ArticleWorld journal of microbiology & biotechnology2016
Diversity of endophytic fungal and bacterial communities in Ilex paraguariensis grown under field conditions.
Article in World journal of microbiology & biotechnology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Diversity and Functions of Endophytic Fungi Associated with Roots and Leaves ofJournal of microbiology and biotechnology · 2020Article
- Comparison of specific endophytic bacterial communities in different developmental stages of Passiflora incarnata using culture-dependent and culture-independent analysis.MicrobiologyOpen · 2019Article
- Transcript and metabolic adjustments triggered by drought in Ilex paraguariensis leaves.Planta · 2019Article
- Community Composition and Metabolic Potential of Endophytic Actinobacteria From Coastal Salt Marsh Plants in Jiangsu, China.Frontiers in microbiology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The composition and diversity of the endophytic community associated with yerba mate (Ilex paraguariensis) was investigated using culture-depending methods. Fungi were identified based on their micromorphological characteristics and internal transcribed spacer rDNA sequence analysis; for bacteria 16S rDNA sequence analysis was used. Fungal and bacterial diversity did not show significant differences between organ age. The highest fungal diversity was registered during fall season and the lowest in winter. Bacterial diversity was higher in stems and increased from summer to winter, in contrast with leaves, which decreased. The most frequently isolated fungus was Fusarium, followed by Colletotrichum; they were both present in all the sampling seasons and organ types assayed. Actinobacteria represented 57.5 % of all bacterial isolates. The most dominant bacterial taxa were Curtobacterium and Microbacterium. Other bacteria frequently found were Methylobacterium, Sphingomonas, Herbiconiux and Bacillus. Nitrogen fixation and phosphate solubilization activity, ACC deaminase production and antagonism against plant fungal pathogens were assayed in endophytic bacterial strains. In the case of fungi, strains of Trichoderma, Penicillium and Aspergillus were assayed for antagonism against pathogenic Fusarium sp. All microbial isolates assayed showed at least one growth promoting activity. Strains of Bacillus, Pantoea, Curtobacterium, Methylobacterium, Brevundimonas and Paenibacillus had at least two growth-promoting activities, and Bacillus, Paenibacillus and the three endophytic fungi showed high antagonistic activity against Fusarium sp. In this work we have made a wide study of the culturable endophytic community within yerba mate plants and found that several microbial isolates could be considered as potential inoculants useful for improving yerba mate production.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.