Abstract
One of the most significant cereal crops in the world, maize (Zea mays L.), is used for food, feed, and energy. Inoculation with plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) could be offered as a substitute method for maize production that is sustainable in contemporary agricultural systems and would reduce the need of chemical fertilisers and pesticides. In this study, we made an effort to collect enough information to support our assertion that the best PGPRs for the maize crop specifically are Azospirillum lipoferum, Pseudomonas fluorescens, Pseudomonas putida, and Bacillus subtilis. On maize crops of the AXE* and PMH1 varieties, PGPRs (Azospirillum lipoferum, Pseudomonas fluorescens, Pseudomonas putida, and Bacillus subtilis) are found to have a significant growth-promoting effect. Results showed that compared to control, A. lipoferum, B. subtilis, P. putida, and P. fluorescens treatment improved morphological, biochemical, and harvest characteristics. We have proposed with the aim of gathering more evidence that Pseudomonas putida and Azospirillum lipoferum bacteria can be deemed maize specific PGPR since out of all the strains under research, better results were obtained with these two strains.
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
Claim · model-written summary
Azospirillum lipoferum improved maize morphological, biochemical and harvest traits over control.
- Treatment
- A. lipoferume0
- Outcome
- morphological, biochemical, and harvest characteristicse0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Comparator
- controle0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“compared to control, A. lipoferum, B. subtilis, P. putida, and P. fluorescens treatment improved morphological, biochemical, and harvest characteristics”
t0“maize plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Bacillus subtilis improved maize morphological, biochemical and harvest traits over control.
- Treatment
- B. subtilise0
- Outcome
- morphological, biochemical, and harvest characteristicse0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“compared to control, A. lipoferum, B. subtilis, P. putida, and P. fluorescens treatment improved morphological, biochemical, and harvest characteristics”
t0“maize plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Pseudomonas putida improved maize morphological, biochemical and harvest traits over control.
- Treatment
- P. putidae0
- Outcome
- morphological, biochemical, and harvest characteristicse0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“compared to control, A. lipoferum, B. subtilis, P. putida, and P. fluorescens treatment improved morphological, biochemical, and harvest characteristics”
t0“maize plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Pseudomonas fluorescens improved maize morphological, biochemical and harvest traits over control.
- Treatment
- P. fluorescense0
- Outcome
- morphological, biochemical, and harvest characteristicse0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“compared to control, A. lipoferum, B. subtilis, P. putida, and P. fluorescens treatment improved morphological, biochemical, and harvest characteristics”
t0“maize plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Pseudomonas putida gave better results than other tested strains.
- Outcome
- better resultse0
Not reportedMaterial
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“better results were obtained with these two strains”
t0“maize plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Azospirillum lipoferum gave better results than other tested strains.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pseudomonas putida and Azospirillum lipoferum bacteria can be deemed maize specific PGPR since out of all the strains under research, better results were obtained with these two strains”
t0“maize plants”
The same questions in other papers
Pseudomonas fluorescens · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
11 papers more in this group
See all 15 papers →Pseudomonas putida · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →Azospirillum lipoferum · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →Bacillus subtilis · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
13 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 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.