ArticleFEMS microbiology ecology2024
Dissecting negative effects of two root-associated bacteria on the growth of an invasive weed.
Article in FEMS microbiology ecology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Wheat native endophytic bacteria isolated from Mediterranean and Atlantic agroecosystems: identification, functional profiling and seedling bioassays.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- The dual nature of plant growth-promoting bacteria: Benefits, risks, and pathways to sustainable deployment.Current research in microbial sciences · 2025Review
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
Abstract
Plant-associated microorganisms can negatively influence plant growth, which makes them potential biocontrol agents for weeds. Two Gammaproteobacteria, Serratia plymuthica and Pseudomonas brassicacearum, isolated from roots of Jacobaea vulgaris, an invasive weed, negatively affect its root growth. We examined whether the effects of S. plymuthica and P. brassicacearum on J. vulgaris through root inoculation are concentration-dependent and investigated if these effects were mediated by metabolites in bacterial suspensions. We also tested whether the two bacteria negatively affected seed germination and seedling growth through volatile emissions. Lastly, we investigated the host specificity of these two bacteria on nine other plant species. Both bacteria significantly reduced J. vulgaris root growth after root inoculation, with S. plymuthica showing a concentration-dependent pattern in vitro. The cell-free supernatants of both bacteria did not affect J. vulgaris root growth. Both bacteria inhibited J. vulgaris seed germination and seedling growth via volatiles, displaying distinct volatile profiles. However, these negative effects were not specific to J. vulgaris. Both bacteria negatively affect J. vulgaris through root inoculation via the activity of bacterial cells, while also producing volatiles that hinder J. vulgaris germination and seedling growth. However, their negative effects extend to other plant species, limiting their potential for weed control.
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.