Abstract
Experiments were conducted to approach the effect of interaction of Glomus mosseae, Glomus aggregatum (VAM) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PGPR) on the growth, percentage of mycorrhizal infection and plant growth parameters of Chenopodium quinoa Willd. Which belongs to Chenopodiacea family considered as a healthy food because of its good source of many nutrients, which when consumed with other foods can be an important part of a balanced diet. Quinoa is most known for its protein content compared to other plant foods. The present research work conducted at Telangana University, Nizamabad, Telangana state from November 2016 to March 2017. The research work carried by two cultivars of Chenopodium quinoa Willd. The two cultivars has shown highest yield and significant increase in N, P, K levels, plant dry weight, fresh weight and in total plant biomass and also estimated that the difference between grains yield per plant, protein content of the grains, weight of 100 grains over the control was recorded when the experimental plants were subjected to VAM or PGPR alone or in combination. VAM propogules were established successfully in sterile soils and the effectiveness of PGPR inoculants were appreciably increased in association with VAM. Especially dual infection of VAM and PGPR expressed a higher beneficial effect on root and shoot development, percentage of mycorrhizal infection and plant growth parameters than either inoculum alone.
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
Inoculated quinoa had higher yield than controls.
- Taxon
- Chenopodium quinoa Willd
Chenopodium quinoat0 - Treatment
- VAM or PGPR alone or in combinatione0
- Interactor
- VAMe0symbiont
- Second interactor
- PGPRe0symbiont
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The two cultivars has shown highest yield and significant increase in N, P, K levels, plant dry weight, fresh weight and in total plant biomass and also estimated that the difference between grains yield per plant, protein content of the grains, weight of 100 grains over the control was recorded when the experimental plants were subjected to VAM or PGPR alone or in combination”
t0“Chenopodium quinoa Willd”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculated quinoa had significantly increased N, P, and K levels.
- Taxon
- Chenopodium quinoa WilldChenopodium quinoat0
- Treatment
- VAM or PGPR alone or in combinatione0
- Outcome
- N, P, K levelse0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The two cultivars has shown highest yield and significant increase in N, P, K levels, plant dry weight, fresh weight and in total plant biomass and also estimated that the difference between grains yield per plant, protein content of the grains, weight of 100 grains over the control was recorded when the experimental plants were subjected to VAM or PGPR alone or in combination”
t0“Chenopodium quinoa Willd”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculated quinoa had significantly increased dry weight, fresh weight and biomass.
- Taxon
- Chenopodium quinoa WilldChenopodium quinoat0
- Treatment
- VAM or PGPR alone or in combinatione0
- Outcome
- plant dry weight, fresh weight and in total plant biomasse0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The two cultivars has shown highest yield and significant increase in N, P, K levels, plant dry weight, fresh weight and in total plant biomass and also estimated that the difference between grains yield per plant, protein content of the grains, weight of 100 grains over the control was recorded when the experimental plants were subjected to VAM or PGPR alone or in combination”
t0“Chenopodium quinoa Willd”
Claim · model-written summary
Grain yield per plant differed from controls after inoculation.
- Taxon
- Chenopodium quinoa WilldChenopodium quinoat0
- Treatment
- VAM or PGPR alone or in combinatione0
- Outcome
- grains yield per plante0
- Comparator
- controle0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“difference between grains yield per plant, protein content of the grains, weight of 100 grains over the control was recorded when the experimental plants were subjected to VAM or PGPR alone or in combination”
t0“Chenopodium quinoa Willd”
Claim · model-written summary
Grain protein content differed from controls after inoculation.
- Taxon
- Chenopodium quinoa WilldChenopodium quinoat0
- Treatment
- VAM or PGPR alone or in combinatione0
- Outcome
- protein content of the grainse0
- Comparator
- controle0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“difference between grains yield per plant, protein content of the grains, weight of 100 grains over the control was recorded when the experimental plants were subjected to VAM or PGPR alone or in combination”
t0“Chenopodium quinoa Willd”
Claim · model-written summary
Hundred-grain weight differed from controls after inoculation.
- Taxon
- Chenopodium quinoa WilldChenopodium quinoat0
- Treatment
- VAM or PGPR alone or in combinatione0
- Outcome
- weight of 100 grainse0
- Comparator
- controle0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“difference between grains yield per plant, protein content of the grains, weight of 100 grains over the control was recorded when the experimental plants were subjected to VAM or PGPR alone or in combination”
t0“Chenopodium quinoa Willd”
Claim · model-written summary
VAM propagules established in sterile soil.
- Taxon
- Chenopodium quinoa WilldChenopodium quinoat0
- Interactor
- VAMe0symbiont
- Outcome
- VAM propogules were established successfullye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“VAM propogules were established successfully in sterile soils”
t0“Chenopodium quinoa Willd”
Claim · model-written summary
PGPR inoculant effectiveness increased in association with VAM.
- Taxon
- Chenopodium quinoa WilldChenopodium quinoat0
- Interactor
- PGPRe0symbiont
- Second interactor
- VAMe0symbiont
- Outcome
- effectiveness of PGPR inoculantse0
- Direction
- increasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effectiveness of PGPR inoculants were appreciably increased in association with VAM”
t0“Chenopodium quinoa Willd”
Claim · model-written summary
Dual VAM and PGPR infection improved root and shoot development more than either alone.
- Taxon
- Chenopodium quinoa WilldChenopodium quinoat0
- Treatment
- dual infection of VAM and PGPRe0
- Interactor
- VAMe0symbiont
- Second interactor
- PGPRe0symbiont
- Outcome
- root and shoot developmente0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- either inoculum alonee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“dual infection of VAM and PGPR expressed a higher beneficial effect on root and shoot development, percentage of mycorrhizal infection and plant growth parameters than either inoculum alone”
t0“Chenopodium quinoa Willd”
Claim · model-written summary
Dual VAM and PGPR infection improved mycorrhizal infection and growth parameters more than either alone.
- Taxon
- Chenopodium quinoa WilldChenopodium quinoat0
- Treatment
- dual infection of VAM and PGPRe0
- Interactor
- VAMe0symbiont
- Second interactor
- PGPRe0symbiont
- Outcome
- percentage of mycorrhizal infection and plant growth parameterse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- either inoculum alonee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“dual infection of VAM and PGPR expressed a higher beneficial effect on root and shoot development, percentage of mycorrhizal infection and plant growth parameters than either inoculum alone”
t0“Chenopodium quinoa Willd”
The same questions in other papers
infection · growth · Chenopodium quinoa (quinoa)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
mycorrhiza · growth · Chenopodium quinoa (quinoa)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
inoculation · growth · Chenopodium quinoa (quinoa)Results agree
8 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 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.