Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27252722›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in plant science2016

Different Growth Promoting Effects of Endophytic Bacteria on Invasive and Native Clonal Plants.

Zhi-Cong Dai, Wei Fu, Ling-Yun Wan, Hong-Hong Cai, Ning Wang, Shan-Shan Qi, Dao-Lin Du

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in plant science, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
8.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Invasive PlantPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Frontiers in plant science · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Frontiers in microbiology · 2018
    Article
  15. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Zhi-Cong DaiInstitute of Environment and Ecology & Academy of Environmental Health and Ecological Security, School of the Environment and Safety Engineering, Jiangsu UniversityZhenjiang, China; Key Laboratory of Modern Agricultural Equipment and Technology, Ministry of Education and Jiangsu Province, Jiangsu UniversityZhenjiang, China; Jingjiang College, Jiangsu UniversityZhenjiang, China.
Wei FuInstitute of Environment and Ecology & Academy of Environmental Health and Ecological Security, School of the Environment and Safety Engineering, Jiangsu University Zhenjiang, China.
Ling-Yun WanInstitute of Environment and Ecology & Academy of Environmental Health and Ecological Security, School of the Environment and Safety Engineering, Jiangsu University Zhenjiang, China.
Hong-Hong CaiInstitute of Environment and Ecology & Academy of Environmental Health and Ecological Security, School of the Environment and Safety Engineering, Jiangsu University Zhenjiang, China.
Ning WangInstitute of Environment and Ecology & Academy of Environmental Health and Ecological Security, School of the Environment and Safety Engineering, Jiangsu University Zhenjiang, China.
Shan-Shan QiInstitute of Environment and Ecology & Academy of Environmental Health and Ecological Security, School of the Environment and Safety Engineering, Jiangsu University Zhenjiang, China.
Dao-Lin DuInstitute of Environment and Ecology & Academy of Environmental Health and Ecological Security, School of the Environment and Safety Engineering, Jiangsu UniversityZhenjiang, China; Key Laboratory of Modern Agricultural Equipment and Technology, Ministry of Education and Jiangsu Province, Jiangsu UniversityZhenjiang, China.
Jiangsu University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The role of the interactions between endophytes and alien plants has been unclear yet in plant invasion. We used a completely germ-free culture system to quantify the plant growth-promoting (PGP) effects of endophytic bacteria Bacillus sp. on aseptic seedlings of Wedelia trilobata and of its native clonal congener W. chinensis. The endophytic bacteria did not affect the growth of W. chinensis, but they significantly promoted the growth of W. trilobata. With the PGP effects of endophytic bacteria, relative change ratios of the clonal traits and the ramets' growth traits of W. trilobata were significantly greater than those of W. chinensis. Our results indicate that the growth-promoting effects of endophytes may differ between invasive and native clonal plants, and the endophytes of invasive plant may be host-specific to facilitate plant invasion.

Indexed as

bio-invasionclonal plantendophytic bacteriaplant–microbe interactionrepeatable aseptic culture system

Identifiers

PMID27252722
PMCPMC4878316
OpenAlexW2398474056

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.