Characterization of<i>Bacillus</i>and<i>Pseudomonas</i>strains with suppressive traits isolated from tomato hydroponic-slow filtration unit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bacillus and Pseudomonas spp. are known to be involved in plant pathogenic fungi elimination during the slow filtration process used in tomato soilless cultures. We isolated 6-8 strains of both Bacillus and Pseudomonas from the top, middle, and bottom sections of filters and identified them after 16S rDNA sequencing. Four Pseudomonas strains were identified as Pseudomonas fulva, 5 as Pseudomonas plecoglossicida, and 12 as Pseudomonas putida. The use of specific oligonucleotide polymerase chain reaction primer sets designed from gyrB gene sequences additionally permitted the identification of 17 Bacillus cereus and 3 Bacillus thuringiensis strains. Ribotyping with EcoRI pointed out an important polymorphism within Bacillus and Pseudomonas strains. Molecular characterization did not reveal a correlation between the location of isolates within the filter (top, middle, or bottom) and bacterial identification or riboclusters. Functional aspects assessed by community-level physiological profiling showed marked phenotypic differences between Pseudomonas communities isolated from the top and bottom filter layers; differences were lower between Bacillus communities of different layers and far less noticeable between mixed communities of Bacillus and Pseudomonas. These strains were tested for several suppressive activities. Conversely to most Bacillus, the majority of Pseudomonas strains were auxin producers and promoted the growth of tomato plantlet roots. On the other hand, only Bacillus strains displayed antagonistic activities by inhibiting the growth of pathogenic fungi frequently detected in soilless cultures. Siderophores were produced by nearly all bacteria, but at higher amounts by Pseudomonas than Bacillus strains. The biocontrol agent potentiality of certain strains to optimize the slow filtration process and to promote the suppressive potential of nutrient solution is discussed.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".