The effect of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria on asparagus seedlings and germinating seeds subjected to water stress under greenhouse conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) can have positive effects on vigour and productivity, especially under stress conditions. In asparagus (Asparagus officinalis L.) field culture, seeds are planted in high-density nurseries, and 1-year-old crowns are transplanted to production fields. Performance can be negatively affected by water stress, transplant shock, and disease pressure on wounded roots. PGPR inoculation has the potential to alleviate some of the stresses incurred in the production system. In this study, the effects of PGPR (Pseudomonas spp.) treatment were determined on 3-week-old greenhouse-grown seedlings and germinating seeds of 2 asparagus cultivars. The pots were irrigated to a predetermined level that resulted in optimum growth or the plants were subjected to drought or flooding stress for 8 weeks. The cultivars responded differently to PGPR: single inoculations of seedlings enhanced growth of 'Guelph Millennium' under optimum conditions and 'Jersey Giant' seedlings under drought stress. Seed inoculations with PGPR resulted in a positive response only for 'Guelph Millennium', for which both single or multiple inoculations enhanced plant growth under drought stress.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".