Exploring Endophytic Bacteria from Artemisia spp. and Beneficial Traits on Pea Plants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Endophytic microorganisms represent promising solutions to environmental challenges inherent in conventional agricultural practices. This study concentrates on the identification of endophytic bacteria isolated from the root, stem, and leaf tissues of four Artemisia plant species. Sixty-one strains were isolated and sequenced by 16S rDNA. Sequencing revealed diverse genera among the isolated bacteria from different Artemisia species, including Bacillus, Pseudomonas, Enterobacter, and Lysinibacillus. AR11 and VR24 obtained from the roots of A. absinthium and A. vulgaris demonstrated significant inhibition on Fusarium c.f. oxysporum mycelial growth. In addition, AR11, AR32, and CR25 exhibited significant activity in phosphatase solubilization, nitrogen fixation, and indole production, highlighting their potential to facilitate plant growth. A comparative analysis of Artemisia species showed that root isolates from A. absinthium, A. campestris, and A. vulgaris have beneficial properties for inhibiting pathogen growth and enhancing plant growth. AR11 with 100% similarity to Bacillus thuringiensis, could be considered a promising candidate for further investigation as microbial biofertilizers. This finding highlights their potential as environmentally friendly alternatives to chemical pesticides, thereby contributing to sustainable crop protection practices.
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) | 0.001 | 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".