4.5 Article

What is the agronomic potential of biofertilizers for maize? A meta-analysis

期刊

FEMS MICROBIOLOGY ECOLOGY
卷 94, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/femsec/fiy094

关键词

biofertilizer; ecological coherence; maize; meta-analysis; PGPR; rhizosphere

资金

  1. Foundation for Food and Agriculture Research
  2. US Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Institute of Food and Agriculture
  3. Agricultural Experiment Station Project [CA-D-PLS-2332-H]
  4. UC Davis Department of Plant Sciences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Biofertilizers are promoted as a strategy for sustainable intensification of agriculture, but their efficacy varies widely among published studies and it is unclear whether they deliver the promised benefits. Studies are commonly conducted under controlled conditions prior to deployment in the field, yet the predictive value of such studies for field-scale productivity has not been critically examined. A meta-analysis was conducted using a novel host crop-specific approach to evaluate the agronomic potential of bacterial biofertilizers for maize. Yield increases tended to be slightly higher and more variable in greenhouse studies using field soil than in the field, and greenhouse studies poorly predicted the influence of moderating climate, soil and taxonomic variables. We found greater efficacy of Azospirillum spp. and lower efficacy of Bacillus spp. and Enterobacter spp. under field conditions. Surprisingly, biofertilizer strains with confirmed plant-growth-promoting traits such as phosphorus solubilization, nitrogen fixation and phytohormone production in vitro were associated with lower yields in the field than strains not confirmed to possess these traits; only 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate deaminase synthesis increased yields. These results indicate the need for a novel biofertilizer development framework that integrates information from native soil microbial communities and prioritizes field validation of results.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据