not enough to be predictive of the response. Without the identification of predictive criteria for improved targeting, the economic use of such inoculants will remain elusive.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Mycorrhizal inoculant significantly increased root colonization in greenhouse pots.
- Taxon
- Soybean
Glycine maxt0 - Treatment
- commercial mycorrhizal inoculante0
- Interactor
- mycorrhizal inoculante0symbiont
- Outcome
- root colonizatione0
- Direction
- significante0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Greenhouse results showed highly significant root colonization by commercial mycorrhizal inoculant alone (p < 0.001)”
t0“Soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil type interacted with mycorrhizal inoculant for root colonization.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- soil typee0
- Outcome
- root colonizatione1
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“in interaction with soil type (p < 0.0001)”
t0“Soybean”
e1“root colonization by commercial mycorrhizal inoculant alone”
Claim · model-written summary
P source interacted with mycorrhizal inoculant for root colonization.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- P sourcee0
- Outcome
- root colonizatione1
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“and P source (p < 0.0001)”
t0“Soybean”
e1“root colonization by commercial mycorrhizal inoculant alone”
Claim · model-written summary
Greenhouse inoculation did not significantly affect plant P uptake, biomass production or leaf chlorophyll index.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- commercial mycorrhizal inoculante1
- Outcome
- plant P uptake, biomass production, or leaf chlorophyll indexe0
- Direction
- no significant effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no significant effect was shown in plant P uptake, biomass production, or leaf chlorophyll index”
t0“Soybean”
e1“commercial mycorrhizal inoculant alone”
Claim · model-written summary
Field inoculant combinations could increase or decrease mycorrhizal colonization.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- mycorrhizal and rhizobial inoculants in combination or alonee0
- Interactor
- mycorrhizale0symbiont
- Second interactor
- rhizobiale0symbiont
- Outcome
- root mycorrhizal colonizatione0
- Direction
- increase or decreasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the effects of mycorrhizal and rhizobial inoculants in combination or alone were highly context-specific and may induce either a significant increase or decrease in root mycorrhizal colonization”
t0“Soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Field inoculants could increase or decrease nodule formation.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- mycorrhizal and rhizobial inoculants in combination or alonee0
- Interactor
- rhizobiale0symbiont
- Second interactor
- mycorrhizale0symbiont
- Outcome
- nodule formatione0
- Direction
- increase or decreasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the effects of mycorrhizal and rhizobial inoculants in combination or alone were highly context-specific and may induce either a significant increase or decrease in root mycorrhizal colonization and nodule formation”
t0“Soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Field inoculants had limited effects on P uptake, biomass and chlorophyll index.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- Mycorrhizal and rhizobial inoculants in combination or alonee0
- Interactor
- Mycorrhizale0symbiont
- Second interactor
- rhizobiale0symbiont
- Outcome
- plant P uptake, biomass production, leaf chlorophyll indexe0
- Direction
- limited effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mycorrhizal and rhizobial inoculants in combination or alone had limited effect on plant P uptake, biomass production, leaf chlorophyll index”
t0“Soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Field inoculants had limited effects on grain yield.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- Mycorrhizal and rhizobial inoculants in combination or alonee0
- Interactor
- Mycorrhizale0symbiont
- Second interactor
- rhizobiale0symbiont
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- limited effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mycorrhizal and rhizobial inoculants in combination or alone had limited effect on plant P uptake, biomass production, leaf chlorophyll index, and grain yield”
t0“Soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Colonization did not translate into higher soybean yield even in low P soils.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- mycorrhizal inoculantse0
- Interactor
- mycorrhizal inoculantse0symbiont
- Outcome
- soybean yielde0
- Direction
- did not lead to highere0
- Qualifier
- soils with limited P contente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Though some mycorrhizal inoculants induced significant root colonization by mycorrhizal inoculants, this did not lead to higher soybean yield, even in soils with limited P content”
t0“Soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculant, soil and P source alone could not predict the response.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Outcome
- responsee0
- Comparator
- inoculant type, soil type, and P sourcee0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“inoculant type, soil type, and P source alone were not enough to be predictive of the response”
t0“Soybean”
The same questions in other papers
mycorrhiza · physiology: pigments · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
7 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →inoculation · physiology: pigments · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 35 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
40 papers more in this group
See all 44 papers →mycorrhiza · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 74 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
75 papers more in this group
See all 79 papers →inoculation · disease · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
59 papers in the same direction as this paper · 67 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
123 papers more in this group
See all 127 papers →inoculation · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
74 papers in the same direction as this paper · 491 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
562 papers more in this group
See all 566 papers →mycorrhiza · disease · Glycine max (soybean)Results agree
22 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
19 papers more in this group
See all 23 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.