Effects of Bacterial and Fungal Inoculants in a Loess Soil Amended with Various Phosphorus Sources on Pea Growth and Phosphorus Uptake
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We evaluated the effects of microbial inoculants in a loess soil amended with various phosphorus (P) sources on pea growth and P uptake (PU). Treatments included factorial combinations of three treatments (noninoculation, NI; bacteria, BA; and fungi, FU) and three P sources (no P, NP; calcium superphosphate, SP; and rock phosphate, RP). Compared with NI, soils inoculated with BA and FU and receiving NP and SP increased pea shoot and total biomass, with greater increases with BA than with FU. Both BA and FU stimulated root growth, regardless of P addition. Compared to NI, PU with BA increased by 26, 59, and 83% in soils amended with RP, SP, and NP, respectively, whereas with FU it increased by 25% with SP and 48% with NP, with no effects with RP. The results indicate that BA can increase bioavailability of soil P, whereas FU may promote plant utilization of bioavailable P existing in soil.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".