<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf8"?>
 <!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "http://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.0/JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd"> <article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.0" xml:lang="en">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">JAR</journal-id>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>Journal of Agronomy Research</journal-title>
      </journal-title-group>
      <issn pub-type="epub">2639-3166</issn>
      <publisher>
        <publisher-name>Open Access Pub</publisher-name>
        <publisher-loc>United States</publisher-loc>
      </publisher>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">JAR-18-2264</article-id>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.14302/issn.2639-3166.jar-18-2264</article-id>
      <article-categories>
        <subj-group>
          <subject>research-article</subject>
        </subj-group>
      </article-categories>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Raw pH fall-out as a sign of a mycorrhizal modifier of <italic>Sorghum </italic><italic>sudanensis</italic><italic>    </italic></article-title>
        <alt-title alt-title-type="running-head">raw ph is a signal of a mycorrhizal modifier</alt-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name>
            <surname>Giorgio</surname>
            <given-names>Masoero</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="idm1842951092">1</xref>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="idm1843047540">*</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name>
            <surname>Pier</surname>
            <given-names>Giorgio Peiretti</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="idm1842951596">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name>
            <surname>Alberto</surname>
            <given-names>Cugnetto</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="idm1842951092">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <name>
            <surname>Giusto</surname>
            <given-names>Giovannetti</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="idm1843044588">3</xref>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <aff id="idm1842951092">
        <label>1</label>
        <addr-line>Accademia di Agricoltura di Torino; Torino, Italy.</addr-line>
      </aff>
      <aff id="idm1842951596">
        <label>2</label>
        <addr-line>Istituto di Scienze delle Produzioni Alimentari, C.N.R., Grugliasco, Italy.</addr-line>
      </aff>
      <aff id="idm1843044588">
        <label>3</label>
        <addr-line>Centro Colture Sperimentali, CCS-Aosta S.r.l., Quart, Italy.</addr-line>
      </aff>
      <aff id="idm1843047540">
        <label>*</label>
        <addr-line>Corresponding Author</addr-line>
      </aff>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="editor">
          <name>
            <surname>Prem</surname>
            <given-names>Narain</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="idm1842794844">1</xref>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <aff id="idm1842794844">
        <label>1</label>
        <addr-line>Biostatistics, Bioinformatics, Genetics Bachelor of Science (Hons), Master of Science, Doctor of Philosphy, Doctor of Science, USA.</addr-line>
      </aff>
      <author-notes>
        <corresp>Giorgio Masoero, Accademia di Agricoltura di Torino, Via A. Doria 10, 10123, Torino, Italy. Email: <email>giorgioxmasoero@gmail.com</email></corresp>
        <fn fn-type="conflict" id="idm1843125492">
          <p>The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.</p>
        </fn>
      </author-notes>
      <pub-date pub-type="epub" iso-8601-date="2018-08-15">
        <day>15</day>
        <month>08</month>
        <year>2018</year>
      </pub-date>
      <volume>1</volume>
      <issue>2</issue>
      <fpage>1</fpage>
      <lpage>11</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received">
          <day>30</day>
          <month>07</month>
          <year>2018</year>
        </date>
        <date date-type="accepted">
          <day>13</day>
          <month>08</month>
          <year>2018</year>
        </date>
        <date date-type="online">
          <day>15</day>
          <month>08</month>
          <year>2018</year>
        </date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>© </copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2018</copyright-year>
        <copyright-holder>Giorgio Masoero, et al.</copyright-holder>
        <license xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple">
          <license-p>This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.</license-p>
        </license>
      </permissions>
      <self-uri xlink:href="http://openaccesspub.org//jar/article/815">This article is available from http://openaccesspub.org//jar/article/815</self-uri>
      <abstract>
        <p>The management of symbiotic Microbial Biota (MB) in the soil as agents that promote the yield and health of crops, is aimed at inducing modifications of the phenotype of plants, both over and under the ground. It is here shown, in <italic>Sorghum</italic><italic>sudanensis</italic> plants, that: i) a simple response to MB inoculation is the result of the fall out of the raw pH; ii) the simple NIR scans of leaves can be considered to rapidly classify the outcomes; iii) the raw pH can be considered a key-variable of leaf modifications. An experiment was carried out on <italic>Sorghum</italic><italic>sudanensis</italic>. The plants were seeded in pots and grown for 66 d, and then a control non-inoculated group (C) was compared with thirteen <italic>Arbuscular Mycorrhizae</italic> (AM) <italic>Glomus</italic> inoculated groups and with two commercial MB products. A total of 374 raw pH measurements conducted on the leaves showed that the 5.18 pH units in the C group were scaled by -1.9% (P&lt;0.0336) in the MB group and by -3.4% in the AM group (P&lt;0.0001), with a relevant diversity between groups. Direct discrimination of these three groups, by means of smart NIR-SCIO, showed a % reclassification of the C, MB and AM groups of 74%, 59% and 96% in the fresh leaves and of 65%, 51% and 94% in the dried ground leaves, respectively. The composition of the dried leaves, based on a set of 14 variables predicted via NIRS models, plus the total foliar dry weight and percentage, showed a typical increase in protein, ash and hemicellulose, and a typical decrease in the cellulose, dry matter, crude fiber and crop maturity index. These variables were related to the foliar pH, as a key-variable, by means of a PLS standard model (R<sup>2</sup> 0.81) in which a low pH steadily favored the dry mass weight and, to a lesser extent, the hemicellulose and the digestible NDF contents; on the other hand, a high pH increased the dry matter percentage and the cellulose content of the leaves. As expected, the leaves of the inoculated plants showed a more juvenile ontogenic status. The epigean botanical modifications can be considered harmonic expressions of a luxuriant symbiosis, as testified by the homologous NIR categorization. The outlook for a symbiotic agriculture, with mycorrhizal plants, should consider the raw pH as a multifaceted variable.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>raw pH</kwd>
        <kwd>arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi</kwd>
        <kwd>microbial biota</kwd>
        <kwd>NIR-Tomoscopy</kwd>
        <kwd>smart NIR-SCIO</kwd>
        <kwd>NIRS foliar discrimination</kwd>
        <kwd>leaf composition</kwd>
        <kwd>symbiotic agriculture.</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
      <counts>
        <fig-count count="4"/>
        <table-count count="4"/>
        <page-count count="11"/>
      </counts>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="idm1842794340" sec-type="intro">
      <title>Introduction</title>
      <p>A credible increase of 50% in the world feed and food necessities can be expected at the end of the next thirty years<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842443532">1</xref>, and more fertilizers, water and pesticides will be needed to satisfy such needs. Starting all over again with a “Symbiotic agriculture” is a seductive “<italic>manifesto</italic>” for both a sustainable development of arable lands and for the new off-land agrotechnology<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842509564">2</xref>. <italic>Arbuscular Mycorrhizae</italic> (AM) need to be closely involved in a road map of sustainable agriculture as a result of their symbiotic capabilities in the agrarian multiverse, characterised by these highlights: 1) soil preservation, with restoration of the organic matter in both topsoil and polluted soils<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842456428">3</xref>; 2) anticipation of the <italic>Mitscherlich</italic> curve of phosphorus efficiency<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842545492">4</xref>; 3) resolution of the “<italic>nitrogen paradox</italic>” as a result of the uptake of organic-N <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842306540">5</xref>; 4) benefits for the atmosphere and for the foreseen climate changes, with an important reduction in N<sub>2</sub>O emissions<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842312732">6</xref>; 5) luxuriance of the epigean as well as of the hypogean plant systems<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842308340">7</xref>; 6) enhancements of the functional properties of feeds and foods<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842303612">8</xref><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842297132">9</xref><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842287004">10</xref><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842289812">11</xref><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842273972">12</xref> 7) induction of greater intrinsic resistance to the onset of a pathological state, regardless of the origin and nature of the plants<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842269796">13</xref>.</p>
      <p>Experiments with AM may be divided into two categories, that is, practical and scientific<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842308340">7</xref>. The first type analyses pure soils and substrates, such as those in a microbial desert, without agrarian biotas, while the second one studies extensive and multiple interactions in the presence of immense microbial charges<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842267276">14</xref>. </p>
      <p>In a first field experiment with maize fertilized by a Micosat F® complex microbial consortium<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842265908">15</xref>, it was found that the <italic>in vivo</italic> raw pH of a plant was acidified according to a de-gradient from the roots (pH -7% in mycorrhizal maize) to the stem at an ear height (-4%). Other researches in vineyards confirmed the tendency of the raw pH<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842278868">16</xref>, measured at the petiole insert, to be lowered after microbial fertilisation with 10 kg ha<sup>-1 </sup>of MB compound inoculated near the secondary roots. The authenticity of the raw pH parameter was highlighted by Cornelissen et al.<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842277500">17</xref>, who considered the leaf pH as a new plant trait that could explain variations in the foliar chemistry and carbon cycling processes of subarctic plant species and types. The first work was followed by a microcosm experiment<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842250060">18</xref>, the results of which upset the myth of a pH dominance of the soil: the pH in fresh leaves will only grow for +0.036 pH<sub>soil</sub><sup>-1 </sup>(from -0.5                   to -0.7%). </p>
      <p>The aim of the present study has been to ascertain whether the decrease in the varied raw pH in leaves is due to AM or to a whole complex of a microbial consortium, and to assess how AM can be considered effective modifier agents of the <italic>Sorghum</italic><italic>sudanensis</italic> phenotype, while considering the raw pH as a                 key-variable.</p>
      <sec id="idm1842789764">
        <title>Experimental Procedure</title>
        <p>Two rapid methods: the measurement of the raw pH, according to Masoero and Giovannetti<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842265908">15</xref>, and the smart NIR-SCIO measurement of the leaf, according to Masoero et al.<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842247828">19</xref>, have been used in this study to analyse the multifaceted effects of an inoculation of <italic>Sorghum</italic><italic>sudanensis</italic> plants with thirteen AM<italic> Glomus</italic> strains and two microbial biotas fertilisers (MB), and the results have been compared with a non-inoculated control (C). Basically, we considered the <italic>in-vivo</italic> raw pH as a rapid indicator of symbiosis. In parallel, we considered the NIR spectra, reflected from the                  fresh and dried leaves (NIR-Tomoscopy), as a categorically discriminant tool. The third step concerned several traits of the leaf composition, which were predicted from an extended NIR-IR spectrum of the dried and ground tissues. Finally, the raw pH was connected, as a key-variable, to the phenotypes of plants by means of linear model analyses. </p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="idm1842788036" sec-type="materials">
      <title>Materials and Methods</title>
      <sec id="idm1842787244">
        <title>Plant material, Inocula and Growth conditions </title>
        <p>Three categories were considered: i) <italic>Arbuscular Mycorrhizae</italic> (AM), with thirteen theses of crude inocula belonging to the <italic>Glomus</italic> genre from the USA                 (AM01-AM13); ii) Microbial Biota of the soil (MB), with two commercial approved bio-fertilizer consortia                 (MB1-MB2); iii) a non-inoculated Control thesis (C)  (<xref ref-type="table" rid="idm1842188596">Table 1</xref>).</p>
        <table-wrap id="idm1842188596">
          <label>Table 1.</label>
          <caption>
            <title> Setup of the Categories and Theses.</title>
          </caption>
          <table rules="all" frame="box">
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <th>
                  <bold>Categories</bold>
                </th>
                <td>
                  <bold>Theses</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>Species</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM - <italic>Arbuscular Mycorrhizae</italic></td>
                <td>AM01</td>
                <td><italic>Claroideoglomus</italic><italic>etunicatum</italic> YV PA137</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM - <italic>Arbuscular Mycorrhizae</italic></td>
                <td>AM02</td>
                <td><italic>Paraglomus</italic><italic>occultum</italic> CL700A</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM - <italic>Arbuscular Mycorrhizae</italic></td>
                <td>AM03</td>
                <td><italic>Acaulospora</italic><italic>morrowiae</italic> CL290 </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM - <italic>Arbuscular Mycorrhizae</italic></td>
                <td>AM04</td>
                <td><italic>Gigaspora</italic><italic> gigantea</italic> PA125 </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM - <italic>Arbuscular Mycorrhizae</italic></td>
                <td>AM05</td>
                <td><italic>Sclerocystis</italic><italic>sinuosa</italic> MD126 </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM - <italic>Arbuscular Mycorrhizae</italic></td>
                <td>AM06</td>
                <td><italic>Septoglomus</italic><italic>constrictum</italic> FL328 </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM - <italic>Arbuscular Mycorrhizae</italic></td>
                <td>AM07</td>
                <td><italic>Gigaspora</italic><italic>rosea</italic> NY328A </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM - <italic>Arbuscular Mycorrhizae</italic></td>
                <td>AM08</td>
                <td><italic>Funneliformus</italic><italic>mosseae</italic> IT201 </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM - <italic>Arbuscular Mycorrhizae</italic></td>
                <td>AM09</td>
                <td><italic>Rhizophagus</italic><italic>intraradices</italic> CA502 </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM - <italic>Arbuscular Mycorrhizae</italic></td>
                <td>AM10</td>
                <td><italic>Archaeospora</italic><italic>trappei</italic> FL208 </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM - <italic>Arbuscular Mycorrhizae</italic></td>
                <td>AM11</td>
                <td><italic>Scutellospora</italic><italic> pellucida</italic> MN408A </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM - <italic>Arbuscular Mycorrhizae</italic></td>
                <td>AM12</td>
                <td><italic>Claroideoglomus</italic><italic>claoideum</italic> ON393 </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM - <italic>Arbuscular Mycorrhizae</italic></td>
                <td>AM13</td>
                <td><italic>Diversispora</italic><italic>eburnea</italic> AZ420</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>MB - Microbial Biota <xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="idm1842716396">$</xref></td>
                <td>MB1</td>
                <td>Micosat F© (CCS-Aosta, Quart, Italy)</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>MB - Microbial Biota <xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="idm1842697892">£</xref></td>
                <td>MB2</td>
                <td>MycUp© (Symborg, Murcia, Spain)</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>C- Control not inoculated</td>
                <td>C</td>
                <td> </td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
          <table-wrap-foot>
            <fn id="idm1842716396">
              <label>$</label>
              <p>MB from finely ground cultivated <italic>Sorghum </italic><italic>sudanensis</italic> roots, containing spores and <italic>ifae</italic> of                  <italic>Funneliformis</italic><italic/><italic>coronatus</italic> GO01 and GU53, <italic>F. </italic><italic>caledonium</italic> GM24, <italic>F. </italic><italic>intraradices</italic> GB67 and GG32, <italic>F. </italic><italic>mosseae</italic> GP11 and GC11, <italic>F. </italic><italic>viscosum</italic> GC41; saprotrophic fungi: <italic>Streptomyces spp</italic>. ST60,               <italic>Streptomyces spp</italic>. SB14, <italic>Streptomyces spp.</italic> SA51, <italic>Beauveria spp</italic>. BB48, <italic>Trichoderma </italic><italic>viride</italic>, <italic>Trichoderma </italic><italic>harzianum</italic> TH01, <italic>Trichoderma </italic><italic>atroviride</italic> TA28, <italic>Trichoderma spp</italic>.; rhizosphere                    bacteria: <italic>Bacillus subtilis</italic> BA41, <italic>Pseudomonas fluorescens</italic> PN53, <italic>Pseudomonas spp</italic>. PT65 and <italic>Pochonia</italic><italic/><italic>chlamidosporia</italic>, in the relative percentage of 40% crude inoculum and 21.6% bacteria and saprotrophic fungi. </p>
            </fn>
            <fn id="idm1842697892">
              <label>£</label>
              <p> MB from finely ground cultivated <italic>Sorghum </italic><italic>sudanensis</italic> roots, containing<italic> Glomus </italic><italic>iranicum</italic><italic> var. </italic><italic>tenuihypharum</italic> (120 propagules g<sup>-1</sup> - 1%); rhizosphere bacteria (103 UFC g<sup>-1</sup>).</p>
            </fn>
          </table-wrap-foot>
        </table-wrap>
        <p><italic>Sorghum</italic><italic>sudanensis</italic> seeds from <italic>cv</italic> “Puma” (Padana Sementi Elette S.r.l. Tombolo, Italy) were inoculated at seeding in 10 L pots (three seeds per pot), using 12 g pot<sup>-1 </sup>of crude inoculum. The growth substrate was volcanic lapillus rock (5 L) and peat (5 L). The substrate was kept in the greenhouse and drip irrigation was adopted.</p>
        <p>The leaves were harvested after 66 d and measured to establish the raw pH of the leaves by means of direct contact of the split central vein with a combined plastic-glass Double Pore Knick® electrode (Hamilton, Reno, USA) using an “XSpH 70” pH meter (Giorgio Bormac S.r.l., Carpi, Italy). </p>
        <p>The whole leaves from each of the 16 theses were chopped and dried at 60 °C to a constant weight, air-equilibrated, ground in a Cyclotec mill and stored for later analysis by means of NIRS. </p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="idm1842696524">
        <title>Vibrational Spectroscopy and Chemometrics</title>
        <p>The ground leaves were repeatedly examined (three scans) with a Spectrum IdentiCheck<sup>TM</sup> FT-NIR/MIR system (Perkin-Elmer, Beaconsfield, Buck, England) and the chemical composition was predicted via NIRS, using equations that were established on twelve different forage crops, as reported in Tassone et al.<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842241924">20</xref>.</p>
        <sec id="idm1842694436">
          <title>NIR-Tomoscopy</title>
          <p>A smart NIR miniaturized web-based wireless spectrophotometer, SCIO version 1.2 (Consumer Physics, Tel Aviv, Israel), with a 740-1070 nm range, was used to scan the fresh leaves on the upper foliar tinge (one scan) and the ground dry matrices                     (10 replicates).</p>
        </sec>
        <sec id="idm1842694220">
          <title>Statistical Analyses</title>
          <p>An ANOVA one-way model was used to fit the effect of the categories or of the 16 theses using PROC GLM from SAS-STAT 9.0 software (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC, USA), while the Tukey test was used to adjust for LSMEANS PDIFF. Univariate analyses were conducted on the values of the raw pH and on the predicted composition. </p>
          <p>The means values of the 14 variables pertaining to the 16 theses plus the total foliar dry weight and percentage, were then related to the foliar pH, as a            key-variable, using a standard Partial Least Square (PLS) model (StatBox 6.5 v., Grimmer Logiciels, Paris, France) which allows two latent variables to be achieved; in this way, it was possible to identify the variables that were favoured or contrasted by the raw foliar pH variations among the theses.</p>
          <p>A categorical discrimination of the three main groups of the fresh and dried leaves was performed by means of chemometrics of the 331-point spectra using the SCIO Lab proprietary software, based on AKA (Also Known As), the confusion matrix, without any mathematical pre-treatment of the spectra.</p>
        </sec>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="idm1842693284" sec-type="results">
      <title>Results </title>
      <sec id="idm1842692492">
        <title>Raw pH </title>
        <p>The raw pH of the leaves appeared as a very narrow-distributed variable, which was characterized by a variation coefficient of 3.8% (<xref ref-type="table" rid="idm1842068692">Table 2</xref>). </p>
        <table-wrap id="idm1842068692">
          <label>Table 2.</label>
          <caption>
            <title> Raw pH values (No. 374) in the three Categories.</title>
          </caption>
          <table rules="all" frame="box">
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td>
                  <bold>Statistics</bold>
                </td>
                <td colspan="3">
                  <bold>Categories</bold>
                </td>
                <td colspan="3">
                  <bold> </bold>
                  <bold>Prob.</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td/>
                <td>
                  <bold>C</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>MB</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>AM</bold>
                </td>
                <td><bold>C</bold>vs.<bold> MB</bold></td>
                <td><bold>C</bold>vs.<bold> AM</bold></td>
                <td><bold>MB</bold>vs.<bold> AM</bold></td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>LSMeans</td>
                <td>5.18</td>
                <td>5.10</td>
                <td>5.00</td>
                <td>0.0336</td>
                <td>&lt;.0001</td>
                <td>0.0002</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>SE ±</td>
                <td>0.03</td>
                <td>0.02</td>
                <td>0.01</td>
                <td> </td>
                <td> </td>
                <td> </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>RMSE</td>
                <td> </td>
                <td>0.19</td>
                <td> </td>
                <td> </td>
                <td> </td>
                <td> </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>R<sup>2</sup></td>
                <td> </td>
                <td>0.12</td>
                <td> </td>
                <td> </td>
                <td> </td>
                <td> </td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
        <p>The normal mean value of 5.18±0.03 in the leaves from the C non-inoculated plants was significantly decreased to 5.10±0.02 in the MB category (-1.5%, P=0.0336), and decreased to a value of 5.00±0.01 in the AM category (-3.5%, P&lt;0.001). Moreover, the AM <italic>vs.</italic> MB difference was highly significant, with the MBs being less acidifying. When the individual theses (<xref ref-type="table" rid="idm1842013900">Table 3a</xref> and <xref ref-type="table" rid="idm1841823812">Table 3b</xref>; <xref ref-type="fig" rid="idm1841641252">Figure 1</xref>) were considered, the differences appeared more scaled.</p>
        <table-wrap id="idm1842013900">
          <label>Table 3a.</label>
          <caption>
            <title> Results of the quality of Sorghum sudanensis leaves (No.48) £.</title>
          </caption>
          <table rules="all" frame="box">
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td>Thesis</td>
                <td>pH</td>
                <td>Dry Mass g</td>
                <td>Hemicellulose %</td>
                <td>NDF            digestible %</td>
                <td>Ether Extr. %</td>
                <td>ADF, %</td>
                <td>Crop Maturity Index</td>
                <td>Crude Fiber %</td>
                <td>Nitrogen Free Extract %</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <th colspan="10"><bold>AM –</bold>Arbuscular Mycorrhizae</th>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM01</td>
                <td>4.93b</td>
                <td>21.1</td>
                <td>7.9</td>
                <td>29.1</td>
                <td>1.4</td>
                <td>46.0</td>
                <td>2.3</td>
                <td>24.2</td>
                <td>47.0</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM02</td>
                <td>4.96b</td>
                <td>14.3</td>
                <td>7.1</td>
                <td>28.9</td>
                <td>1.7</td>
                <td>45.5</td>
                <td>2.1</td>
                <td>24.6</td>
                <td>42.5</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM03</td>
                <td>4.97b</td>
                <td>14.3</td>
                <td>8.2</td>
                <td>27.0</td>
                <td>1.4</td>
                <td>43.7</td>
                <td>2.0</td>
                <td>25.0</td>
                <td>45.9</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM04</td>
                <td>5.03ab</td>
                <td>9.0</td>
                <td>8.8</td>
                <td>27.9</td>
                <td>1.5</td>
                <td>48.3</td>
                <td>2.1</td>
                <td>24.3</td>
                <td>45.4</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM05</td>
                <td>4.95b</td>
                <td>16.0</td>
                <td>6.1</td>
                <td>27.4</td>
                <td>1.7</td>
                <td>48.8</td>
                <td>2.4</td>
                <td>26.5</td>
                <td>42.7</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM06</td>
                <td>5.08ab</td>
                <td>17.2</td>
                <td>6.4</td>
                <td>27.3</td>
                <td>1.5</td>
                <td>45.8</td>
                <td>2.1</td>
                <td>24.0</td>
                <td>45.6</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM07</td>
                <td>5.04ab</td>
                <td>16.9</td>
                <td>4.8</td>
                <td>27.7</td>
                <td>1.4</td>
                <td>46.9</td>
                <td>2.2</td>
                <td>23.9</td>
                <td>43.9</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM08</td>
                <td>4.97b</td>
                <td>17.6</td>
                <td>5.5</td>
                <td>29.2</td>
                <td>1.5</td>
                <td>46.8</td>
                <td>2.0</td>
                <td>23.7</td>
                <td>43.5</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM09</td>
                <td>5.03ab</td>
                <td>15.7</td>
                <td>8.3</td>
                <td>27.4</td>
                <td>1.6</td>
                <td>44.6</td>
                <td>1.9</td>
                <td>20.3</td>
                <td>46.9</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM10</td>
                <td>5.04ab</td>
                <td>8.8</td>
                <td>5.6</td>
                <td>30.1</td>
                <td>1.7</td>
                <td>43.2</td>
                <td>1.5</td>
                <td>22.2</td>
                <td>45.7</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM11</td>
                <td>5.01b</td>
                <td>15.5</td>
                <td>5.3</td>
                <td>29.1</td>
                <td>1.5</td>
                <td>47.0</td>
                <td>2.0</td>
                <td>23.7</td>
                <td>43.3</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM12</td>
                <td>5.06ab</td>
                <td>15.5</td>
                <td>5.4</td>
                <td>27.7</td>
                <td>1.5</td>
                <td>47.4</td>
                <td>2.3</td>
                <td>26.4</td>
                <td>43.3</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM13</td>
                <td>4.94b</td>
                <td>18.4</td>
                <td>7.9</td>
                <td>27.1</td>
                <td>1.6</td>
                <td>47.9</td>
                <td>2.2</td>
                <td>25.9</td>
                <td>43.7</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td colspan="10">
                  <bold>MB–</bold>
                  <bold> Microbial Biota</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>MB1</td>
                <td>5.08a</td>
                <td>12.1</td>
                <td>7.4</td>
                <td>28.4</td>
                <td>1.4</td>
                <td>42.6</td>
                <td>1.9</td>
                <td>20.2</td>
                <td>46.3</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>MB2</td>
                <td>5.12a</td>
                <td>14.7</td>
                <td>8.4</td>
                <td>28.3</td>
                <td>1.4</td>
                <td>44.1</td>
                <td>1.9</td>
                <td>21.1</td>
                <td>46.7</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <th colspan="10">
                  <bold>C– Control</bold>
                </th>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>C</td>
                <td>5.18a</td>
                <td>6.7</td>
                <td>5.6</td>
                <td>25.0</td>
                <td>1.3</td>
                <td>45.5</td>
                <td>2.3</td>
                <td>25.8</td>
                <td>43.9</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>MB/C</td>
                <td>-1%</td>
                <td>99%</td>
                <td>42%</td>
                <td>13%</td>
                <td>10%</td>
                <td>-5%</td>
                <td>-18%</td>
                <td>-20%</td>
                <td>6%</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Prob</td>
                <td>0.03</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>0.01</td>
                <td>0.00</td>
                <td>0.37</td>
                <td>0.24</td>
                <td>0.01</td>
                <td>0.00</td>
                <td>0.019</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM/C%</td>
                <td>-3%</td>
                <td>129%</td>
                <td>20%</td>
                <td>12%</td>
                <td>18%</td>
                <td>2%</td>
                <td>-8%</td>
                <td>-6%</td>
                <td>1%</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Prob</td>
                <td>&lt;.0001</td>
                <td>-</td>
                <td>0.20</td>
                <td>&lt;.00</td>
                <td>0.00</td>
                <td>0.94</td>
                <td>0.13</td>
                <td>0.34</td>
                <td>0.80</td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
        <table-wrap id="idm1841823812">
          <label>Table 3b.</label>
          <caption>
            <title> Quality results on Sorghum sudanensis leaves (No. 48).</title>
          </caption>
          <table rules="all" frame="box">
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td>Thesis</td>
                <td>Ash %</td>
                <td><italic>In vitro</italic> Digestibility %</td>
                <td>NDF non dig. %</td>
                <td>NDF             digestibility %</td>
                <td>ADL %</td>
                <td>NDF %</td>
                <td>Crude      Protein %</td>
                <td>Cellulose %</td>
                <td>Dry Matter %<sup>£</sup></td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td colspan="10"><bold>AM</bold><bold> – </bold>Arbuscular Mycorrhizae</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM01</td>
                <td>8.0</td>
                <td>70.4</td>
                <td>29.6</td>
                <td>42.3</td>
                <td>6.3</td>
                <td>54.5</td>
                <td>6.7</td>
                <td>22.1</td>
                <td>32.6</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM14</td>
                <td>8.7</td>
                <td>72.0</td>
                <td>28.0</td>
                <td>47.3</td>
                <td>8.8</td>
                <td>50.9</td>
                <td>9.1</td>
                <td>19.9</td>
                <td>30.3</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM06</td>
                <td>7.6</td>
                <td>71.1</td>
                <td>28.9</td>
                <td>45.6</td>
                <td>8.8</td>
                <td>49.6</td>
                <td>8.7</td>
                <td>18.2</td>
                <td>28.9</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM02</td>
                <td>10.1</td>
                <td>72.5</td>
                <td>27.5</td>
                <td>52.3</td>
                <td>8.4</td>
                <td>51.1</td>
                <td>10.1</td>
                <td>17.5</td>
                <td>29.7</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM09</td>
                <td>9.5</td>
                <td>71.6</td>
                <td>28.4</td>
                <td>44.6</td>
                <td>8.4</td>
                <td>51.4</td>
                <td>9.3</td>
                <td>19.1</td>
                <td>28.9</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM03</td>
                <td>9.1</td>
                <td>71.8</td>
                <td>28.2</td>
                <td>43.1</td>
                <td>7.9</td>
                <td>51.2</td>
                <td>9.6</td>
                <td>22.4</td>
                <td>29.4</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM12</td>
                <td>9.6</td>
                <td>71.4</td>
                <td>28.6</td>
                <td>44.1</td>
                <td>8.5</td>
                <td>51.6</td>
                <td>9.3</td>
                <td>18.8</td>
                <td>29.7</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM10</td>
                <td>10.3</td>
                <td>72.2</td>
                <td>27.8</td>
                <td>44.9</td>
                <td>7.8</td>
                <td>52.2</td>
                <td>11.5</td>
                <td>24.5</td>
                <td>29.3</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM05</td>
                <td>7.3</td>
                <td>72.0</td>
                <td>28.0</td>
                <td>46.1</td>
                <td>8.8</td>
                <td>54.1</td>
                <td>9.8</td>
                <td>22.4</td>
                <td>29.0</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM11</td>
                <td>10.8</td>
                <td>76.6</td>
                <td>23.4</td>
                <td>52.9</td>
                <td>8.2</td>
                <td>50.4</td>
                <td>9.5</td>
                <td>19.7</td>
                <td>28.8</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM08</td>
                <td>8.5</td>
                <td>71.1</td>
                <td>28.9</td>
                <td>40.3</td>
                <td>7.0</td>
                <td>52.4</td>
                <td>8.3</td>
                <td>20.6</td>
                <td>31.0</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM13</td>
                <td>7.7</td>
                <td>69.6</td>
                <td>30.4</td>
                <td>43.3</td>
                <td>9.5</td>
                <td>52.1</td>
                <td>8.3</td>
                <td>21.0</td>
                <td>33.0</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM07</td>
                <td>8.6</td>
                <td>70.9</td>
                <td>29.1</td>
                <td>43.7</td>
                <td>8.0</td>
                <td>53.3</td>
                <td>9.6</td>
                <td>22.2</td>
                <td>30.2</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <th colspan="10">
                  <bold>MB - Microbial Biota</bold>
                </th>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>MB1</td>
                <td>10.5</td>
                <td>72.9</td>
                <td>27.1</td>
                <td>49.4</td>
                <td>7.3</td>
                <td>49.3</td>
                <td>10.5</td>
                <td>23.8</td>
                <td>29.4</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>MB2</td>
                <td>10.3</td>
                <td>72.7</td>
                <td>27.3</td>
                <td>47.7</td>
                <td>6.8</td>
                <td>53.0</td>
                <td>10.4</td>
                <td>22.9</td>
                <td>30.8</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td colspan="10">
                  <bold>C – Control</bold>
                  <bold> non-inoculated</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>C</td>
                <td>7.1</td>
                <td>70.0</td>
                <td>30.0</td>
                <td>42.3</td>
                <td>7.5</td>
                <td>52.7</td>
                <td>7.1</td>
                <td>23.6</td>
                <td>33.6</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>MB/C%</td>
                <td>46%</td>
                <td>4%</td>
                <td>-10%</td>
                <td>15%</td>
                <td>-7%</td>
                <td>-3%</td>
                <td>48%</td>
                <td>-1%</td>
                <td>-10%</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Prob</td>
                <td>0.00</td>
                <td>0.06</td>
                <td>0.07</td>
                <td>0.13</td>
                <td>0.37</td>
                <td>0.57</td>
                <td>0.01</td>
                <td>0.99</td>
                <td>-</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>AM/C%</td>
                <td>25%</td>
                <td>3%</td>
                <td>-6%</td>
                <td>7%</td>
                <td>9%</td>
                <td>-1%</td>
                <td>30%</td>
                <td>-12%</td>
                <td>-11%</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Prob</td>
                <td>0.03</td>
                <td>0.12</td>
                <td>0.12</td>
                <td>0.48</td>
                <td>0.78</td>
                <td>0.89</td>
                <td>0.03</td>
                <td>0.03</td>
                <td>-</td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
        <fig id="idm1841641252">
          <label>Figure 1.</label>
          <caption>
            <title> Histogram of the % decrease in the raw pH of the inoculated theses from the                  non-inoculated Control, ordered by values.</title>
          </caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="images/image1.jpg" mime-subtype="jpg"/>
        </fig>
        <p>As far as the biofertilizers are concerned,       MB1 (-1.1%) was more acidifying than MB2 (-2.0%), and the AM were scaled according to three gradients of acidity: the most acidic strains, that is, below -4%, were the AM01, AM13, AM05, AM02 and AM08 strains. </p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="idm1842439196">
        <title>NIR-Tomoscopy, Foliar Weight and Composition</title>
        <p>The weight of the leaves harvested from the plants was much more reduced in the non-inoculated Control than in all other theses (<xref ref-type="table" rid="idm1842013900">Table 3a</xref>). Moreover, the foliar composition was affected by the category of the inoculant, as calculated from <xref ref-type="table" rid="idm1842013900">Table 3a</xref> and <xref ref-type="table" rid="idm1841823812">Table 3b</xref>. The MB category scored 7 significant increments and 3 decrements <italic>vs</italic>. the C, while the AM category scored 5 and 1 variations, respectively.</p>
        <p>As can be observed in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="idm1841636860">Figure 2</xref>, the constituents augmented in the leaves of the inoculated <italic>Sorghum</italic><italic>sudanensis</italic> were: crude protein, ash, digestible NDF, hemicellulose and the ether extract; the constituents reduced in contents and properties, namely dry matter, crude fiber, cellulose and crop maturity index, were increased less.</p>
        <fig id="idm1841636860">
          <label>Figure 2.</label>
          <caption>
            <title> Histogram of the % deviation in the foliar composition of the AM and MB categories from the non-inoculated control, ordered           according to the AM values.</title>
          </caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="images/image2.jpg" mime-subtype="jpg"/>
        </fig>
      </sec>
      <sec id="idm1842438620">
        <title>Foliar pH as the Key-Variable</title>
        <p>The PLS standard model (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="idm1841635492">Figure 3</xref>), with R<sup>2</sup>=0.81, showed that a low pH steadily favoured the dry mass weight and, to a lesser extent, the hemicellulose, digestible NDF and ether extract contents; on the other hand, a high pH tendentially increased the dry matter percentage and the cellulose content of the leaves.</p>
        <fig id="idm1841635492">
          <label>Figure 3.</label>
          <caption>
            <title> Histogram of the normalized Partial Least Squares regression coefficient of the raw foliar PH</title>
          </caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="images/image3.jpg" mime-subtype="jpg"/>
        </fig>
      </sec>
      <sec id="idm1842434156">
        <title>NIR-Tomoscopy</title>
        <p>In general, the discriminations of the three categories when the SCIO instrument was used were highly significant (<xref ref-type="table" rid="idm1841634268">Table 4</xref>). The leaves from plants inoculated with AM were individuated more correctly, in the scans on the fresh leaves (96%) as well as in the scans on the dry leaves (94%); the performances pertaining to the MB leaves were significant, albeit not so high (59 and 51%, respectively), while the Control leaves were individuated more clearly (74 and 65%, respectively). </p>
        <table-wrap id="idm1841634268">
          <label>Table 4.</label>
          <caption>
            <title> Reclassification of the AKA matrices of the NIR-SCIO spectra from fresh and dry leaves into three              Categories, and Probability of the diagonal elements.</title>
          </caption>
          <table rules="all" frame="box">
            <tbody>
              <tr>
                <td>
                  <bold> </bold>
                </td>
                <td> </td>
                <td colspan="3">
                  <bold> NIR-</bold>
                  <bold>Tomoscopy</bold>
                  <bold> (No. 480) </bold>
                </td>
                <td colspan="3">
                  <bold> Dry leaves (No. 48)</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>
                  <bold>Categories</bold>
                </td>
                <td> </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>C</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>MB</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>AM</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>C</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>MB</bold>
                </td>
                <td>
                  <bold>AM</bold>
                </td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Arbuscular Mycorrhizae (AM)</td>
                <td> </td>
                <td>22%</td>
                <td>31%</td>
                <td>96%</td>
                <td>30%</td>
                <td>48%</td>
                <td>94%</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Microbial Biota (MB)</td>
                <td/>
                <td>5%</td>
                <td>59%</td>
                <td>2%</td>
                <td>5%</td>
                <td>51%</td>
                <td>3%</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Control (C)</td>
                <td/>
                <td>74%</td>
                <td>11%</td>
                <td>1%</td>
                <td>65%</td>
                <td>0%</td>
                <td>1%</td>
              </tr>
              <tr>
                <td>Prob. Diagonal elements</td>
                <td>P</td>
                <td>&lt; 0.0001</td>
                <td>&lt; 0.0001</td>
                <td>&lt; 0.0001</td>
                <td>&lt; 0.0001</td>
                <td>&lt; 0.0001</td>
                <td>&lt; 0.0001</td>
              </tr>
            </tbody>
          </table>
        </table-wrap>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="idm1842368052" sec-type="discussion">
      <title>Discussion</title>
      <sec id="idm1842367908">
        <title>Mycorrhizal Modifier</title>
        <p>A luxuriating effect has been displayed in foliar development. A meta-analysis of the ﬁeld studies on the responses of wheat to AM has highlighted that ﬁeld AM inoculation can be proposed as an effective agronomic practice for wheat production<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842308340">7</xref>, with aboveground biomass increases of around 20%, as already assessed in maize under high<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842289812">11</xref>,<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842265908">15</xref><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842253516">22</xref><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842233772">23</xref><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842228012">24</xref>or low<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842238236">25</xref>Italian input conditions and under Indian conditions<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842255748">21</xref></p>
        <p>As expected, a more juvenile ontogenic status emerged for the leaves of inoculated plants but graded among the inocula types. </p>
        <p>Claps et al.<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842236004">26</xref>, in field conditions, after the autumn sowing of barley (<italic>Hordeum</italic><italic>vulgare</italic>) and clover (<italic>Trifolium</italic><italic>alexandrinum</italic>) tanned at 1 kg ha<sup>-1</sup> with the MB1 of the present work, observed a slight increase in yield (not significant), but also significant variations in composition (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="idm1841546220">Figure 4</xref>), albeit only in the barley grass. As in the present work, the advantage was centred on crude protein (+18%), but in that case a strong reduction in fibrousness was found, which enhanced the digestibility coefficients of the NDF, crude protein and organic matter. On the other hand, a reduction in                ash (-10%) disagreed with the increase observed in the present work.</p>
        <fig id="idm1841546220">
          <label>Figure 4.</label>
          <caption>
            <title> Histogram of the % deviation in the grass composition of the treated barley,                 according to Claps et al.26, with MB1 from the non-inoculated control, ordered according to the values.</title>
          </caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="images/image4.jpg" mime-subtype="jpg"/>
        </fig>
        <p>Other AA have conducted experiments on AM at more mature stages, but hay and silages have rarely been studied. Uzun<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842253516">22</xref> observed that no reductions in forage yield occurred in <italic>Sorghum</italic><italic>sudanensis</italic> or maize, when the diminished supply of fertilizers was balanced with the action of <italic>Glomus spp.</italic> and the forage produced using an AM treatment showed better chemical characteristics when harvested at an appropriate phenological stage.</p>
        <p>As far as maize forage is concerned, Sibi et al.<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842209028">27</xref> observed that an AM fungus was significant, at a level of 5%, on water soluble carbohydrates, which increased by 14%. The Authors hypothesised that inoculation with an AM fungus increased the cytokinins, and, moving nutrients from other parts to the leaves tended to delay their senescence.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="idm1842360420">
        <title>Raw pH fall-out as a Key-Variable</title>
        <p>In our short modification experiment, low pH steadily favoured the dry mass weight and, to a lesser extent, the hemicellulose, digestible NDF and the ether extract contents of the leaves. If the raw pH is a real key-variable, the modifier direction in <italic>Sorghum</italic><italic>sudanensis</italic> appears quite attractive for ruminants.     Phyto-evolution studies<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842277500">17</xref>,<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842207012">28</xref> of a subarctic ﬂora suggest that tissue pH itself is controlled to a great extent for a given species, because of its direct or indirect functions in the plant; in fact, a low pH corresponds to poor digestibility and may therefore act as an anti-herbivore defence in the same subarctic ﬂora.</p>
        <p>The field surveys of AM communities over a wide range of soil pH suggest that it is also the major driving force in structuring these communities<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842205428">29</xref>.</p>
        <p>It was found, in the microcosm experiments<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842312732">6</xref>, that N<sub>2</sub>O emissions were cumulatively 42.4% higher without AM than with AM microcosms. However, it should be recalled that the Authors, in their tomato experiment, observed an increase in soil pH after an AM inoculum of 7.75 <italic>vs</italic>. 7.62 (+1.6%; P=0.004). Unfortunately, the raw pH was not measured in that experiment. In light of our present and previous results<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842265908">15</xref>,<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842278868">16</xref>, it is possible to hypothesize that the transfer of [H<sup>+</sup>] from the soil to the AM plants could have effectively reduced the circulating acidity of the soil. Several results support this hypothesis. Bago et al.<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842201036">30</xref> demonstrated, in a sterile culture with <italic>Glomus </italic><italic>intraradices</italic><italic>,</italic> that extra-radicalmycelium utilised NO<sub>3</sub>-N and increased pH of the medium by up to one unit. Li and Christie<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842214716">31</xref> showed that soil solution Zn                  concentrations were lower and pH values were higher in mycorrhizal treatments than non-mycorrhizal controls, and the AM effects were more pronounced at higher Zn application rates.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="idm1842356028">
        <title>Vibrational Spectroscopy</title>
        <p>The direct NIRS discrimination of bio-fertilized crops is rare. A first work on <italic>Ocimum</italic><italic>basilicum</italic><italic>cv.</italic> “Genovese”<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842193236">32</xref> assessed that three AMs were modifiers of growth, and distributors of glandular trichomes and of the essential oil composition, with a homologous relative pattern that was appreciated by NIRS and Electronic Nose. A smart NIRS technique that has recently been applied to hay-litter-bags<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842247828">19</xref>has produced promising results in discriminating the fingerprint effects of                    bio-fertilizers. The results of direct NIR discrimination have instead been obtained for several cases. Szuvandzsiev et al.<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842192012">33</xref> suggested that the effect of very different irrigation regimes on tomato leaves is detectable by means of NIRS, irrespective of the cultivar and phenological stage; around 960 nm emerged a good correlation between different irrigation regimes and the reflectance of the raw spectra of tomato leaves taken from the 900-1000 nm representative spectral range. Foliar UV-Vis-NIR spectra (325-1075 nm) was used to discriminate high oil and high protein from a normal maize type on five sampling dates over two years<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842190500">34</xref>; the results showed that the qualitative models constituted a robust classification method; however, the best method on average attained only 58.3±5.5% of validation, a superior value to the hazard threshold of 33%, but of no use for traceability purposes. The somewhat optimistic values reported in the present work, obtained using the smart NIR-SCIO (Tab. 4), need to be confirmed over some years and under different conditions.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="idm1842355308" sec-type="conclusions">
      <title>Conclusions </title>
      <p>In a meta-analysis concerning nearly half a million species x sites worldwide on twenty-one plant traits, Moles et al.<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842184884">35</xref>stated that the mean annual temperature was correlated more with the plant traits than with the mean annual precipitation. Considering the present results, a further recommended easy trait that could be considered is the raw pH.</p>
      <p>In this work, the fall out of the raw pH responded as a simple sign of AM inoculation and activities. However, various responses were observed for the same <italic>Sorghum </italic><italic>sudanensis</italic> with different AMs, thus suggesting more useful combinations and interactions, where the raw pH can be considered a key-variable of plant modifications in an AM framework.</p>
      <p>The vibrational spectroscopy of leaves can be used to rapidly classify the outcomes linked to symbiotic agents, and a smart network can be used to capitalize on useful information in an NIRS leaf data-base.</p>
      <p>From a practical point of view, it may be recommended to monitor raw pH for traceability purposes in an AM multiplication framework. </p>
      <p>Pursuing the study of pH from a plant-to-soil point of view is better than the inverse, and each search conducted to connect the microbial soil fingerprint (hay-litter-bags<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842247828">19</xref>or others<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ridm1842183300">36</xref>)to the NIRS fingerprint and productivity traits of leaves can be considered useful.</p>
      <sec id="idm1842352788">
        <title>Acknowledgments</title>
        <p>The authors wish to thank the Fondazione CRT, Torino – Italy, for the financial support to the scientific activities of the “Accademia di Agricoltura di Torino”.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ridm1842443532">
        <label>1.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Abhilash</surname>
            <given-names>P C</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Tripathi</surname>
            <given-names>V</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Edrisi</surname>
            <given-names>S A</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Dubey</surname>
            <given-names>R K</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Bakshi</surname>
            <given-names>M</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Dubey</surname>
            <given-names>P K</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Singh</surname>
            <given-names>H B</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Ebbs</surname>
            <given-names>S D</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Sustainability of crop production from polluted lands</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2016</year>
          </date>
          <source>Energy, Ecology and Environment</source>
          <volume>1</volume>
          <fpage>54</fpage>
          <lpage>65</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842509564">
        <label>2.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="book">
          <name>
            <surname>Vurukonda</surname>
            <given-names>SSK</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Giovanardi</surname>
            <given-names>D</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Stefani</surname>
            <given-names>E</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Symbiotic Agriculture: increasing knowledge on the mode of action of beneficial microorganisms</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2017</year>
          </date>
          <chapter-title>Poster at the XXIII National Conference of Italian Society of Plant Pathology.</chapter-title>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842456428">
        <label>3.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Weyens</surname>
            <given-names>N</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Lelie</surname>
            <given-names>D van der</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Taghavi</surname>
            <given-names>S</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Newman</surname>
            <given-names>L</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Vangronsveld</surname>
            <given-names>J</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Exploiting plantmicrobe partnerships to improve biomass production and remediation</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2009</year>
          </date>
          <source>Trends in Biotechnology</source>
          <volume>27</volume>
          <fpage>591</fpage>
          <lpage>598</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842545492">
        <label>4.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>XWang</surname>
            <given-names>X</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Variation in phosphorus acquisition efficiency among maize varieties as related to mycorrhizal functioning. Doctoral dissertation</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2016</year>
          </date>
          <source>Wageningen University</source>
          <volume>168</volume>
          <fpage>pp.</fpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842306540">
        <label>5.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Thirkell</surname>
            <given-names>T J</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Cameron</surname>
            <given-names>D D</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Hodge</surname>
            <given-names>A</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Resolving the ‘nitrogen paradox’of arbuscular mycorrhizas: fertilization with organic matter brings considerable benefits for plant nutrition and growth</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2016</year>
          </date>
          <source>Plant, Cell and Environment</source>
          <volume>39</volume>
          <fpage>1683</fpage>
          <lpage>1690</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842312732">
        <label>6.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Bender</surname>
            <given-names>S F</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Plantenga</surname>
            <given-names>F</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Neftel</surname>
            <given-names>A</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Jocher</surname>
            <given-names>M</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Oberholzer</surname>
            <given-names>H R</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Köhl</surname>
            <given-names>L</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Giles</surname>
            <given-names>M</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Daniell</surname>
            <given-names>T J</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Heijden</surname>
            <given-names>MG Van Der</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Symbiotic relationships between soil fungi and plants reduce N2O emissions from soil</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2014</year>
          </date>
          <source>The ISME Journal</source>
          <volume>8</volume>
          <fpage>1336</fpage>
          <lpage>1345</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842308340">
        <label>7.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Pellegrino</surname>
            <given-names>E</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Öpik</surname>
            <given-names>M</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Bonaria</surname>
            <given-names>E</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Ercoli</surname>
            <given-names>L</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Responses of wheat to arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi: A meta-analysis of field studies from 1975 to 2013. Soil Biology and</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2015</year>
          </date>
          <source>Biochemistry</source>
          <volume>84</volume>
          <fpage>210</fpage>
          <lpage>217</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842303612">
        <label>8.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Bona</surname>
            <given-names>E</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Lingua</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Todeschini</surname>
            <given-names>V</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Effect of bioinoculants on the quality of crops. In: “Bioformulations: for Sustainable Agriculture”</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2016</year>
          </date>
          <fpage>93</fpage>
          <lpage>124</lpage>
          <publisher-loc>(Eds.Arora,N,Mehnaz,S,Balestrini,R),Springer,New Delhi</publisher-loc>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842297132">
        <label>9.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Raiola</surname>
            <given-names>A</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Tenore</surname>
            <given-names>G C</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Petito</surname>
            <given-names>R</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Ciampaglia</surname>
            <given-names>R</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Ritieni</surname>
            <given-names>A</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Improving of nutraceutical features of many important Mediterranean vegetables by inoculation with a new commercial product</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2015</year>
          </date>
          <source>Current Pharmaceutical Biotechnology</source>
          <volume>16</volume>
          <fpage>738</fpage>
          <lpage>746</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842287004">
        <label>10.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Migliorini</surname>
            <given-names>P</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Torri</surname>
            <given-names>L</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Whittaker</surname>
            <given-names>A</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Moschini</surname>
            <given-names>V</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Benedettelli</surname>
            <given-names>S</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Masoero</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Old and new common wheat (TriticumaestivumL.) varieties in organic: connecting agronomic, microorganism, phytochemical and bread sensory characteristics</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2018</year>
          </date>
          <source>Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment</source>
          <volume>16</volume>
          <fpage>22</fpage>
          <lpage>27</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842289812">
        <label>11.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Tripaldi</surname>
            <given-names>C</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Novero</surname>
            <given-names>M</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>DiGiovanni</surname>
            <given-names>S</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Chiarabaglio</surname>
            <given-names>P M</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Lorenzoni</surname>
            <given-names>P</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>MeoZilio</surname>
            <given-names>D</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Palocci</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Balconi</surname>
            <given-names>C</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Aleandri</surname>
            <given-names>R</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Impact of Mycorrhizal Fungi and rhizosphere microorganisms on maize grain yield and chemical composition</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2017</year>
          </date>
          <source>Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Sciences</source>
          <volume>54</volume>
          <fpage>857</fpage>
          <lpage>865</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842273972">
        <label>12.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Peiretti</surname>
            <given-names>P G</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Tassone</surname>
            <given-names>S</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Masoero</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Barbera</surname>
            <given-names>S</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Chemical and physical properties of meat of bulls and steers fed Mycorrhizal or Conventional corn</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2018</year>
          </date>
          <source>In: “Agricultural Research Updates” (Eds: Gorawala, P and Mandhatri, S), Nova Science Publishers, Inc., NY</source>
          <volume>23</volume>
          <fpage>177</fpage>
          <lpage>196</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842269796">
        <label>13.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Nuti</surname>
            <given-names>M</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Giovannetti</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Borderline products between bio-fertilizers/bio-effectors and plant protectants: the role of microbial consortia</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2015</year>
          </date>
          <source>Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology A</source>
          <volume>5</volume>
          <fpage>305</fpage>
          <lpage>315</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842267276">
        <label>14.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="book">
          <name>
            <surname>Malusà</surname>
            <given-names>E</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Pinzari</surname>
            <given-names>F</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Canfora</surname>
            <given-names>L</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Efficacy of biofertilizers: challenges to improve crop production.In:Singh,DP,Singh,H,Prabha,R.(eds.),Microbial Inoculants</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2016</year>
          </date>
          <chapter-title>in Sustainable Agricultural Productivity</chapter-title>
          <volume>2</volume>
          <fpage>17</fpage>
          <lpage>40</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842265908">
        <label>15.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Masoero</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Giovannetti</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>In vivo Stem pH can testify the acidification of the maize treated by mycorrhizal and microbial consortium</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2015</year>
          </date>
          <source>Journal of Environmental and Agricultural Sciences</source>
          <volume>3</volume>
          <fpage>23</fpage>
          <lpage>30</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842278868">
        <label>16.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Masoero</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Cugnetto</surname>
            <given-names>A</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Giovannetti</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Consorzi microbici, riduttori del pH in vivo, contro la Flavescenza Dorata: primi risultati in Piemonte</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2017</year>
          </date>
          <source>L’enologo</source>
          <volume>3</volume>
          <fpage>79</fpage>
          <lpage>82</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842277500">
        <label>17.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Cornelissen</surname>
            <given-names>JHC</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Quested</surname>
            <given-names>H M</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>RSP</surname>
            <given-names>Van Logtestijn</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Pérez-Harguinde-guy</surname>
            <given-names>N</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Gwynn-Jones</surname>
            <given-names>D</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Dìaz</surname>
            <given-names>S</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Callaghan</surname>
            <given-names>T V</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Press</surname>
            <given-names>M C</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Aerts</surname>
            <given-names>R</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Foliar pH as a new plant trait: can it explain variation in foliar chemistry and carbon cycling processes among subarctic plant species and types?</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2006</year>
          </date>
          <source>Oecologia</source>
          <volume>147</volume>
          <fpage>315</fpage>
          <lpage>326</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842250060">
        <label>18.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Cornelissen</surname>
            <given-names>JGC</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Sibma</surname>
            <given-names>F</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>RSP</surname>
            <given-names>Van Logtestijn</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Broekman</surname>
            <given-names>R A</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Thompson</surname>
            <given-names>K</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Leaf pH as a plant trait: species-driven rather than soil-driven variation</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2011</year>
          </date>
          <source>Functional Ecology</source>
          <volume>25</volume>
          <fpage>449</fpage>
          <lpage>455</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842247828">
        <label>19.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Masoero</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Delmastro</surname>
            <given-names>M</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Cugnetto</surname>
            <given-names>A</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Giovannetti</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Nuti</surname>
            <given-names>M</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>NIRS footprint of bio-fertilizers from hay litter-bags</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2018</year>
          </date>
          <source>Journal of Agronomy Research</source>
          <volume>1</volume>
          <fpage>22</fpage>
          <lpage>33</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842241924">
        <label>20.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Tassone</surname>
            <given-names>S</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Masoero</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Peiretti</surname>
            <given-names>P G</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Vibrational spectroscopy to predict in vitro digestibility and the maturity index of different forage crops during the growing cycle and after freeze- or oven-drying treatment</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2014</year>
          </date>
          <source>Animal Feed Science and Technology</source>
          <volume>194</volume>
          <fpage>12</fpage>
          <lpage>25</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842255748">
        <label>21.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Mäder</surname>
            <given-names>P</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Kaiser</surname>
            <given-names>F</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Adholeya</surname>
            <given-names>A</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Singh</surname>
            <given-names>R</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Uppal</surname>
            <given-names>H S</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Sharma</surname>
            <given-names>A K</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Srivastava</surname>
            <given-names>R</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Inoculation of root microorganisms for sustainable wheat–rice and wheat–black gram rotations in India</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2011</year>
          </date>
          <source>Soil Biology and Biochemistry</source>
          <volume>43</volume>
          <fpage>609</fpage>
          <lpage>619</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842253516">
        <label>22.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Uzun</surname>
            <given-names>P</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Improvement of forage yield to improve dairy product quality: mycorrhizal fungi application and differentiation of forage conservation methods. Doctoral tesi</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2016</year>
          </date>
          <fpage>1</fpage>
          <lpage>84</lpage>
          <institution>University of Naples Federico II</institution>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842233772">
        <label>23.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Uzun</surname>
            <given-names>P</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Masucci</surname>
            <given-names>F</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Varricchio</surname>
            <given-names>M L</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Serrapica</surname>
            <given-names>F</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Ottaviano</surname>
            <given-names>L</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>A</surname>
            <given-names>Di Francia</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Effects of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and low fertilizer supply on forage quality, milk traits and profitability</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2017</year>
          </date>
          <source>Italian Journal of Animal Science</source>
          <volume>16</volume>
          <issue>1</issue>
          <fpage>219</fpage>
          <lpage>220</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842228012">
        <label>24.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Masoero</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Rotolo</surname>
            <given-names>L</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Zoccarato</surname>
            <given-names>I</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Gasco</surname>
            <given-names>L</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Schiavone</surname>
            <given-names>A</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>V</surname>
            <given-names>De Marco</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Meineri</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Borreani</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Tabacco</surname>
            <given-names>E</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Casa</surname>
            <given-names>Della</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Faeti</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Chiarabaglio</surname>
            <given-names>V</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Lanzanova</surname>
            <given-names>C PM</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Locatelli</surname>
            <given-names>S</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Aleandri</surname>
            <given-names>R</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Symbiotic corn can improve yield, reduce mycotoxins, and preserve nutritive value</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2018</year>
          </date>
          <source>In: “Agricultural Research Updates” (Eds:P,Gorawala,S,Mandhatri),Nova Science Publishers,Inc.,NY</source>
          <volume>24</volume>
          <fpage>117</fpage>
          <lpage>140</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842238236">
        <label>25.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Sabia</surname>
            <given-names>E</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Claps</surname>
            <given-names>S</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Morone</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Bruno</surname>
            <given-names>A</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Sepe</surname>
            <given-names>L</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Aleandri</surname>
            <given-names>R</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Field inoculation of arbuscular mycorrhiza on maize (ZeamaysL.) under low inputs: preliminary study on quantitative and qualitative aspects</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2015</year>
          </date>
          <source>Italian Journal of Agronomy</source>
          <volume>10</volume>
          <fpage>30</fpage>
          <lpage>33</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842236004">
        <label>26.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Claps</surname>
            <given-names>S</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Sabia</surname>
            <given-names>E</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Sepe</surname>
            <given-names>L</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Rufrano</surname>
            <given-names>L</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Morone</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Paladino</surname>
            <given-names>F</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Fedele</surname>
            <given-names>V</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>vivodigestibility of different forage species inoculated with Arbuscular mycorrhiza spp</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2013</year>
          </date>
          <source>Italian Journal of Animal Science</source>
          <volume>12</volume>
          <issue>1</issue>
          <fpage>8</fpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842209028">
        <label>27.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Sibi</surname>
            <given-names>M</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Faryabi</surname>
            <given-names>E</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Marzban</surname>
            <given-names>Z</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Assessment of forage corn quality intercropping with green beans under influence ofRhizobium bacteriaand arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2015</year>
          </date>
          <source>Biodiversity and Environmental Sciences</source>
          <volume>6</volume>
          <fpage>418</fpage>
          <lpage>424</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842207012">
        <label>28.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Freschet</surname>
            <given-names>G T</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Cornelissen</surname>
            <given-names>JHC</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>RSP</surname>
            <given-names>van Logtestijn</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Aerts</surname>
            <given-names>R</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Evidence of the ‘plant economics spectrum’ in a subarctic ﬂora</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2010</year>
          </date>
          <source>Journal of Ecology</source>
          <volume>98</volume>
          <fpage>362</fpage>
          <lpage>373</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842205428">
        <label>29.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Dumbrell</surname>
            <given-names>A J</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Nelson</surname>
            <given-names>M</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Helgason</surname>
            <given-names>T</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Dytham</surname>
            <given-names>C</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Fitter</surname>
            <given-names>A H</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Relative roles of niche and neutral processes in structuring a soil microbial community</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2010</year>
          </date>
          <source>The ISME Journal</source>
          <volume>4</volume>
          <fpage>337</fpage>
          <lpage>345</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842201036">
        <label>30.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Bago</surname>
            <given-names>B</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Vierheilig</surname>
            <given-names>H</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Piche</surname>
            <given-names>Y</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Azcon-Aguilar</surname>
            <given-names>C</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Nitrate depletion and pH changes induced by the extraradical mycelium of the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungusGlomusintraradicesgrown in monoxenic culture</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>1996</year>
          </date>
          <source>New Phytologist</source>
          <volume>133</volume>
          <fpage>273</fpage>
          <lpage>280</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842214716">
        <label>31.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Li</surname>
            <given-names>X</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Christie</surname>
            <given-names>P</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Changes in soil solution Zn and pH and uptake of Zn by arbuscular mycorrhizal red clover in Zn-contaminated soil</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2001</year>
          </date>
          <source>Chemosphere</source>
          <volume>42</volume>
          <fpage>201</fpage>
          <lpage>207</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842193236">
        <label>32.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Copetta</surname>
            <given-names>A</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Lingua</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Berta</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Bardi</surname>
            <given-names>L</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Masoero</surname>
            <given-names>G</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Three arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi differently affect growth, distribution of glandular trichomes and essential oil composition, appreciated by NIR Spectroscopy and Electronic Nose</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2006</year>
          </date>
          <source>inOcimumbasilicumvar. Genovese. Acta Horticolturae</source>
          <volume>723</volume>
          <fpage>151</fpage>
          <lpage>156</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842192012">
        <label>33.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="book">
          <name>
            <surname>Szuvandzsiev</surname>
            <given-names>P</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Pék</surname>
            <given-names>Z</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Szántó</surname>
            <given-names>C</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Helyes</surname>
            <given-names>L</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Application of VIS-NIR reflectance spectra for estimating water supply effect on open field processing tomato. In:</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2014</year>
          </date>
          <chapter-title>XIII International Symposium on Processing Tomato</chapter-title>
          <fpage>191</fpage>
          <lpage>195</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842190500">
        <label>34.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Kahriman</surname>
            <given-names>F</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Demirel</surname>
            <given-names>K</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Inalpulat</surname>
            <given-names>M</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Egesel</surname>
            <given-names>C O</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Genc</surname>
            <given-names>L</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Using leaf based hyperspectral models for monitoring biochemical constituents and plant phenotyping in maize</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2016</year>
          </date>
          <source>Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology</source>
          <volume>18</volume>
          <fpage>1705</fpage>
          <lpage>1718</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842184884">
        <label>35.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Moles</surname>
            <given-names>A T</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Perkins</surname>
            <given-names>S E</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Laffan</surname>
            <given-names>S W</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Flores-Moreno</surname>
            <given-names>H</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Awasthy</surname>
            <given-names>M</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Tindall</surname>
            <given-names>M L</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Sack</surname>
            <given-names>L</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Pitman</surname>
            <given-names>A</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Kattge</surname>
            <given-names>J</given-names>
          </name>
          <name>
            <surname>Aarssen</surname>
            <given-names>L W</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Which is a better predictor of plant traits: temperature or precipitation?</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2014</year>
          </date>
          <source>Journal of Vegetation Science</source>
          <volume>25</volume>
          <fpage>1167</fpage>
          <lpage>1180</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ridm1842183300">
        <label>36.</label>
        <mixed-citation xlink:type="simple" publication-type="journal">
          <name>
            <surname>Broadfoot</surname>
            <given-names>M</given-names>
          </name>
          <article-title>Microbes added to seeds could boost crop production. Scientific American. Retrieved from:https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/microbes-added-to-seeds-could-boost-crop-production/</article-title>
          <date>
            <year>2016</year>
          </date>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>
