Manipulation of rhizosphere organisms to enhance glomalin production and C sequestration: Pitfalls and promises
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Walley, F. L., Gillespie, A. W., Adetona, A. B., Germida, J. J. and Farrell, R. E. 2014. Manipulation of rhizosphere organisms to enhance glomalin production and C-sequestration: Pitfalls and promises. Can. J. Plant Sci. 94: 1025–1032. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) reportedly produce glomalin, a glycoprotein that has the potential to increase soil carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) storage. We hypothesized that interactions between rhizosphere microorganisms, such as plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR), and AMF, would influence glomalin production. Our objectives were to determine the effects of AMF/PGPR interactions on plant growth and glomalin production in the rhizosphere of pea (Pisum sativum L.) with the goal of enhancing C and N storage in the rhizosphere. One component of the study focussed on the molecular characterization of glomalin and glomalin-related soil protein (GRSP) using complementary synchrotron-based N and C X-ray absorption near-edge structure (XANES) spectroscopy, pyrolysis field ionization mass spectrometry (Py-FIMS), and proteomics techniques to characterize specific organic C and N fractions associated with glomalin production. Our research ultimately led us to conclude that the proteinaceous material extracted, and characterized in the literature, as GRSP is not exclusively of AMF origin. Our research supports the established concept that GRSP is important to soil quality, and C and N storage, irrespective of origin. However, efforts to manipulate this important soil C pool will remain compromised until we more clearly elucidate the chemical nature and origin of this resource.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".