Field evaluation of dual inoculation of alfalfa with <i>Sinorhizobium meliloti</i> and <i>Penicillium bilaii</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Field experiments were conducted at five sites to evaluate the effects of dual inoculation of alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) with Sinorhizobium meliloti and Penicillium bilaii, a phosphorus-solubilizing fungus, on the yield and quality of alfalfa hay. Dual inoculation with S. meliloti strain NRG-34 and P. bilaii strain PB-50 increased nodule number and occupancy, but resulted in only small increases in hay yield and total nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations of hay compared with inoculation with S. meliloti alone. There was little response of alfalfa to phosphorus fertilizer at the sites, and this may partly explain the small effects of dual inoculation of the two microorganisms. There were no significant differences in nodulation, hay yield or hay nutrient concentrations between alfalfa inoculated with separate NRG-34 and PB-50 inoculant products and that inoculated with a co-cultured inoculant. This similarity in response supports use of a single effective delivery system for the two different rhizosphere microorganisms, which is of great practical relevance as producers are more likely to adopt technology that requires a single inoculation procedure than one requiring two separate inoculation procedures at planting time. Key words: Co-cultured inoculant, Medicago sativa, phosphorus-solubilizing microorganisms, Penicillium bilaii, Sinorhizobium meliloti
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".