Isolation and biological characterization of phosphate solubilizing bacteria strains from the rhizospheric soils of corn in Mali
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Forty-eight bacteria isolates from the rhizosphere of three cultivars of corn and three different soils were examined for their phosphate solubiling ability. The tests were realized on NBRIP (National Botanical Research Institute of Phosphate Growth medium) containing the Tilemsi phosphate rock (TPR) as the only source of insoluble phosphorus. All the isolates solubilized the TPR in solid and liquid media. Twenty isolates were selected for their high solubilizing capacity in liquid medium (105 to 311 mg P/ ml/g of TPR). These isolates were submitted to different stress conditions (acid medium with pH 7 to 5, five successive growths and the temperature range of 30°C to 45°C). Only six isolates (I 1 , I 2 , I 3 , I 4 I 5 ad I 6) were able to maintain their ability of solubilizing the TPR and also they were not antagonistics. These selected isolates were also tested for their solubilization efficiency (SE) of TPR and phytate on NBRIP solid medium containing the TPR and phytate as the only insoluble source of phosphorus and phytate respectively. The maximum solubilization (300%) for TPR was obtained with the isolate I 5 and 167% for phytate with the isolate I 1 . It has been observed that the bacteria isolates have an average solubilization capacity of 18.54 kg P 2 O 5 out off 30 kg contained in 100 kg of PNT. The same bacteria strains were tested for their plant growth promotion (PGPR) characteristics which indicated that all produced low molecular weight Organic Acids, Siderophores, Indole Acetic Acid (IAA or auxine), but none of them produced the Hydrocyanic Acid (HCN).
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".