Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32271848›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Impacts of plant growth promoters and plant growth regulators on rainfed agriculture.

Naeem Khan, Asghari Bano, M D Ali Babar

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
18.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 112 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Naeem KhanDepartment of Agronomy, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-0379-4622
Asghari BanoDepartment of Bioscinces, University of Wah, Wah Cantt, Pakistan.
M D Ali BabarDepartment of Agronomy, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, United States of America.
University of Florida · USUniversity of Wah · PK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Demand for agricultural crop continues to escalate in response to increasing population and damage of prime cropland for cultivation. Research interest is diverted to utilize soils with marginal plant production. Moisture stress has negative impact on crop growth and productivity. The plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) and plant growth regulators (PGR) are vital for plant developmental process under moisture stress. The current study was carried out to investigate the effect of PGPR and PGRs (Salicylic acid and Putrescine) on the physiological activities of chickpea grown in sandy soil. The bacterial isolates were characterized based on biochemical characters including Gram-staining, P-solubilisation, antibacterial and antifungal activities and catalases and oxidases activities and were also screened for the production of indole-3-acetic acid (IAA), hydrogen cyanide (HCN) and ammonia (NH3). The bacterial strains were identified as Bacillus subtilis, Bacillus thuringiensis and Bacillus megaterium based on the results of 16S-rRNA gene sequencing. Chickpea seeds of two varieties (Punjab Noor-2009 and 93127) differing in sensitivity to drought were soaked for 3 h before sowing in fresh grown cultures of isolates. Both the PGRs were applied (150 mg/L), as foliar spray on 20 days old seedlings of chickpea. Moisture stress significantly reduced the physiological parameters but the inoculation of PGPR and PGR treatment effectively ameliorated the adverse effects of moisture stress. The result showed that chickpea plants treated with PGPR and PGR significantly enhanced the chlorophyll, protein and sugar contents. Shoot and root fresh (81%) and dry weights (77%) were also enhanced significantly in the treated plants. Leaf proline content, lipid peroxidation and antioxidant enzymes (CAT, APOX, POD and SOD) were increased in reaction to drought stress but decreased due to PGPR. The plant height (61%), grain weight (41%), number of nodules (78%) and pod (88%), plant yield (76%), pod weight (53%) and total biomass (54%) were higher in PGPR and PGR treated chickpea plants grown in sandy soil. It is concluded from the present study that the integrative use of PGPR and PGRs is a promising method and eco-friendly strategy for increasing drought tolerance in crop plants.

Indexed as

AgricultureAmmoniaBacillaceaeBacillus megateriumBacillus subtilisBiomassChlorophyllCicerIndoleacetic AcidsLipid PeroxidationPlant Growth RegulatorsPlant LeavesPlant ProteinsPlant RootsPutrescineRainAmmoniaChlorophyllindoleacetic acidIndoleacetic AcidsPlant Growth RegulatorsPlant ProteinsPutrescineRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSalicylic Acid

Identifiers

PMID32271848
PMCPMC7145150
OpenAlexW3015917472

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.