Paper · 2021 · Sustainability

Co-Inoculation of Bacillus spp. for Growth Promotion and Iron Fortification in Sorghum

Mansani Manasa; Polapally Ravinder; Subramaniam Gopalakrishnan; et al.

9
claims
13
verbatim quotes
61
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Seven Bacillus spp. isolated from the marine water and the rhizosphere of the medicinal plant Coscinium fenestratum were studied to produce plant growth promotion (PGP) traits invitro. Among the seven isolates, MMRH22 and RHPR20 produced copious amounts of PGP traits. Based on the 16S rRNA sequence, the two potent bacterial isolates, RHPR20 and MMRH22, were identified as Bacillus mojavensis and Bacillus cereus, respectively. A compatibility test between the isolates RHPR20 and MMRH22 revealed they are compatible and can be used as a consortium. Both isolates were evaluated for the plant growth promotion and the biofortification of sorghum under greenhouse conditions. Treatments included the application of MMRH22, RHPR20, their consortium (RHPR20 + MMRH22), and an uninoculated control. Inoculation with bacterial cultures resulted in a significant increase in the plant height; the number of leaves; the leaf area; the root, shoot, and leaf weight; and the yield of sorghum at 30 and 60 days after sowing (DAS). The scanning electron micrograph of the sorghum plant roots revealed extensive colonization in the plants treated with the bacterial cultures compared to the uninoculated control. The sorghum grains obtained after final harvest were analyzed for their nutrient content by ICP–OES. The biofortification in sorghum grains was varied and was found to enhance the iron content up to 97%. This study revealed that treatments with microbial consortia enhance plant growth, yield, and iron content, which could combat nutrient deficiencies in plants and humans.

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 9

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

MMRH22 and RHPR20 produced abundant plant growth promotion traits.

Taxon
Coscinium fenestratumCoscinium fenestratume1
Outcome
PGP traitse0

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

Coscinium fenestratum
Coscinium fenestratum · TaxonVinayaraj · CC BY-SA 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Among the seven isolates, MMRH22 and RHPR20 produced copious amounts of PGP traits.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 185–268 · show in text ↑
e1

“the medicinal plant Coscinium fenestratum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 74–115 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

RHPR20 was identified as Bacillus mojavensis.

Taxon
Coscinium fenestratumCoscinium fenestratume1
Outcome
identified as Bacillus mojavensise0

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

Coscinium fenestratum
Coscinium fenestratum · TaxonVinayaraj · CC BY-SA 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“RHPR20 and MMRH22, were identified as Bacillus mojavensis and Bacillus cereus, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 336–428 · show in text ↑
e1

“the medicinal plant Coscinium fenestratum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 74–115 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

MMRH22 was identified as Bacillus cereus.

Taxon
Coscinium fenestratumCoscinium fenestratume1
Outcome
Bacillus cereuse0

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

Coscinium fenestratum
Coscinium fenestratum · TaxonVinayaraj · CC BY-SA 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“RHPR20 and MMRH22, were identified as Bacillus mojavensis and Bacillus cereus, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 336–428 · show in text ↑
e1

“the medicinal plant Coscinium fenestratum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 74–115 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

RHPR20 and MMRH22 were compatible.

Taxon
Coscinium fenestratumCoscinium fenestratume1
Outcome
they are compatiblee0

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

Coscinium fenestratum
Coscinium fenestratum · TaxonVinayaraj · CC BY-SA 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“A compatibility test between the isolates RHPR20 and MMRH22 revealed they are compatible and can be used as a consortium.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 429–550 · show in text ↑
e1

“the medicinal plant Coscinium fenestratum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 74–115 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Bacterial inoculation significantly increased sorghum height, leaf number, and leaf area at 30 and 60 days.

Taxon
sorghumSorghume0
Organ / stage
leafe0
Treatment
Inoculation with bacterial culturese0
Outcome
plant height; the number of leaves; the leaf areae0
Direction
increasee0
Qualifier
30 and 60 days after sowing (DAS)e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Sorghum
Sorghum · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)Evelyn Simak · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Inoculation with bacterial cultures resulted in a significant increase in the plant height; the number of leaves; the leaf area; the root, shoot, and leaf weight; and the yield of sorghum at 30 and 60 days after sowing (DAS).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 796–1021 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Bacterial inoculation significantly increased root, shoot, and leaf weight of sorghum.

Taxon
sorghumSorghume0
Treatment
Inoculation with bacterial culturese0
Outcome
root, shoot, and leaf weighte0
Direction
increasee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Sorghum
Sorghum · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)Evelyn Simak · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Inoculation with bacterial cultures resulted in a significant increase in the plant height; the number of leaves; the leaf area; the root, shoot, and leaf weight; and the yield of sorghum at 30 and 60 days after sowing (DAS).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 796–1021 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Bacterial inoculation significantly increased sorghum yield.

Taxon
sorghumSorghume0
Treatment
Inoculation with bacterial culturese0
Outcome
yield of sorghume0
Direction
increasee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Sorghum
Sorghum · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)Evelyn Simak · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Inoculation with bacterial cultures resulted in a significant increase in the plant height; the number of leaves; the leaf area; the root, shoot, and leaf weight; and the yield of sorghum at 30 and 60 days after sowing (DAS).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 796–1021 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bacterial cultures extensively colonized sorghum roots relative to uninoculated plants.

Taxon
sorghumSorghume0
Organ / stage
plant rootse0
Treatment
bacterial culturese0
Outcome
extensive colonizatione0
Comparator
uninoculated controle0

Not reportedDirection

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

Sorghum
Sorghum · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)Evelyn Simak · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The scanning electron micrograph of the sorghum plant roots revealed extensive colonization in the plants treated with the bacterial cultures compared to the uninoculated control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1022–1201 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Biofortification enhanced sorghum grain iron content by up to 97%.

Taxon
sorghumSorghume0
Organ / stage
grainse0
Treatment
biofortificatione0
Outcome
iron contente0
Direction
enhancee0
Value
97%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Sorghum
Sorghum · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)Evelyn Simak · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The biofortification in sorghum grains was varied and was found to enhance the iron content up to 97%.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1303–1405 · show in text ↑

inoculation · growth · SorghumPositive and negative results

76 papers: 65 positive, 11 negative or no effect

64 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. negative

72 papers more in this group

See all 76 papers →

inoculation · yield · SorghumPositive and negative results

76 papers: 68 positive, 8 negative or no effect

67 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

72 papers more in this group

See all 76 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.