Effects of the Endophytic Bacteria<i>Bacillus cereus</i>BCM2 on Tomato Root Exudates and<i>Meloidogyne incognita</i>Infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Root-knot nematodes (Meloidogyne spp.) cause serious crop losses worldwide. The colonization of tomato roots by endophytic bacteria Bacillus cereus BCM2 can greatly reduce Meloidogyne incognita damage, and tomato roots carrying BCM2 were repellent to M. incognita second-stage juveniles (J2). Here, the effects of BCM2 colonization on the composition of tomato root exudates was evaluated and potential mechanisms for BCM2-mediated M. incognita control explored using a linked twin-pot assay and GC-MS. On water agar plates, J2 preferentially avoided filter paper treated with tomato root exudates (organic phase only) from plants inoculated with BCM2, visiting these 67.1% less than controls. In a linked twin-pot assay, BCM2 treatment resulted in a 42.0% reduction in the number of nematodes in the soil, a 43.3% reduction in the number of galls and a 47.7% decrease in the density of M. incognita in root tissues. Analysis of root exudate composition revealed that BCM2 inoculation increased the number of components in exudates. Among these, 2,4-di-tert-butylphenol, 3,3-dimethyloctane, and n-tridecane secretions markedly increased. In repellency trials on water agar plates, J2 avoided 2,4-di-tert-butylphenol, n-tridecane, and 3,3-dimethyloctane at concentrations of 4 mmol/liter. In a linked twin-pot assay, inoculation with 2,4-di-tert-butylphenol or 3,3-dimethyloctane reduced the number of nematodes in the soil (by 54.9 and 70.6%, respectively), the number of galls (by 53.7 and 52.4%), and the number of M. incognita in root tissues (by 67.5 and 36.3%). BCM2 colonization in tomato roots affected the composition of root exudates, increasing the secretion of substances that appear to be repellent, thus decreasing M. incognita J2 infection of roots.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".