Evaluation of the plant-growth-promoting abilities of endophytic bacteria from the psammophyte <i>Ammodendron bifolium</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to assess the plant-growth-promoting abilities of 45 endophytic bacterial isolates from Ammodendron bifolium through physiological characteristics detection and endophytic bacteria-plant interaction. Each of these isolates exhibited 1 or more plant-growth-promoting traits, but only 11 isolates belonging to the genera Bacillus, Staphylococcus, and Kocuria were capable of promoting seed germination and radicle growth. These results together with the results of the correlation analysis revealed that the completion of seed germination may not be due to IAA production, phosphate solubilization, pellicle formation, and ACC deaminase, protease and lipase production by endophytic bacteria, but may be closely related to amylase and cellulase production. Further, endophytic bacterial isolates with plant-growth-promoting traits may also provide beneficial effects to host plants at different growth stages. Thus, these results are of value for understanding the ecological roles of endophytic bacteria in host plant habitats and can serve as a foundation for further studies of their potential in plant regeneration.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".