The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Inoculation Method Affects Colonization and Performance of Bacterial Inoculant Strains in the Phytoremediation of Soil Contaminated with Diesel Oil
Abstract
Plants in combination with microorganisms can remediate soils, which are contaminated with organic pollutants such as petroleum hydrocarbons. Inoculation of plants with degrading bacteria is one approach to improve remediation processes, but is often not successful due to the competition with resident microorganisms. It is therefore of high importance to address the persistence and colonization behavior of inoculant strains. The objective of this study was to determine whether the inoculation method (seed imbibement and soil inoculation) influences bacterial colonization, plant growth promotion and hydrocarbon degradation. Italian ryegrass was grown in non-sterilized soil polluted with diesel and inoculated with different alkane-degrading strains Pantoea sp. ITSI10, Pantoea sp. BTRH79 and Pseudomonas sp. MixRI75 individually as well as in combination. Inoculation generally had a beneficial effect on plant biomass production and hydrocarbon degradation, however, strains inoculated in soil performed better than applied by seed imbibement. Performance correlated with the colonization efficiency of the inoculated strains. The highest hydrocarbon degradation was observed in the treatment, in which all three strains were inoculated in combination into soil. Our study revealed that besides the degradation potential and competitive ability of inoculant strains the inoculation method plays an important role in determining the success of microbial inoculation.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Compant, S., Clément, C., & Sessitsch, A. (2010) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2009.11.024 · Cited by 2,318
Self-citationExploiting plant–microbe partnerships to improve biomass production and remediation
Weyens, N., van der Lelie, D., Taghavi, S., Newman, L., & Vangronsveld, J. (2009) · Trends in Biotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2009.07.006 · Cited by 592
Cited by
Soil microbial inoculants for sustainable agriculture: Limitations and opportunities
O'Callaghan, M., Ballard, R. A., & Wright, D. (2022) · Soil Use and Management · doi:10.1111/sum.12811 · Cited by 489
Plant–bacteria partnerships for the remediation of hydrocarbon contaminated soils
Khan, S., Afzal, M., Iqbal, S., & Khan, Q. M. (2013) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.09.045 · Cited by 411
Self-citationApplications of a lipopeptide biosurfactant, surfactin, produced by microorganisms
Chen, W.-C., Juang, R.-S., & Wei, Y.-H. (2015) · Biochemical Engineering Journal · doi:10.1016/j.bej.2015.07.009 · Cited by 297
Bhuyan, B., & Pandey, P. (2022) · International Journal of Phytoremediation · doi:10.1080/15226514.2022.2033689 · Cited by 27
Metadata
- Authors
- Afzal, M., Yousaf, S., Reichenauer, T. G., & Sessitsch, A.
- Venue
- International Journal of Phytoremediation
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2012-01
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 35-47
- ISSN
- 1522-6514 (ISSN-L)
- 1549-7879
- OpenAlex
- W1983197121
- Cited by
- 180
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 5.97
- 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: The Inoculation Method Affects Colonization and Performance of Bacterial Inoculant Strains in the Phytoremediation of Soil Contaminated with Diesel Oil. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/15226514.2011.552928
- The paper
- Afzal, M., Yousaf, S., Reichenauer, T. G., & Sessitsch, A. (2012). The Inoculation Method Affects Colonization and Performance of Bacterial Inoculant Strains in the Phytoremediation of Soil Contaminated with Diesel Oil. International Journal of Phytoremediation. https://doi.org/10.1080/15226514.2011.552928
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.