<i>Azospirillum</i>-plant relationships: physiological, molecular, agricultural, and environmental advances (1997-2003)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review presents a critical and comprehensive documentation and analysis of the developments in agricultural, environmental, molecular, and physiological studies related to Azospirillum cells, and to Azospirillum interactions with plants, based solely on information published between 1997 and 2003. It was designed as an update of previous reviews (Bashan and Levanony 1990; Bashan and Holguin 1997a), with a similar scope of interest. Apart from an update and critical analysis of the current knowledge, this review focuses on the central issues of Azospirillum research today, such as, (i) physiological and molecular studies as a general model for rhizosphere bacteria; (ii) co-inoculation with other microorganisms; (iii) hormonal studies and re-consideration of the nitrogen contribution by the bacteria under specific environmental conditions; (iv) proposed Azospirillum as a non-specific plant-growth-promoting bacterium; (v) re-introduction of the "Additive Hypothesis," which suggests involvement of multiple mechanisms employed by the bacteria to affect plant growth; (vi) comment on the less researched areas, such as inoculant and pesticide research; and (vii) proposes possible avenues for the exploitation of this bacterium in environmental areas other than agriculture.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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".