## 3 Results and Discussion
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Factor**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Plant Height (cm)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Root Depth (cm)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Spikes = \({}^{-2}\)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Genains Spike = \({}^{-1}\)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Spike Size (cm)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Cain Valid**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Straw Yield**} \\  & **Mean** & **Standard  
In our essays, spike size significantly increased by 9% (_p_ < 0.05) on the 240 kg N ha\({}^{-1}\) + CB treatment compared to the uninoculated treatment at the same rate of N (7.2 vs. 6.6 cm, Supplementary Table S2), but in the unfertilized treatments (0 kg N ha\({}^{-1}\)) a decrease of 7.7% was observed in the inoculated vs. uninoculated treatment (6 vs. 6.5 cm). In this sense, this trait was more influenced by the application of higher doses of N (240 kg N ha\({}^{-1}\)), than by the inoculation of the BC (Table 3). Regarding grain yield, a significant (_p_ < 0.05) increase due to the inoculation of the BC was observed at 240 kg N ha\({}^{-1}\) (7.06 vs. 6.48 tons ha\({}^{-1}\)). On the other hand, a decrease of 1.26 ton ha\({}^{-1}\) was observed by the inoculation of BC vs. the uninoculated treatment under 0 kg N ha\({}^{-1}\) (Supplementary Table S2). In general, in this crop cycle, the doses of N had a greater impact on grain yield than the inoculation of the bacterial consortium (Table 3). This effect of inoculation of the BC on wheat contrasts with that observed in previous field experiments carried out by our group, under similar field conditions. [PERSON] et al. (2024) [5] reported that the inoculation of strains TRQ8, TRQ65, and TE3T to durum wheat resulted in a yield increase of 1.1 ton ha\({}^{-1}\) under 0 kg N ha\({}^{-1}\) (123 kg N ha\({}^{-1}\) as residual in the soil) compared with its uninoculated control, and an increment of 2.0 ton ha\({}^{-1}\) under 120 kg N ha\({}^{-1}\) (104 kg N ha\({}^{-1}\) a residual in the soil) compared with uninoculated treatment. Our essay was carried out at the same location, agricultural practices, and N applied, as well as similar soil physical properties and climatic conditions compared with [PERSON] et al. (2024). However, in the present study, the N content in the soil on the sowing date was 183 kg N ha\({}^{-1}\), and the N was fractionated differently at 30, 60, and 10%, in comparison with 33%, 33%, and 33% used by [PERSON] et al. (2024) [5]. Another distinct finding was reported by [PERSON] et al. (2023) [19], who inoculated a bacterial consortium (_Bacillus subtilis_ TSO9, _Bacillus ednilesii_ subsp. _tritici_ TSO2T, _Bacillus subtilis_ TSO22, _Bacillus paralicheniformis_ TRQ65, and _Pristia megaterium_ TRQ8), to durum wheat in the same location, under the same agricultural practices, three different N rates applied, and similar soil and climatic conditions, obtaining a increment of 1 ton ha\({}^{-1}\) in grain yield in the inoculated treatment under 130 kg N ha\({}^{-1}\) (medium N fertilization) compared to the uninoculated control. Various studies have shown increases in crop productivity, yield parameters, or nitrogen-use efficiency with the inoculation of plant growth-promoting bacteria under medium doses of N fertilization. [PERSON] et al. 2023 [29] tested the co-inoculation of winter wheat with _Azospirillum brasilense_ and _Bacillus subtilis_ under five N doses (0, 40, 80, 120, and 160 kg ha\({}^{-1}\), applied from urea) in Brazilian Cerrado. They suggest that N fertilization can be reduced by application of those strains under a no-tillage system; their results show that a medium rate of fertilization of 80 kg ha\({}^{-1}\), nitrogen-use efficiency, grain N accumulation, and number of grains spikes\({}^{-1}\) were significantly increased. On the other hand, [PERSON] et al. (2021) [30] found that the effect of PGPB inoculation on plant growth was observed only with 50% of the N fertilization dose. Moreover, [PERSON] et al.