MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971923404 · doi:10.5539/jas.v6n6p66

Screening of Nitrogen Fixing Endophytic Bacteria in Oryza sativa L.

2014· article· en· W1971923404 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Prathana Hongrittipun, Somchit Youpensuk, Benjavan Rerkasem

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLegume Nitrogen Fixing Symbiosis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFaculty of Science, Chiang Mai UniversityCommission on Higher EducationChiang Mai University
KeywordsCitrobacterDiazotrophOryza sativaBacteriaBiologyNitrogenaseNitrogen fixationBacillus amyloliquefaciensBurkholderia16S ribosomal RNABotanyPseudomonasEnterobacterGeneEscherichia coli

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nitrogen (N) is an essential element for the growth and yield of rice. Some endophytic bacteria can fix N2 from the air and convert to nitrogen compounds that can be utilized by plants. In this study, endophytic bacteria were isolated from one-month-old seedlings of five rice (Oryza sativa L.) varieties (Muey Nong 24, Muey Nong 25, Pathum Thani 1, Suphan Buri 1 and Chai Nat 1) growing without nitrogen fertilizer in the farmers’ field. One hundred and twenty-three isolates of endophytic bacteria were obtained from the roots, stems and leaves of these rice varieties. Nitrogenase activity of the bacteria in N-free culture medium was determined by acetylene reduction assay. Seven isolates of the bacteria with highest nitrogenase activity were identified by phylogenetic analysis of the 16S rRNA genes, and found to belong to Burkholderia cepacia (CS5), Citrobacter sp. (CR9), Citrobacter sp. (SS5), Citrobacter sp. (SS6), Bacillus amyloliquefaciens (25R14), B. amyloliquefaciens (SR1) and B. thuringiensis (25R2). Inoculation of Bu. cepacia (CS5) and Citrobacter sp. (CR9) to the seedlings of local rice variety (Muey Nong 24) significantly increased nitrogen concentration in the roots of rice.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.715
Threshold uncertainty score0.201

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicLegume Nitrogen Fixing SymbiosisFrench-language works237,207