Paper · 2022 · Selcuk Journal of Agricultural and Food Sciences

Effects of Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria on Growth, Yield and Fruit Quality of Pomegranate (Punica granatum L.)

Osman Acar; Lütfi Pırlak; Mesude Figen Dönmez

6
claims
12
verbatim quotes
0
citations
4
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-nd

Abstract

This study was carried out in a commercial pomegranate garden in Denizli, in 2017-2018 in order to determine the effects of Pseudomonas sp. HV 5 and Micrococcus luteus GC- subgroup B MFDV3 bacterial strains, which are potentially capable of improving plant yield and development, on plant growth, yield and quality. The effects of bacterial application on shoot diameter, fruit width, fruit size, fruit juice content, pH, acidity and yield per tree were statistically in significant but the effects on fruit weight, fruit volume and fruit juice C vitamins were found to be significant. Concomitant use of HV5 and MFDV3 bacteria resulted in increased fruit weight, volume, and amount of vitamin C in fruit juice compared to control. According to the results of the research, it was concluded that the bacterial strains used had a positive effect on fruit juice and vitamin C only, so that different application forms and doses should be tested.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Bacterial application had nonsignificant effects on shoot diameter, fruit width and fruit size.

Taxon
PomegranatePunica granatumt0
Treatment
bacterial applicatione0
Outcome
shoot diameter, fruit width, fruit sizee0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Punica granatum
Punica granatum · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The effects of bacterial application on shoot diameter, fruit width, fruit size, fruit juice content, pH, acidity and yield per tree were statistically in significant”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 316–482 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pomegranate (Punica granatum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Bacterial application had nonsignificant effects on fruit juice content, pH and acidity.

Taxon
PomegranatePunica granatumt0
Treatment
bacterial applicatione0
Outcome
fruit juice content, pH, aciditye0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Punica granatum
Punica granatum · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The effects of bacterial application on shoot diameter, fruit width, fruit size, fruit juice content, pH, acidity and yield per tree were statistically in significant”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 316–482 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pomegranate (Punica granatum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Bacterial application had a nonsignificant effect on yield per tree.

Taxon
PomegranatePunica granatumt0
Treatment
bacterial applicatione0
Outcome
yield per treee0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Punica granatum
Punica granatum · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The effects of bacterial application on shoot diameter, fruit width, fruit size, fruit juice content, pH, acidity and yield per tree were statistically in significant”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 316–482 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pomegranate (Punica granatum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined HV5 and MFDV3 increased fruit weight and volume relative to control.

Taxon
PomegranatePunica granatumt0
Treatment
Concomitant use of HV5 and MFDV3 bacteriae0
Interactor
HV5e0symbiont
Second interactor
MFDV3e0symbiont
Outcome
fruit weight, volumee0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
controle0

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

Punica granatum
Punica granatum · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Concomitant use of HV5 and MFDV3 bacteria resulted in increased fruit weight, volume, and amount of vitamin C in fruit juice compared to control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 586–731 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pomegranate (Punica granatum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined HV5 and MFDV3 increased vitamin C in fruit juice relative to control.

Taxon
PomegranatePunica granatumt0
Treatment
Concomitant use of HV5 and MFDV3 bacteriae0
Interactor
HV5e0symbiont
Second interactor
MFDV3e0symbiont
Outcome
amount of vitamin C in fruit juicee0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
controle0

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

Punica granatum
Punica granatum · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Concomitant use of HV5 and MFDV3 bacteria resulted in increased fruit weight, volume, and amount of vitamin C in fruit juice compared to control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 586–731 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pomegranate (Punica granatum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–118 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend testing other application forms and doses.

Taxon
PomegranatePunica granatumt0
Outcome
different application forms and doses should be testede0

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

Punica granatum
Punica granatum · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“different application forms and doses should be tested.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 888–943 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pomegranate (Punica granatum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–118 · show in text ↑

inoculation · yield · Punica granatum (pomegranate)Positive and negative results

9 papers: 8 positive, 1 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 papers →

inoculation · quality: phytochemicals · Punica granatum (pomegranate)Results agree

4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 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.