MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386308454 · doi:10.3389/fpls.2023.1219836

Enhanced production of select phytocannabinoids in medical Cannabis cultivars using microbial consortia

2023· article· en· W4386308454 on OpenAlexafffund
Bulbul Ahmed, František Beneš, Jana Hajšlová, Lenka Fišarová, Miroslav Vosátka, Mohamed Hijri

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Plant Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinisterstvo Průmyslu a Obchodu
KeywordsMicrobial inoculantCannabidiolCultivarRhizosphereBiologyInoculationBiomass (ecology)Dry weightHorticultureCannabisAgronomyBotanyBacteriaMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The root microbiome of medical cannabis plants has been largely unexplored due to past legal restrictions in many countries. Microbes that live on and within the tissue of Cannabis sativa L. similar to other plants, provide advantages such as stimulating plant growth, helping it absorb minerals, providing protection against pathogen attacks, and influencing the production of secondary metabolites. To gain insight into the microbial communities of C. sativa cultivars with different tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) profiles, a greenhouse trial was carried out with and without inoculants added to the growth substrate. Illumina MiSeq metabarcoding was used to analyze the root and rhizosphere microbiomes of the five cultivars. Plant biomass production showed higher levels in three of five cultivars inoculated with the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus Rhizophagus irregularis and microbial suspension. The blossom dry weight of the cultivar THE was greater when inoculated with R. irregularis and microbial suspension than with no inoculation. Increasing plant biomass and blossom dry weight are two important parameters for producing cannabis for medical applications. In mature Cannabis , 12 phytocannabinoid compounds varied among cultivars and were affected by inoculants. Significant differences ( p ≤ 0.01) in concentrations of cannabidivarinic acid (CBDVA), cannabidivarin (CBDV), cannabigerol (CBG), cannabidiol (CBD), and cannabigerolic acid (CBGA) were observed in all Cannabis cultivars when amended with F, K1, and K2 inoculants. We found microbes that were shared among cultivars. For example, Terrimicrobium sp., Actinoplanes sp., and Trichoderma reesei were shared by the cultivars ECC-EUS-THE, CCL-ECC, and EUS-THE, respectively. Actinoplanes sp. is a known species that produces phosphatase enzymes, while Trichoderma reesei is a fungal train that produces cellulase and contributes to organic matter mineralization. However, the role of Terrimicrobium sp. as an anaerobic bacterium remains unknown. This study demonstrated that the use of inoculants had an impact on the production of phytocannabinoids in five Cannabis cultivars. These inoculants could have useful applications for optimizing cannabis cultivation practices and increasing the production of phytocannabinoids.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Plant ScienceSame topicPlant tissue culture and regenerationFrench-language works237,207