Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42018257›Full record

SynthesisBrazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology]2026

Survey of scientific production on bio-inputs in Northern and Northeastern Brazil (2010-2025): A focus on plant growth-promoting microorganisms in legumes and grasses.

Tancredo Augusto Feitosa de Souza, Lindete Míria Vieira Martins, Mariangela Hungria, Paulo Ivan Fernandes-Júnior

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology], 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Tancredo Augusto Feitosa de SouzaCentro de Ciências Agrárias, Programa de Pós- Graduação em Ciências do Solo, Universidade Federal da Paraíba, Areia, PB, Brazil. tancredo_agro@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8729-5478
Lindete Míria Vieira MartinsDepartamento de Tecnologia e Ciências Sociais (DTCS- UNEB), Universidade do Estado da Bahia, Juazeiro, BA, Brazil.
Mariangela HungriaSoil Biotechnology Laboratory, Embrapa Soja, Londrina, C.P. 4006, CEP 86.085-981, Paraná, Brazil.
Paulo Ivan Fernandes-JúniorEmbrapa Semiárido, BR 428, km 152, Petrolina, Pernambuco, CEP 56.302-000, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Using bio-inputs, particularly those based on plant growth-promoting microorganisms (PGPM), has gained momentum in Brazil as a sustainable alternative to conventional agricultural inputs. This meta-analysis synthesizes data from 1,391 peer-reviewed studies published between 2010 and 2025, focusing on the spatial, temporal, and biological dimensions of PGPM research in Northern and Northeastern Brazil. An increase in the number of publications has been observed after 2018. Geographically, 61.2% of studies originated in the Northeast—primarily in Bahia, Pernambuco, and Ceará—while 38.8% were conducted in the North, especially in Pará, Acre, and Amazonas. Leguminous species accounted for 52% of studies, reflecting their nitrogen-fixing capacity and regional agronomic importance, followed by grasses (41%) and other species (7%). Diazotrophic bacteria such as Azospirillum, Bradyrhizobium, and Herbaspirillum were the most frequently studied microbial group, consistently enhancing plant growth metrics across crop types. Seed coating was the most widely used and effective inoculation method, followed by soil drenching and foliar application. PGPM treatments significantly improved aboveground biomass, root traits (notably nodulation and root density), and crop yield, especially in legumes. Subgroup analyses identified critical moderators influencing PGPM efficacy, including inoculant type, inoculation method, soil fertility, and environmental stressors. Despite these benefits, challenges were frequently reported. Approximately 31% of studies cited inconsistent field performance, and 28% highlighted microbial viability and soil compatibility constraints. Regulatory gaps, quality control deficiencies, and biosafety concerns regarding releasing of non-native strains were also noted. These findings highlight the potential of PGPM to support regional food systems and contribute to national sustainability goals, underscoring the urgent need for improved standardization, targeted funding, and stronger policy frameworks. The study provides evidence-based insights to guide research, regulation, and investment in bio-inputs for a more equitable and resilient Brazilian agriculture.

Indexed as

BacteriaFabaceaePlant DevelopmentPoaceaeAgricultureBrazilNitrogen FixationSoil MicrobiologyCrop productivityInoculation methodsMeta-analysisMicrobial inoculantsSoil-microbe interactions

Identifiers

PMID42018257
PMCPMC13103236

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.