MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Colonization of peanut roots by biofilm-forming Paenibacillus polymyxa initiates biocontrol against crown rot disease

2007· article· en· W2147399391 on OpenAlexaff
Wafaa M. Haggag, Salme Timmusk

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Microbiology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant-Microbe Interactions and Immunity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaenibacillus polymyxaRhizosphereBiofilmBiologyRoot rotColonizationCrown (dentistry)PathogenBiological pest controlMicrobiologyHyphaBotanyBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To investigate the role of biofilm-forming Paenibacillus polymyxa strains in controlling crown root rot disease. METHODS AND RESULTS: Two plant growth-promoting P. polymyxa strains were isolated from the peanut rhizosphere, from Aspergillus niger-suppressive soils. The strains were tested, under greenhouse and field conditions for inhibition of the crown root rot pathogen of the peanut, as well as for biofilm formation in the peanut rhizosphere. The strains' colonization and biofilm formation were further studied on roots of the model plant Arabidopsis thaliana and with solid surface assays. Their crown root rot inhibition performance was studied in field and pot experiments. The strains' ability to form biofilms in gnotobiotic and soil systems was studied employing scanning electron microscope. CONCLUSION: Both strains were able to suppress the pathogen but the superior biofilm former offers significantly better protection against crown rot. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: The study highlights the importance of efficient rhizosphere colonization and biofilm formation in biocontrol.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations211
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied MicrobiologySame topicPlant-Microbe Interactions and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207