Abstract
Using microorganisms to enhance crop productivity is an active and increasing field of research, which encompasses the productive, environmental, and economic aspects of agricultural production to obtain high-quality crops with a reduction in the need for fertilizers. Among the nutrients necessary for plant growth, phosphorous is problematic due to its low availability and its susceptibility to convert into non-labile forms. In this regard, phosphate-solubilizing bacteria (PSB) can be an interesting tool to improve phosphorous availability and to reduce the requirements of phosphate fertilizers. This work aimed to evaluate the potential use of phosphate-solubilizing bacteria in the supply of phosphorus and soybean development. This study was conducted in the 2019/2020 and 2020/2021 harvests. The experimental design was in randomized blocks, containing seven treatments and six replicates. The treatments consisted of five doses of phosphate fertilization, using triple superphosphate fertilizer, associated with the application of Bacillus subtilis and Bacillus megaterium bacteria, and two treatments, with and without the use of phosphorous fertilizer and without the use of an inoculant. Plant tissue nutrients and biometric and productive parameters of the crop were assessed. According to the observed results, applying PSB associated with phosphate fertilization and phosphate fertilization alone did not influence soybean’s nutritional, biometric, and productive parameters in the two harvests. Thus, the application of B. subtilis and B. megaterium, either associated or not associated with phosphate fertilization, does not contribute to the nutrition, development, and yield of soybean crops in soil with a naturally low P content, considering the climatic and soil conditions of the study.
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 4
Claim · model-written summary
PSB combined with phosphate fertilization did not influence soybean nutritional, biometric, or productive parameters in either harvest.
- Taxon
- soybean
Glycine maxe0 - Treatment
- applying PSB associated with phosphate fertilizatione0
- Interactor
- phosphate-solubilizing bacteriae1symbiont
- Outcome
- soybean’s nutritional, biometric, and productive parameterse0
- Direction
- did not influencee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“applying PSB associated with phosphate fertilization and phosphate fertilization alone did not influence soybean’s nutritional, biometric, and productive parameters in the two harvests.”
e1“phosphate-solubilizing bacteria (PSB)”
Claim · model-written summary
Phosphate fertilization alone did not influence soybean nutritional, biometric, or productive parameters in either harvest.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- phosphate fertilization alonee0
- Outcome
- soybean’s nutritional, biometric, and productive parameterse0
- Direction
- did not influencee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“applying PSB associated with phosphate fertilization and phosphate fertilization alone did not influence soybean’s nutritional, biometric, and productive parameters in the two harvests.”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors conclude that B. subtilis does not contribute to soybean nutrition, development, or yield under the study conditions.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- the application of B. subtilise0
- Interactor
- B. subtilis
Bacillus subtilise0symbiont - Outcome
- nutrition, development, and yield of soybean cropse0
- Direction
- does not contributee0
- Qualifier
- soil with a naturally low P contente0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the application of B. subtilis and B. megaterium, either associated or not associated with phosphate fertilization, does not contribute to the nutrition, development, and yield of soybean crops in soil with a naturally low P content, considering the climatic and soil conditions of the study.”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors conclude that B. megaterium does not contribute to soybean nutrition, development, or yield under the study conditions.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- B. megateriume0
- Interactor
- B. megaterium
Priestia megateriume0symbiont - Outcome
- nutrition, development, and yield of soybean cropse0
- Direction
- does not contributee0
- Qualifier
- soil with a naturally low P contente0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the application of B. subtilis and B. megaterium, either associated or not associated with phosphate fertilization, does not contribute to the nutrition, development, and yield of soybean crops in soil with a naturally low P content, considering the climatic and soil conditions of the study.”
The same questions in other papers
Priestia megaterium · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →Bacillus subtilis · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
17 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 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.