ArticlePloS one2024
How different of the rhizospheric and endophytic microbial compositions in watermelons with different fruit shapes.
Article in PloS one, 2024. 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.
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fruit shape is an important character of watermelon. And the compositions of rhizospheric and endophytic microorganisms of watermelon with different fruit shape also remains unclear. To elucidate the biological mechanism of watermelon fruit shape formations, the rhizospheric and endophytic microbial community compositions between oval (OW) and circular watermelons (CW) were analyzed. The results showed that except of the rhizospheric bacterial richness (P < 0.05), the rhizospheric and endophytic microbial (bacterial and fungal) diversity were not statistically significant between OW and CW (P > 0.05). However, the endophytic microbial (bacterial and fungal) compositions were significantly different. Firstly, Bacillus, Rhodanobacter, Cupriavidus, Luteimonas, and Devosia were the unique soil dominant bacterial genera in rhizospheres of circular watermelon (CW); In contrast, Nocardioides, Ensifer, and Saccharomonospora were the special soil dominant bacterial genera in rhizospheres of oval watermelons (OW); Meanwhile, Cephalotrichum, Neocosmospora, Phialosimplex, and Papulaspora were the unique soil dominant fungal genera in rhizospheres of circular watermelon (CW); By contrast, Acremonium, Cladosporium, Cryptococcus_f__Tremellaceae, Sodiomyces, Microascus, Conocybe, Sporidiobolus, and Acremonium were the unique soil dominant fungal genera in rhizospheres of oval watermelons (OW). Additionally, Lechevalieria, Pseudorhodoferax, Pseudomonas, Massilia, Flavobacterium, Aeromicrobium, Stenotrophomonas, Pseudonocardia, Novosphingobium, Melittangium, and Herpetosiphon were the unique dominant endophytic bacterial genera in stems of CW; In contrast, Falsirhodobacter, Kocuria, and Kineosporia were the special dominant endophytic genera in stems of OW; Moreover, Lectera and Fusarium were the unique dominant endophytic fungal genera in stems of CW; By contrast, Cercospora only was the special dominant endophytic fungal genus in stems of OW. All above results suggested that watermelons with different fruit shapes exactly recruited various microorganisms in rhizospheres and stems. Meanwhile, the enrichments of the different rhizosphric and endophytic microorganisms could be speculated in relating to watermelon fruit shapes formation.
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.