Impact of Phosphorus Fertilizer and Microbial Inoculants on Maize and Soil Microbiota
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maize (Zea Mays) is an important crop that strongly depends on soil phosphorus availability. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the compatibility of two commercial microbial inoculants that assist in soil phosphorus absorption and their effects on soil microbiota and the early development of maize plants. The experiment was conducted in a greenhouse at the Experimental Farm of the State University of Goiás, Ipameri, Goiás, Brazil. A completely randomized design with four replications and seven treatments was used, totaling 28 experimental units (pots). The treatments consisted of applying the recommended phosphorus (P) rate (100 kg P2O5 ha-1) alone or combined with seed inoculation with an arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus (AMF) (Rhizophagus intraradices; Rootella BR®), phosphate-solubilizing bacteria (PSB) (Bacillus subtilis and B. megaterium; BiomaPhos®), or AMF + PSB; and half the recommended P rate (50 kg P2O5 ha-1) combined with seed inoculation with AMF, PSB, or AMF + PSB. Microbial biomass carbon, soil basal respiration, microbial metabolic quotient, mycorrhizal colonization, plant height, stem diameter, and shoot and root dry weights were assessed 42 days after emergence (DAE). The best microbiological results were observed in the treatments applying the recommended P rate without inoculation and half this rate combined with PSB or AMF inoculation. The recommended P rate alone and half this rate combined with PSB, AMF, or AMF + PSB had a satisfactory effect on phytotechnical parameters up to 42 DAE. However, an apparent incompatibility between AMF and PSB was observed when combined with the recommended P rate.
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".