Endophytic Bacteria; Diversity, Characterization and Role in Agriculture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Entophytic bacteria have an important role in the growth process and health of the plant host. Nevertheless, also some endophytic bacteria are existing in seeds and have not been studied yet. In addition, some Entophytic bacteria are important in plant tolerance to environmental stresses. They can colonize the internal tissues of the host and are able to use a variety of different relations including symbiotic, mutualism, communalistic, and trophobiotic. They have the ability for plant hormone production like auxin, indole acetic acid, and gibberellin; also some endophytic bacteria have the ability for siderophore creation, phosphate solubilization, nitrogen fixation, protease, and hydrogen cyanide formation.. Moreover, they produce compounds that could have possible usage in drug, agriculture or engineering. They have the ability to removesoil toxins thus, improving phytoremediation and soil fertility. Further, most of endophytic bacteria are diazotrophs and associated with the Proteobacteria, and a varied range has been detected agreeing to the nifH gene which codes for nitrogenase enzyme, structures recovered from plant materials, however a limited part of these genes looks to be stated. The endophytes discussed in this review are isolated from surface-disinfested plant tissue, and that do not damage the plant. Moreover, endophytes appear to be in-between saprophytic bacteria and plant pathogens, they are either saprophytes growing to be pathogens, or extremely grown plant pathogens with protective accommodation and nutrient provisions, but not killing their host. Generally, endophytic bacteria are partial under biotic and abiotic influences, with the plant itself being one of the main prompting influences.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".