2022
DOI: 10.1007/s13199-022-00890-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Identification of the symbiovar maamori in Mesorhizobium isolated from nodules of Ononis repens in the Maamora forest (Morocco)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 62 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There are a few symbiovar names that, if they had been proposed as species epithets, would have been corrected by the nomenclature editors because they are not well formed according to the rules for Latin names. Thus, lysilomaefficiens [ 25 ] would be better as lysilomefficiens (based on the stem Lysilom- of the host plant name), phaseolarum [ 40 ] would be phaseolearum (of the tribe Phaseoleae), oxytropis [ 41 ] would be oxytropidis (of Oxytropis ), maamori [ 42 ] would be maamorensis (from the place Maamora). While authors may, in future, prefer to use the corrected form, we consider either version to be acceptable.…”
Section: Considerations For a Stable Classification Of Symbiovarsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…There are a few symbiovar names that, if they had been proposed as species epithets, would have been corrected by the nomenclature editors because they are not well formed according to the rules for Latin names. Thus, lysilomaefficiens [ 25 ] would be better as lysilomefficiens (based on the stem Lysilom- of the host plant name), phaseolarum [ 40 ] would be phaseolearum (of the tribe Phaseoleae), oxytropis [ 41 ] would be oxytropidis (of Oxytropis ), maamori [ 42 ] would be maamorensis (from the place Maamora). While authors may, in future, prefer to use the corrected form, we consider either version to be acceptable.…”
Section: Considerations For a Stable Classification Of Symbiovarsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…astragalus/caraganae have been used to label clades in a nodC phylogeny [ 55 ], but the authors did not describe them in the text, so we consider that they did not define these potential symbiovars and we have not included the names in Table 1 . Several later publications have repeated the names [ 41 42 56 ], but still with no formal definition.…”
Section: Considerations For a Stable Classification Of Symbiovarsmentioning
confidence: 99%