MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2075805548 · doi:10.1139/w02-088

Effective dose of a microbial inoculant is one to four cells in the rhizosphere

2002· article· en· W2075805548 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bo Normander, Niels Bohse Hendriksen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Microbiology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicrobial Community Ecology and Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of EnvironmentMiljøministeriet
KeywordsRhizospherePseudomonas fluorescensPhyllosphereMicrobial inoculantBiologyBacteriaRhizobacteriaPopulationPseudomonasBacterial growthBotanyMicrobiologyAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A single-cell approach for studying the growth potential and the establishment of bacteria in the barley phytosphere is presented, using Pseudomonas fluorescens strain with the capability for biological control. The incidence of growth of one to four bacterial cells dispersed to the young rhizosphere approximated to 100%, and specific growth rate averaged 0.05. Net growth occurred for cells added to the rhizosphere at densities between 1 and 100,000 cells, while at higher densities population sizes declined, but always approached 10(5)-10(6) cells per rhizosphere. No net growth was observed in bulk soil, and cells died in the phyllosphere. Our results showed that bacterial establishment was more related to the availability of microhabitats supporting growth, than related to the number of bacteria released.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.191
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Microbiology→Same topicMicrobial Community Ecology and Physiology→French-language works237,207→