Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 287

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 45 of the 45 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Impact of co-inoculation with plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria and rhizobium on the biochemical responses of alfalfa-soil system in copper contaminated soil

Ju, Wenliang, Liu, Lei, Fang, Linchuan, Cui, Yongxing, Duan, Chengjiao, Wu, Hao·2019·Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety

Abstract

The effects and regulatory mechanisms of co-inoculation of plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPRs) and rhizobium in plant-soil systems remain unclear, despite numerous reports that PGPRs or rhizobium can alleviate metal toxicity. We used the co-inoculation of the PGPR Paenibacillus mucilaginosus and the metal-resistant rhizobium Sinorhizobium meliloti for exploring the physiological and biochemical responses of the plant-soil system in metal-contaminated soil. The co-inoculation with the PGPR and rhizobium significantly increased the nutrient (N, P, and K) contents in plant tissues and promoted plant growth in soil contaminated with copper (Cu). Stress from Cu-induced reactive oxygen species and lipid peroxidation were largely attenuated by the co-inoculation by increasing the activities of antioxidant enzymes. The contents and uptake of Cu in plant tissues increased significantly in the co-inoculation treatment compared with the uninoculated control and individual inoculation treatment. Co-inoculation with PGPR and rhizobium significantly increased soil microbial biomass, enzymatic activities, total nitrogen, available phosphorus, and soil organic matter contents compared with the uninoculated control. Interestingly, co-inoculation also affected the composition of the rhizospheric microbial community, and slightly increased rhizospheric microbial diversity. These improvements of the soil fertility and biological activity also had a beneficial impact on plant growth under Cu stress. Our results suggested that alfalfa co-inoculated with PGPR and rhizobium could increase plant growth and Cu uptake in metal-contaminated soil by alleviating plant Cu stress and improving soil biochemical properties. These results indicate that the co-application of PGPR and rhizobium can have a positive effect on the biochemical responses of alfalfa-soil systems in soil contaminated by heavy metals and can provide an efficient strategy for the phytomanagement of metal-contaminated land.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2018.10.016

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 45 references

Cited by

See all 287

Metadata

Authors
Ju, W., Liu, L., Fang, L., Cui, Y., Duan, C., & Wu, H.
Venue
Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-01
Volume
167
Pages
218-226
ISSN
0147-6513 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2896819968
Cited by
287
References
45
FWCI
19.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Impact of co-inoculation with plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria and rhizobium on the biochemical responses of alfalfa-soil system in copper contaminated soil. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2018.10.016
The paper
Ju, W., Liu, L., Fang, L., Cui, Y., Duan, C., & Wu, H. (2019). Impact of co-inoculation with plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria and rhizobium on the biochemical responses of alfalfa-soil system in copper contaminated soil. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2018.10.016

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.