Control of greenhouse tomato root rot [<i>Pythium ultimum</i>] in hydroponic systems, using plant-growth-promoting microorganisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Twenty-eight microorganisms showing in vitro antagonistic activity against Pythium ultimum were tested for their ability to reduce root rot [P. ultimum] on mature tomato plants grown in a greenhouse under hydroponic conditions. Of those, Penicillium brevicompactum, Penicillium solitum strain 1, Pseudomonas fluorescens subgroup G strain 2, Pseudomonas marginalis, Pseudomonas putida subgroup B strain 1, Pseudomonas syringae strain 1, and Trichoderma atroviride were shown to strongly reduce root rot severity, to improve the anchorage, and to increase the marketable yields of the plants grown in rockwool infested with P. ultimum. Experiments conducted in an organic medium containing peat, pine sawdust, and compost (v / v / v ; 60:30:10) also revealed the capability of most of these microorganisms to reduce root rot severity and to improve the anchorage of the tomato plants. However, Pseudomonas marginalis was the only microorganism that significantly improved fruit production of infected plants grown in organic medium. Moreover, Penicillium brevicompactum, Penicillium solitum strain 1, Pseudomonas fluorescens subgroup G strain 2, Pseudomonas marginalis, Pseudomonas putida subgroup B strain 1, and T. atroviride were shown to stimulate the growth of healthy tomato seedlings, suggesting that they act as PGPR (plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria) or PGPF (plant-growth-promoting fungi). This study led to the selection of potential biocontrol agents against root rot of tomato caused by P. ultimum in hydroponic systems. This may open the way for new alternatives for the biological control of Pythium diseases in hydroponic systems that not only protect the crop but also have a beneficial effect on the plant growth and development in the absence of pathogens.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".