Paper · 2025 · International Journal of Research in Agronomy

Influence of bio inoculants on growth and rooting of hardwood stem cutting of pomegranate cv. Super Bhagwa

Lochana M; Arunkumar K Kamble; Sateesh Pattepur; et al.

8
claims
15
verbatim quotes
0
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Pomegranate (Punica granatum L.) is a drought-tolerant, high-value fruit crop known for its nutritional and medicinal properties. Widely cultivated in arid and semi-arid regions, it plays a significant role in dryland horticulture due to its adaptability, high economic returns, and export potential. However, commercial propagation of pomegranate, particularly the Super Bhagwa variety, is often hindered by poor rooting and uneven establishment of hardwood stem cuttings. To address this, the present study investigated the effect of different bioinoculants and their combinations on the vegetative performance of pomegranate cuttings under polyhouse conditions. Eleven treatments involving individual and consortial applications of Trichoderma harzianum, Glomus fasciculatum (VAM), Bacillus subtilis and Pseudomonas fluorescens were evaluated. The results showed significant enhancement in early sprouting, shoot proliferation, leaf development, and root growth in bioinoculant-treated cuttings compared to the untreated control. The consortium treatment T₁₀ (VAM + T. harzianum + B. subtilis + P. fluorescens) recorded the best performance, with the earliest sprouting (6.50 days), highest shoot count (10.89), leaf production (93.86 leaves/cutting), and superior root biomass (6.69 g dry weight; 34.6 cm root length). These results suggest that integrated microbial inoculants significantly improve the propagation efficiency and vigor of pomegranate cuttings and may be recommended as a sustainable nursery practice for quality planting material production.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 8

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Bioinoculants significantly improved early sprouting, shoot proliferation and leaf development versus untreated cuttings.

Taxon
pomegranatePunica granatumt0
Treatment
bioinoculant-treatede0
Outcome
early sprouting, shoot proliferation, leaf developmente0
Direction
enhancemente0
Comparator
untreated 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

“significant enhancement in early sprouting, shoot proliferation, leaf development, and root growth in bioinoculant-treated cuttings compared to the untreated control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 866–1031 · show in text ↑
t0

“pomegranate”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 78–89 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Bioinoculants significantly improved root growth versus untreated cuttings.

Taxon
pomegranatePunica granatumt0
Treatment
bioinoculant-treatede0
Outcome
root growthe0
Direction
enhancemente0
Comparator
untreated 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

“significant enhancement in early sprouting, shoot proliferation, leaf development, and root growth in bioinoculant-treated cuttings compared to the untreated control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 866–1031 · show in text ↑
t0

“pomegranate”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 78–89 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Consortium T₁₀ produced the earliest sprouting at 6.50 days.

Taxon
pomegranatePunica granatumt0
Treatment
T₁₀ (VAM + T. harzianum + B. subtilis + P. fluorescens)e0
Outcome
sproutinge0
Direction
earlieste0
Value
6.50 dayse0

Not reportedComparator

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 consortium treatment T₁₀ (VAM + T. harzianum + B. subtilis + P. fluorescens) recorded the best performance, with the earliest sprouting (6.50 days)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1033–1184 · show in text ↑
t0

“pomegranate”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 78–89 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Consortium T₁₀ gave the highest shoot count at 10.89.

Taxon
pomegranatePunica granatumt0
Treatment
T₁₀ (VAM + T. harzianum + B. subtilis + P. fluorescens)e0
Outcome
shoot counte0
Direction
higheste0
Value
10.89e0

Not reportedComparator

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 consortium treatment T₁₀ (VAM + T. harzianum + B. subtilis + P. fluorescens) recorded the best performance, with the earliest sprouting (6.50 days), highest shoot count (10.89)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1033–1213 · show in text ↑
t0

“pomegranate”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 78–89 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Consortium T₁₀ produced 93.86 leaves per cutting.

Taxon
pomegranatePunica granatumt0
Treatment
T₁₀ (VAM + T. harzianum + B. subtilis + P. fluorescens)e0
Outcome
leaf productione0
Direction
beste0
Value
93.86 leaves/cuttinge0

Not reportedComparator

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 consortium treatment T₁₀ (VAM + T. harzianum + B. subtilis + P. fluorescens) recorded the best performance, with the earliest sprouting (6.50 days), highest shoot count (10.89), leaf production (93.86 leaves/cutting)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1033–1253 · show in text ↑
t0

“pomegranate”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 78–89 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Consortium T₁₀ gave superior root dry weight of 6.69 g.

Taxon
pomegranatePunica granatumt0
Treatment
T₁₀ (VAM + T. harzianum + B. subtilis + P. fluorescens)e0
Outcome
root biomasse0
Direction
superiore0
Value
6.69 g dry weighte0

Not reportedComparator

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 consortium treatment T₁₀ (VAM + T. harzianum + B. subtilis + P. fluorescens) recorded the best performance, with the earliest sprouting (6.50 days), highest shoot count (10.89), leaf production (93.86 leaves/cutting), and superior root biomass (6.69 g dry weight; 34.6 cm root length)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1033–1321 · show in text ↑
t0

“pomegranate”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 78–89 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Consortium T₁₀ gave superior root length of 34.6 cm.

Taxon
pomegranatePunica granatumt0
Treatment
T₁₀ (VAM + T. harzianum + B. subtilis + P. fluorescens)e0
Outcome
root lengthe0
Direction
superiore0
Value
34.6 cme0

Not reportedComparator

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 consortium treatment T₁₀ (VAM + T. harzianum + B. subtilis + P. fluorescens) recorded the best performance, with the earliest sprouting (6.50 days), highest shoot count (10.89), leaf production (93.86 leaves/cutting), and superior root biomass (6.69 g dry weight; 34.6 cm root length)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1033–1321 · show in text ↑
t0

“pomegranate”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 78–89 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend integrated microbial inoculants for sustainable nursery production of quality pomegranate cuttings.

Taxon
pomegranatePunica granatume0
Treatment
integrated microbial inoculantse0
Outcome
sustainable nursery practice for quality planting material productione0

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

“integrated microbial inoculants significantly improve the propagation efficiency and vigor of pomegranate cuttings and may be recommended as a sustainable nursery practice for quality planting material production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1350–1562 · show in text ↑

Bacillus subtilis · yield · Punica granatum (pomegranate)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

Pseudomonas fluorescens · yield · Punica granatum (pomegranate)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

mycorrhiza · yield · Punica granatum (pomegranate)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

mycorrhiza · growth · 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.