ArticleEnvironmental monitoring and assessment2019
Deciphering the associated risk on soil microbes upon use of biopesticides in rice ecosystem.
Article in Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Green silver nano-particles: synthesis using rice leaf extract, characterization, efficacy, and non-target effects.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Plant species, viz Cleistanthus collinus, Lantana camara, and Strychnos nux-vomica are being traditionally used for pest management in rice. However, limited investigation has been carried out to understand the toxic effect of these materials on soil microbes. Hot water extracts of these plants were evaluated for their effects on soil microbial population and enzyme activities along with neem oil and chlorpyrifos as check. Soil microbial population, viz bacteria, fungi, phosphate-solubilizing bacteria (PSB), and asymbiotic nitrogen fixers were unchanged after application of plant extracts. Maximum population of bacteria including PSB and asymbiotic nitrogen fixers were observed in control, whereas, S. nux-vomica, and C. collinus-treated soil had higher number of actinomycetes and fungal population, respectively. Soil microbial biomass did not vary differently among the plant extracts. Application of plant extracts did not alter dehydrogenase, β-glycosidase, acid phosphatase, alkaline phosphatase, and urease content in soil. Secondary metabolites present in these plant extracts may be responsible for variable effects on soil microbes. Chlorpyrifos had a fleeting negative effect on soil microbes and enzymes in comparison to plant extracts. All the three plants did not have any negative effect on soil microbes and enzymes and can be safely recommended in rice pest management.
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.