MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2890737959 · doi:10.5539/jas.v10n10p493

Bacterial Formulations in Induction of Resistance and Growth Promotion of Tomato Plants

2018· article· en· W2890737959 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
José Ribamar Muniz Campos Neto, Rafael Ribeiro Chaves, Diogo Herison Silva Sardinha, Luiz Gustavo de Lima Melo, Antônia Alice Costa Rodrigues

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa e ao Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico do Maranhão
KeywordsFusarium wiltFusarium oxysporumHorticultureBiologyCultivarSeedlingFusarium oxysporum f.sp. lycopersiciFusariumBotanyAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this work was to evaluate the effectiveness of seed treatment with fresh suspensions and powder formulations with Bacillus methylotrophicus to promote plant growth and induction of resistance against fusarium wilt (Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. lycopersici) in tomato plants under greenhouse conditions, verifying the occurrence of morphological and biochemical changes in the evaluated plants. Powder formulations based on Cassava (Manihot esculenta), Arrowroot (Maranta arundinacea) and sodium alginate containing Bacillus, in addition to the commercial product Quartz®, were used to microbiolize the tomato seeds of the cultivar Santa Cruz. The formulations promoted plant growth, with a seedling vigor index greater than 50% for all treatments containing B. mthylotrophicus, in addition to a significant increase in total dry matter. The treatments induced systemic resistance, controlling the fusarium wilt with a 75% reduction of the disease and activation of enzymes such as peroxidase and polyphenoloxidase, only β-1,3-glucanase presented less activity than controls (treatments without B. mthylotrophicus). Thus, the use of formulations containing Bacillus are efficient in promoting plant growth of tomato plants and in inducing resistance to the control of fusarium wilt.

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 score0.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural Science→Same topicPlant tissue culture and regeneration→French-language works237,207→