ライフサイエンスコーパス: monoculture

1 robial swarm propagation has been studied in monoculture.

2 s were both observed in Eucalyptus urophylla monoculture.

3 plantations were similar as that of N-fixing monoculture.

4 h H(2)/formate levels during fermentation in monoculture.

5 to gemcitabine toxicity than those grown in monoculture.

6 e C. jejuni but is dispensable for growth in monoculture.

7 eassembled from isolates that had evolved in monoculture.

8 ility reduced from 22% to 13%) compared with monoculture.

9 hey formed 2D sheet-like structures in rMVEC monoculture.

10 nded resources than is caught by any species monoculture.

11 higher-diversity plots outperformed the best monoculture.

12 ample that contained essentially an archaeal monoculture.

13 and revenue by 14-27% relative to continuous monoculture.

14 odern crop cultivars are bred to be grown in monoculture.

15 of a mixed-forest complex into a Scots pine monoculture.

16 types are lost, a dependency not observed in monoculture.

17 ghed the higher productivity attainable by a monoculture.

18 and 16%, respectively, compared to the best monoculture.

19 tatively predicted from traits of species in monoculture.

20 her resistance to antibiotics than in either monoculture.

21 over twice than that in Castanopsis hystrix monoculture.

22 reater predictive power, in mixtures than in monocultures.

23 ixtures and negative plant-soil feedbacks in monocultures.

24 r 8 years in species mixtures rather than in monocultures.

25 prisingly fail to activate trigeminal neuron monocultures.

26 ersified agricultural systems, and intensive monocultures.

27 NF-alpha (100 U/ml), when compared with GEnC monocultures.

28 smooth muscle cell protein expression in ASC monocultures.

29 engthened food chains by 10%-20% compared to monocultures.

30 -culture with HCC hepatocytes as compared to monocultures.

31 formed 24 h, 48 h and 72 h in co-culture and monocultures.

32 il depths in the three species when grown in monocultures.

33 h the sums of these activities in PMN and MC monocultures.

34 rongly self-limited because they attack crop monocultures.

35 m genetically diverse vs genetically uniform monocultures.

36 evolved more in communities than they did in monocultures.

37 mixed culture surpassed the mean of the two monocultures.

38 ure compared with P. gingivalis or F. alocis monocultures.

39 ied out in as little as 5h when working with monocultures.

40 elds through agrochemical intensification of monocultures.

41 red with their expression in sulfate-limited monocultures.

42 by addition of recombinant NRG-1beta to ARVM monocultures.

43 enhanced the TRAP activity of preosteoclast monocultures.

44 d intracellular cAMP levels of preosteoclast monocultures.

45 siting tree species polycultures compared to monocultures.

46 ots attaining 2.7 times greater biomass than monocultures.

47 atients with PA were developed as planktonic monocultures.

48 which had not been previously identified in monocultures.

49 ylolyticus which were not represented in the monocultures.

50 king dissociation of networks in endothelial monocultures.

51 enotypes that are not observed when studying monocultures.

52 abolite discovery is often conducted in pure monocultures.

53 h higher species biomass inequality in their monocultures.

54 n open environments as opposed to vulnerable monocultures.

55 tability, and nutrient recycling compared to monocultures.

56 ased CSC-mediated growth and invasion in GBM-monocultures.

57 ession at this site, and 70% greater than in monocultures.

58 sity make polycultures more sustainable than monocultures.

59 high-diversity plots than expected based on monocultures.

60 timizing all three functions than any of the monocultures.

61 ly relevant therapeutic response compared to monocultures.

62 in 32 tree plots (21 x 21 m; 12 tree species monocultures, 20 four-species polycultures) every 45 day

63 In wheat monoculture, Adalia and Chrysoperla mixed treatments cau

64 10- to 100-fold) up-regulated in S. gordonii monocultures after 3 h of growth when exogenous arginine

65 he 3D-bioprinted model versus traditional 2D monoculture, against human CAVD tissue.

66 actices that may offset impacts of intensive monoculture agriculture.

67 In monoculture, all species produced more above-ground biom

68 de better natural pest control compared with monocultures, although the success varies depending on t

69 ed culture, the metabolic activity of Caco-2 monoculture and 90% Caco-2/10% HT29-MTX co-cultures on L

70 Farmed shrimp are cultivated as monoculture and are susceptible to infections.

71 CC-1 and UM-SCC-47 cells were cultured in 2D monoculture and compared with: 2D co-culture with cancer

72 cks for two grassland plant species grown in monoculture and competition in soils that had or had not

73 Cells were treated in monoculture and cumulative coculture conditions.

74 increased invasive performance when grown in monoculture and decreased native performance in native-o

75 Monoculture and improper management may reduce soil fert

76 he in vivo transcriptome of P. aeruginosa in monoculture and in coculture with Staphylococcus aureus.

77 ptation to wheat straw as a resource both in monoculture and in polycultures wherein on-going eco-evo

78 s in the rat granuloma pouch model system in monoculture and is completely outcompeted by the wild-ty

79 to varying inorganic N availability, in both monoculture and mixed culture conditions.

80 rowth in a mixed culture utilizing data from monoculture and mixed-culture growth curves.

81 But nevertheless, some rhizobacterial monoculture and mixture treatments improved per plant (s

82 ely to negatively impact bacterial growth in monoculture and more likely to reveal net interactive ef

83 nities on four plant species' performance in monoculture and outcomes of interspecific competition.

84 looding responses of 60 grassland species in monocultures and 16-species mixtures.

85 pplying our engineered lambda-DART phages to monocultures and a mixed bacterial community comprising

86 wn increased productivity in comparison with monocultures and allow for the reduction of metabolic lo

87 erage of 1.7 times more biomass than species monocultures and are more productive than the average mo

88 nt diversity and was greater with warming in monocultures and at intermediate diversity, but at high

89 formation in vehicle- or gemcitabine-treated monocultures and co-cultured PC cells.

90 Monocultures and co-cultures were layered on L-pNIPAM hy

91 resources compared with the same species in monocultures and evolved to use waste products generated

92 enhanced wound closure rates in keratinocyte monocultures and in the living skin equivalent system, e

93 We measured how monocultures and mixtures of grassland plant species wit

94 lonized by different ECM fungal isolates, in monocultures and mixtures, enabled us to test for both i

95 Growing 12 grassland species in test monocultures and mixtures, we found character displaceme

96 bacterial growth was tested using planktonic monocultures and multibacterial biofilms.

97 tion of PAR1 knock-out mice, oligodendrocyte monocultures and oligodendrocyte-astrocyte cocultures, w

98 maximum biomass almost a month earlier than monocultures and plots treated with foliar fungicide, de

99 ies to compare the sustainability metrics of monocultures and polycultures of six fresh-water algal s

100 robial species in replicate polycultures and monocultures and quantified local adaptation.

101 Modern agricultural systems are often large monocultures and so are highly vulnerable to disease out

102 lly related to the growth rates of clones in monocultures and varied strongly with the food.

103 c species have included fungal and bacterial monocultures and, to a lesser extent, microbial communit

104 tailored to kill 92% of bacterial cells in a monoculture, and in a co-culture of E. coli and HEK 293T

105 to 60 years old, which were first tested in monocultures, and then exposed for 10 weeks as mixed pop

106 regions; (b) grass/legume mixtures vs grass monocultures; and (c) soil pH of 5-6 vs other pHs.

107 In 3D monocultures, antiestrogens and antiandrogens induced an

108 . maritima cell densities when compared with monoculture as well as concomitant formation of exopolys

109 AD mean lifetimes and greater migration than monocultures at 24, 48, and 72 hours postseeding.

110 is conditionally auxotrophic for arginine in monoculture but biosynthesises arginine when coaggregate

111 egion beta chain are nonresponsive to SEA in monoculture but display strong STAT3 activation and IL-1

112 pleted for the alanine racemase AlrA died in monoculture but survived in a biofilm colony co-culture

113 years of evolutionary history than intensive monocultures but 300 million fewer years than forests.

114 rom species mixtures than those from species monocultures, but similar among individuals from genetic

115 tivity from the averages of their respective monocultures, but some did overyield significantly.

116 ion in peripheral blood mononuclear cells in monoculture by 41% and 55%, and co-culture with HCT-116

117 N and P nutrient-use efficiency compared to monocultures by balancing trade-offs in nutrient-use eff

118 Bicultures outperformed monocultures by performing multiple functions simultaneo

119 and endure more changeable environments than monocultures can, they represent an important new fronti

120 these ecosystems, that even the best-chosen monocultures cannot achieve greater productivity or carb

121 re species had higher total biomass than did monoculture communities, but native and nonnative commun

122 d whether the members of Andropogon gerardii monocultures compete via common mycorrhizal networks.

123 In this study, experiments with Pelagibacter monocultures confirmed that these cells are capable of m

124 ake and assimilation rates in four 40-yr-old monoculture coniferous plantations (Pinus koraiensis, Pi

125 Compared with its monoculture counterpart, the consortium exhibits reduced

126 survival in the wild, this is suboptimal in monoculture crop fields for maximizing productivity and

127 ly been conducted in the context of dominant monoculture cropping systems, with little focus on multi

128 Soil domestication through continuous monoculture cultivation of rice results in compositional

129 ZVI(PLS)) were treated in a sulfate-reducing monoculture (D. desulfuricans) and an enrichment culture

130 Cultivation of monocultures derived from limited genetic diversity, env

131 Monoculture-derived multispecific CTL infusion could pro

132 nd nitrate concentrations, such that not all monocultures differed from diverse subplots in the same

133 Unlike monocultures, diverse plant communities favor the develo

134 ersity gains by promoting mixed forests over monocultures; doing so is unlikely to entail major oppor

135 ed as overperformance in mixture relative to monoculture (e.g., 'complementarity effect').

136 f SMCs with conditioned media from static EC monoculture (EC-CM) increased SMC miR-126 level and SMC

137 Notably, compared with monoculture ECM proteomes, the coculture ECM proteome be

138 sition and organization of ECM compared with monoculture ECMs, and electron microscopy revealed basem

139 The underlying idea, known as the 'monoculture effect,' is well documented in agricultural

140 s the efficacy of mixtures, with susceptible monocultures emerging as more productive than susceptibl

141 populations could be recaptured in intensive monocultures engineered to be functionally diverse.

142 mitigate issues often found in engineering a monoculture, especially as functional complexity increas

143 tate, is frequently accompanied by intensive monoculture, especially in the developing world.

144 iotic adaptation:ancestral, polyculture- and monoculture-evolved populations did not have significant

145 strains, which we calibrated using separate monoculture experiments.

146 ince laminin alpha1 chain is not detected in monocultures exposed to coculture-conditioned medium or

147 The undifferentiated astrocyte monocultures expressed only the GLAST subtype.

148 on lambsquarters in mixed-cropping farms and monoculture fields in New York and Hawaii, USA, were gen

149 may be contributing to CLS epidemics in the monoculture fields in New York.

150 a gradient in plant resource richness (corn monocultures, fields dominated by native switchgrass and

151 that species-specific dynamics observable in monocultures (for example, environmental responses or de

152 The model can be used either in monoculture, for studies of molecular flux including per

153 will be continued clearance for farming and monoculture forest plantations, unsustainable selective

154 with higher AGS cell densities than those in monoculture frequently observed.

155 e II collagen expression compared to the MSC monoculture group.

156 n artificial urine medium, where E. faecalis monoculture grows poorly.

157 tion of the permease gene scfD resulted in a monoculture growth defect in CDM that could be rescued b

158 aging an extensive dataset on energy-limited monoculture growth.

159 We show here that continuous monoculture (> 8 growing seasons) of the major food crop

160 In myocyte monoculture, H2O2 induced erbB4-dependent, but NRG-indep

161 N-fixing Acacia crassicarpa monoculture had the highest DON, and 10-mixed species pl

162 ositions, while cereal rye and forage radish monocultures had unique Core OTU compositions.

163 Rapid spread of dense Phragmites monocultures has prompted efforts to limit its expansion

164 in hepatocytes and hepatic stellate cells in monoculture; however, they do not account for cellular c

165 greater productivity of mixtures relative to monocultures (i.e. overyielding) in 108 young experiment

166 higher levels simultaneously than any of the monocultures (i.e., >67th percentile).

167 been 14.5% more on average over 20 years in monocultures if not for nitrogen-induced decreases in pH

168 res and are more productive than the average monoculture in 79% of all experiments.

169 s were in coculture with stromal cells or in monoculture in the presence of receptor-activated NFkapp

170 ead facilitated by the global unification of monocultures in modern agriculture, high volumes of trad

171 ic mixtures outperformed the most productive monocultures in only 10% of the cases, compared with 42%

172 Although microbes are routinely grown in monocultures in the laboratory, they are almost never en

173 se studies used whole IPF tissue or in vitro monocultures in which fibrosis was artificially induced.

174 been raised about the effects of algorithmic monoculture, in which many decision-makers all rely on t

175 aditionally been utilized in two-dimensional monocultures, in contrast to the multi-systemic interact

176 n why S. fumaroxidans does not produce H2 in monoculture, indicating that current methods might not a

177 % in coculture without affecting myotubes in monoculture, indicating the cardiomyocytes were the pace

178 . aureus coinfections are more virulent than monoculture infection with either species; however, diff

179 cies with higher 'inherent' LUE (i.e. LUE in monoculture) intercepted more light than species with lo

180 est that when the most productive and stable monoculture is unknown, inoculating raceway ponds with a

181 en though intercropping, compared to average monocultures, is generally more productive, the full yie

182 e this mechanism has been well documented in monocultures, its relevance for mixed stands of varying

183 r the model will be applicable to commercial monocultures like maize, wheat, etc.

184 derived from it, epithelial and mesenchymal monocultures lose their ability to synthesize the lamini

185 Spatial and temporal treatments compared monoculture maize with legume-diversified maize that inc

186 sification doubled grain yield compared with monoculture maize.

187 Switchgrass monocultures managed for high yield produced 93% more bi

188 arameterized with data from species grown in monoculture may be underestimating the belowground respo

189 iversity and prolonged selection of crops in monoculture may compromise this potential for selection

190 In contrast to declining PHH monocultures, micropatterned co-cultures (MPCCs) of PHHs

191 tained through the long-standing, high-input monoculture model?

192 o biomaterials are often studied in in vitro monoculture models, few studies have investigated how bi

193 ere greater than between species selected in monocultures (monoculture types).

194 In monoculture, mycorrhizal dependency of legumes was highe

195 to-regulation have used low light acclimated monocultures, not mimicking environmental conditions.

196 extinguished repeatedly during the extended monoculture of domestication.

197 ibility: (a) a relatively high digestibility monoculture of perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne), (b)

198 switched the culture to a stress-acclimated monoculture of Synechocystis sp., which rapidly grew and

199 ive to a soilborne pathogen during prolonged monoculture of the susceptible host.

200 d host cannot be adequately recapitulated in monoculture of tumour-derived cell lines.

201 urs in response to the disease and continued monoculture of wheat.

202 (12-23% of daytime water losses) in row-crop monocultures of bean (annual herb) and cotton (woody shr

203 ss years (CV) was 50% lower in mixtures than monocultures of both native and exotic species.

204 ctional response observed in heifers grazing monocultures of Cynodon sp.

205 Monocultures of different plant functional types had dis

206 To address this, we sampled replicated monocultures of four tree species and secondary forest c

207 ial consortia are a promising alternative to monocultures of genetically modified microorganisms for

208 ve capacity, and limitations of conventional monocultures of human hepatocytes, with high attrition r

209 Whereas monocultures of LNCaP(bcl-2/neo-r) or LNCaP(hygr-r) trea

210 In the laboratory, monocultures of M. xanthus at a very high density will r

211 Monocultures of O. vulgatum were enriched in (13) C and

212 While monocultures of PS01 and PS02 had few motile cells (0.6

213 ial grassland plant species had, relative to monocultures of these same species, ~30 to 90% greater i

214 ent on these habitats are being displaced by monocultures of weedy species.

215 est gains (via mixed forest) and losses (via monocultures) of bird diversity, along with major losses

216 among different fungal food species grown in monoculture on different culture media.

217 tein, hesperetin, and naringenin compared to monoculture only at the deficient and adequate N supply

218 l cancer (CRC) cells (HCT116, HT29) grown in monoculture or coculture.

219 plant density and species composition (wheat monoculture or wheat and faba bean polyculture) on the e

220 and stromal cells were isolated and grown in monocultures or co-cultures, and incubated with 0.1 to 1

221 cross China, GFGP forests are overwhelmingly monocultures or compositionally simple mixed forests.

222 etabolomic molecular features differ between monocultures or dual cultures and a tripartite community

223 ng cells within the hydrogels, and either as monocultures or indirect (non-contact) cocultures with p

224 wing with pine and birch compared with their monocultures or mixtures without pine and birch.

225 ate with overall remediation performance for monocultures or mixtures, as tissue accumulation varied

226 Hepatocytes were either cultured alone (monoculture) or co-cultured with PBMCs.

227 c microvascular endothelial cells (CMECs) in monoculture, or together in coculture.

228 In SC monoculture, OS substantially enhanced SC proliferation

229 s been performed at the species level and in monoculture, our ability to predict responses across spe

230 re performances represented the sum of their monoculture parts.

231 ural composition of seascapes by introducing monoculture patches.

232 ultistrain cultures are not predictable from monoculture performance.

233 atabase of 4756 field-plot measurements from monoculture plantations across all forested continents.

234 Although monoculture plantations dominate existing commitments to

235 ntal treatments were a control (open water); monoculture plantings (Iris ensata 'Rising Sun', Canna x

236 Monoculture plantings of brassica were associated with t

237 erbivore attack in polyculture compared with monoculture plantings.

238 birds visiting polyculture plots compared to monoculture plots, as well as a distinct species composi

239 PD) was observed in polyculture relative to monoculture plots.

240 ost species unable to sustain the plasmid in monoculture, promoting community-wide access to the plas

241 In such monoculture, prostate cancer cells have a high (i.e., >9

242 Adding estradiol in monoculture provides sensitive cells with increased resi

243 ne un-inoculated control, six rhizobacterial monoculture (Pseudomonas poae, Pseudomonas sp., Bacillus

244 Monoculture results indicate that approximately 5% of al

245 shrimp ponds (SP), alongside reclaimed rice monoculture (RM) and rice-shrimp coculture (RS) fields t

246 ere, we show that the dangers of algorithmic monoculture run much deeper, in that monocultural conver

247 ified landscapes composed of large swaths of monocultures separated by small fragments of natural lan

248 solation and characterization of bacteria in monoculture, separating the organisms from the surroundi

249 Oilseed rape (OSR) grown in monoculture shows a decline in yield relative to virgin

250 In monoculture, streptococcal arginine biosynthesis was ine

251 vious bottom-up estimate based on laboratory monoculture studies but 2 orders of magnitude lower than

252 ulture model compared to either cell type in monoculture, suggesting an interaction and feedback mech

253 Monoculture suspensions of 6 bacterial species were trea

254 n eroded slopes, the differences between the monoculture switchgrass and prairie in terms of total an

255 Monoculture switchgrass and restored prairie are promisi

256 cal depressions, in the fields in multi-year monoculture switchgrass and restored prairie vegetation.

257 ores as compared to a single species system (monoculture switchgrass).

258 ther with resistant cells than when grown in monoculture, termed facilitation in ecology.

259 determinants could be obtained from cells in monoculture than from whole animal studies where differe

260 Three times as many species colonized the monocultures than the high diversity 17 species communit

261 ely produced 10 times as much biomass in the monocultures than the high diversity communities (~30 vs

262 eness of nsPCE on a DFBA model of an E. coli monoculture that consists of 1075 reactions and 761 meta

263 nah landscape for intensive year-round maize monoculture that probably sustained its relatively large

264 In monoculture, the mean effect of CO(2) enrichment on abov

265 In resource-poor monocultures, the ants were top predators, sharing a tro

266 seminatural landscapes are transformed into monocultures, there is growing concern over current and

267 s that were bred for maximal productivity in monocultures, thereby ignoring the ability of plants to

268 In monocultures, these strains grew comparably; however, th

269 ular phenotypes of co-cultures to respective monocultures, through optical, biomolecular and electric

270 However, the benefits of a transition from monoculture to crop rotation may be reduced if trade-off

271 ture system is a better in vitro screen than monoculture to identify proliferation-independent agents

272 esents a tree species richness gradient from monocultures to 2-, 3- and 5-species mixtures composed o

273 f human iPSC-derived microglial and neuronal monocultures to dissect how the APOE genotype in each ce

274 ution effect in 1999 (more severe disease in monocultures) to an amplification effect in 2019 (more s

275 For all monoculture trials, total pot biomass increased as densi

276 an between species selected in monocultures (monoculture types).

277 ixtures of mixture types than in mixtures of monoculture types.

278 fermented by Lactobacillus plantarum 299v in monoculture under different time and temperature conditi

279 ging a curated database of >60,000 microbial monocultures, users can search known and unknown MS/MS s

280 is study assessed how FTW planting strategy (monoculture vs mixed planting) influenced removal of N a

281 olonization did not vary by farm management (monocultures vs polycultures), but did vary by crop host

282 Endothelial cell tube formation in a HUVEC monoculture was effectively inhibited at 45%.

283 Cellular infection in endothelial monocultures was determined using fluorescence imaging.

284 s was more susceptible to chloramphenicol in monocultures, we found that chloramphenicol exposure non

285 idespread decline of take-all in response to monoculture wheat (or barley-wheat sequences).

286 It also outperforms monoculture when polyhydroxyalkanoates serves as a targe

287 roduced the amount of biomass predicted from monoculture when sown with close relatives.

288 duced more biomass than predicted from their monocultures when they were in plots with distantly rela

289 N mineralization was found in A. crassicarpa monoculture, which was over twice than that in Castanops

290 two widely used grassland practices: a grass monoculture with higher nitrogen fertilizer and a two-sp

291 intestinalis and Bacteroides ovatus grown in monoculture with the abundant dietary polysaccharide xyl

292 n (e.g. industrial management of large-scale monocultures with high chemical inputs) homogenises land

293 -containing multispecies mixtures over grass monocultures with higher nitrogen fertilizer inputs incr

294 many agricultural landscapes into expansive monocultures with little natural habitat.

295 odel, employing parameters measured in batch monocultures with zero or excess metabolite, failed to q

296 72h in co-culture with PBMCs as compared to monoculture, with MHC II-expressing HCC hepatocytes show

297 e cancer cells to chemotherapeutic agents in monoculture without the presence of osteoblasts.

298 ntal conditions, whereas correlations in the monoculture yield affected productivity throughout expos

299 d for two traits (per capita growth rate and monoculture yield) under constant and temporary exposure

300 bioenergy yields that were 238% greater than monoculture yields after a decade.