ArticleCurrent microbiology2023
Comparison of the Rhizobacteria Serratia sp. H6 and Enterobacter sp. L7 on Arabidopsis thaliana Growth Promotion.
Article in Current microbiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- A century ofPlant signaling & behavior · 2025Review
- Evaluation of Stress-TolerantPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Effects of Feeding Sources and Different Temperature Changes on the Gut Microbiome Structure ofInsects · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The genera Serratia and Enterobacter belong to the Enterobacteriaceae family and several members have been described as plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR). However, how these bacteria influence growth and development is unclear. We performed in vitro interaction assays between either Serratia sp. H6 or Enterobacter sp. L7 with Arabidopsis thaliana seedlings to analyze their effects on plant growth. In experiments of co-cultivation distant from the root tip, Enterobacter sp. decreased root length, markedly increased lateral root number, and slightly increased plant biomass by 33%, 230%, and 69%, respectively, and relative to the control. The volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted from Serratia sp. H6 but not those from Enterobacter sp. L7 promoted Arabidopsis growth. A blend of volatile compounds from the two bacteria had effects on plant growth that were similar to those observed for volatile compounds from H6 only. At several densities, the direct contact of roots with Serratia sp. H6 had phytostimulant properties but Enterobacter sp. L7 had clear deleterious effects. Together, these results suggest that direct contact and VOCs of Serratia sp. H6 were the main mechanisms to promote plant growth of A. thaliana, while diffusible compounds of Enterobacter sp. L7 were predominant in their PGPR activity.
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.