Abstract
Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) establish symbioses with most terrestrial plants, enhancing nutrient uptake, stress tolerance, and soil quality. We evaluated the use of Rhizophagus irregularis-based inoculants in cover crops and subsequent commercial crops in a no-till system and assessed their effects on soil biological attributes and crop yield. Three on-farm field experiments in different locations were conducted with common bean, okra, and corn cultivated after the winter cover crops. The assays were arranged in a randomized complete block design with a split-plot scheme and four replicates, with cover crop inoculation (black oats) as the main factor and crop inoculation in the subplot. The treatments included (i) inoculation in the cover crop and no inoculation in the main crop; (ii) no inoculation in the cover crop and inoculation in the main crop; (iii) inoculation in both crops; and (iv) no inoculation in either crop. Soil acid phosphatase activity, fluorescein diacetate hydrolysis, AMF spore density, and crop yield were measured at the end of each cycle, and the AMF community composition was characterized. The AMF inoculant increased the soil quality indicators (acid phosphatase activity and fluorescein diacetate hydrolysis). Inoculation of the cover crops did not replace the beneficial effects of direct inoculation on the yields of beans, okra, or corn. The results of the experiments in locations with different soils revealed that, overall, direct crop inoculation increased the yields of bean, okra, and corn by 30%, 33%, and 19%, respectively, and intensified soil enzyme activity, with no detectable effects on soil AMF community diversity or structure.
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 6
Claim · model-written summary
The AMF inoculant increased the soil quality indicators acid phosphatase activity and fluorescein diacetate hydrolysis.
- Taxon
- common bean, okra, and corn
Phaseolus vulgaris
Zea mays subsp. mays.jpg?width=60)
Abelmoschus esculentuse0 - Treatment
- AMF inoculante1
- Interactor
- AMFe1symbiont
- Outcome
- acid phosphatase activity and fluorescein diacetate hydrolysise1
- Direction
- increasede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“common bean, okra, and corn”
e1“The AMF inoculant increased the soil quality indicators (acid phosphatase activity and fluorescein diacetate hydrolysis)”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculation of the cover crops did not replace the beneficial effects of direct inoculation on the yields of beans, okra, or corn.
Verbatim
e1“Inoculation of the cover crops did not replace the beneficial effects of direct inoculation on the yields of beans, okra, or corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Direct crop inoculation increased bean yield by 30%.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e1“direct crop inoculation increased the yields of bean, okra, and corn by 30%, 33%, and 19%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Direct crop inoculation increased okra yield by 33%.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse1
- Treatment
- direct crop inoculatione1
- Outcome
- yieldse1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 33%e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“direct crop inoculation increased the yields of bean, okra, and corn by 30%, 33%, and 19%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Direct crop inoculation increased corn yield by 19%.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse1
- Treatment
- direct crop inoculatione1
- Outcome
- yieldse1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 19%e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“direct crop inoculation increased the yields of bean, okra, and corn by 30%, 33%, and 19%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Direct crop inoculation had no detectable effects on soil AMF community diversity or structure.
- Taxon
- bean, okra, and corne1
- Treatment
- direct crop inoculatione1
- Interactor
- AMFe1symbiont
- Outcome
- soil AMF community diversity or structuree1
- Direction
- no detectable effectse1
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e1“direct crop inoculation increased the yields of bean, okra, and corn by 30%, 33%, and 19%, respectively, and intensified soil enzyme activity, with no detectable effects on soil AMF community diversity or structure”
The same questions in other papers
mycorrhiza · soil: biology · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
22 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- positive
20 papers more in this group
See all 24 papers →inoculation · soil: physics · Abelmoschus esculentus (okra)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
inoculation · soil: physics · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
cover crop · yield · Abelmoschus esculentus (okra)Positive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
inoculation · soil: physics · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →cover crop · yield · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
15 papers more in this group
See all 19 papers →inoculation · yield · Abelmoschus esculentus (okra)Positive and negative results
47 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
48 papers more in this group
See all 52 papers →inoculation · soil: biology · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
56 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
61 papers more in this group
See all 65 papers →8 of 15 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.