Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30671922›Full record

ArticleBrazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology]2019

Combined application of biochar and PGPR consortia for sustainable production of wheat under semiarid conditions with a reduced dose of synthetic fertilizer.

Muhammad Ijaz, Muhammad Tahir, Muhammad Shahid, Sami Ul-Allah, Abdul Sattar, Ahmad Sher, Khalid Mahmood, Mubshar Hussain

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology], 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
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

8 authors.

Muhammad IjazCollege of Agriculture, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Bahadur Sub-Campus, Layyah, Pakistan.
Muhammad TahirDepartment of Environmental Sciences, COMSATS University Islamabad, Vehari Campus, Vehari, Pakistan.
Muhammad ShahidDepartment of Bioinformatics and Biotechnology, Government College University, Faisalabad, Pakistan.
Sami Ul-AllahCollege of Agriculture, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Bahadur Sub-Campus, Layyah, Pakistan. sami_llh@yahoo.com.
Abdul SattarCollege of Agriculture, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Bahadur Sub-Campus, Layyah, Pakistan.
Ahmad SherCollege of Agriculture, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Bahadur Sub-Campus, Layyah, Pakistan.
Khalid MahmoodDepartment of Agro-ecology, Faculty of Science and Technology, Aarhas University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Mubshar HussainDepartment of Agronomy, FAS&T, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan. mubashir.hussain@bzu.edu.pk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study investigates the combined effect of locally adopted plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR), biochar, and synthetic fertilizer on the wheat crop for the production and economic returns. A total of 20 PGPR strains were isolated from three different ecological zones of Pakistan and were evaluated. Of them, three isolates were selected for further studies. The treatments included (i) control with a full dose of the recommended fertilizer, (ii) control with half a dose of the fertilizer, (iii) PGPR consortia with half a dose of the fertilizer, (iv) biochar with half a dose of the fertilizer, and (v) PGPR + biochar with half a dose of the fertilizer. The study was repeated at three different locations. The data collected for leaf area index (LAI), grain yield, biological yield, straw yield, and harvest index (HI) revealed significant differences (P ≤ 0.05) for the locations and treatments, but the interaction of location and treatments was not significant. Based on the productivity and economic returns, the treatment with PGPR + biochar with half a dose of the fertilizer proved to be the best. Thus, the use of the PGPR consortia and biochar can improve the yield and profit of wheat crop with reduced synthetic fertilization. Graphical abstract ᅟ.

Indexed as

CharcoalFertilizersNitrogenNitrogen FixationPakistanPlant DevelopmentRhizobiaceaeRhizosphereRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSoilSoil MicrobiologyTriticumbiocharCharcoalFertilizersNitrogenRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSoilBiocharEconomic returnsGrain yieldNitrogen fixationPGPR

Identifiers

PMID30671922
PMCPMC6863250

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.