MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406253587 · doi:10.5376/msb.2024.15.0018

Engineering Rhizobium Strains for Enhanced Nitrogen Fixation in Soybean

2025· article· en· W4406253587 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Soil Biology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTree-ring climate responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEcologyTree (set theory)Adaptation (eye)Root (linguistics)Dynamics (music)Environmental scienceBiologyMathematicsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soybean ( Glycine max ) is an important food and oil crop with a high demand for nitrogen. Long-term reliance on chemical nitrogen fertilizers not only raises production costs but also causes environmental pollution. To address this problem, several engineered rhizobium strains with strong nitrogen-fixing capacity, good stress tolerance, and plant growth-promoting ability were obtained through genetic modification and selection. Field trials were conducted in temperate, subtropical, and semi-arid climate zones, and in various soil types including acidic soil, gray terrace soil, loam, and sandy loam. The results showed that these strains could stably attach to soybean roots and form many effective nodules, maintaining high nitrogen fixation even under adverse conditions such as high temperature, drought, and low pH. Data from the trials indicated that inoculated soybeans yielded 15%~40% more than controls, and even with a 50% reduction in nitrogen fertilizer, high yield and good quality were maintained; seed protein and oil content also increased. In some trials, co-inoculation with phosphate-solubilizing bacteria further reduced nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer use. Farmers involved in the trials generally found the technology easy to apply and economically beneficial. The study suggests that promoting these rhizobium inoculants can help reduce fertilizer use, lower environmental pressure, and improve the efficiency and sustainability of soybean production.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.269
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.235
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Soil BiologySame topicTree-ring climate responsesFrench-language works237,207