MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7088291771 · doi:10.15302/j-fase-2025655

Bacterial endophytes in sustainable agriculture: perspectives and advancements as biostimulants and fungal biocontrol agents in crops

2025· article· en· W7088291771 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers of Agricultural Science and Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversitySte. Anne's Hospital
FundersGenome CanadaMitacsCanada Research ChairsMcGill University
KeywordsAgricultureSustainable agricultureCropCrop productionAgricultural productivityBiological pest controlProduction (economics)Sustainability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Agricultural intensification, to meet the nutritional needs of the growing world population, has been made possible through the extensive use of agrochemicals, such as synthetic fertilizers and pesticides. However, these practices pose significant health and environmental risks, including groundwater contamination, soil degradation and microbial resistance. Also, predictions indicate that relying solely on synthetic chemicals to boost production may not be enough to meet the future global need for food. Sustainable agricultural intensification involves the use of novel tools to enhance production while addressing environmental concerns using eco-friendly strategies, such as microbial inoculants. These can improve soil fertility, nutrient cycling and crop yield, while enhancing stress tolerance and overall crop fitness. This review outlines the key aspects of the global presence of plant diseases, plant defense responses and disease management strategies, and examines bacterial endophytes as crop biostimulants and biocontrol agents for sustainable control of mycotoxigenic fungi. It also proposes strategies to increase microbial product adoption by addressing technical limitations, such as field stability, delivery precision and shelf-life.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.245
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers of Agricultural Science and EngineeringSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207