Literature DB >> 25527391

Bacterial communities in the rhizosphere of Vitis vinifera L. cultivated under distinct agricultural practices in Argentina.

A D Vega-Avila1, T Gumiere, P A M Andrade, J E Lima-Perim, A Durrer, M Baigori, F Vazquez, F D Andreote.   

Abstract

Plants interact with a myriad of microbial cells in the rhizosphere, an environment that is considered to be important for plant development. However, the differential structuring of rhizosphere microbial communities due to plant cultivation under differential agricultural practices remains to be described for most plant species. Here we describe the rhizosphere microbiome of grapevine cultivated under conventional and organic practices, using a combination of cultivation-independent approaches. The quantification of bacterial 16S rRNA and nifH genes, by quantitative PCR (qPCR), revealed similar amounts of these genes in the rhizosphere in both vineyards. PCR-DGGE was used to detect differences in the structure of bacterial communities, including both the complete whole communities and specific fractions, such as Alphaproteobacteria, Betaproteobacteria, Actinobacteria, and those harboring the nitrogen-fixing related gene nifH. When analyzed by a multivariate approach (redundancy analysis), the shifts observed in the bacterial communities were poorly explained by variations in the physical and chemical characteristics of the rhizosphere. These approaches were complemented by high-throughput sequencing (67,830 sequences) based on the V6 region of the 16S rRNA gene, identifying the major bacterial groups present in the rhizosphere of grapevines: Proteobacteria, Actinobacteria, Firmicutes, Bacteriodetes, Acidobacteria, Cloroflexi, Verrucomicrobia and Planctomycetes, which occur in distinct proportions in the rhizosphere from each vineyard. The differences might be related to the selection of plant metabolism upon distinct reservoirs of microbial cells found in each vineyard. The results fill a gap in the knowledge of the rhizosphere of grapevines and also show distinctions in these bacterial communities due to agricultural practices.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25527391     DOI: 10.1007/s10482-014-0353-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek        ISSN: 0003-6072            Impact factor:   2.271


  17 in total

1.  Ecological Processes Shaping Bulk Soil and Rhizosphere Microbiome Assembly in a Long-Term Amazon Forest-to-Agriculture Conversion.

Authors:  Dennis Goss-Souza; Lucas William Mendes; Jorge Luiz Mazza Rodrigues; Siu Mui Tsai
Journal:  Microb Ecol       Date:  2019-06-27       Impact factor: 4.552

2.  Use of Endophytic and Rhizosphere Actinobacteria from Grapevine Plants To Reduce Nursery Fungal Graft Infections That Lead to Young Grapevine Decline.

Authors:  José Manuel Álvarez-Pérez; Sandra González-García; Rebeca Cobos; Miguel Ángel Olego; Ana Ibañez; Alba Díez-Galán; Enrique Garzón-Jimeno; Juan José R Coque
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 4.792

3.  The Aboveground Vegetation Type and Underground Soil Property Mediate the Divergence of Soil Microbiomes and the Biological Interactions.

Authors:  Shu-Hong Wu; Bing-Hong Huang; Chia-Lung Huang; Gang Li; Pei-Chun Liao
Journal:  Microb Ecol       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 4.552

4.  Linking the Composition of Bacterial and Archaeal Communities to Characteristics of Soil and Flora Composition in the Atlantic Rainforest.

Authors:  Julia Elidia Lima-Perim; Emiliana Manesco Romagnoli; Francisco Dini-Andreote; Ademir Durrer; Armando Cavalcante Franco Dias; Fernando Dini Andreote
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-01-11       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Grapevine rootstocks shape underground bacterial microbiome and networking but not potential functionality.

Authors:  Ramona Marasco; Eleonora Rolli; Marco Fusi; Grégoire Michoud; Daniele Daffonchio
Journal:  Microbiome       Date:  2018-01-03       Impact factor: 14.650

6.  Effects of different management regimes on microbial biodiversity in vineyard soils.

Authors:  Maximilian Hendgen; Björn Hoppe; Johanna Döring; Matthias Friedel; Randolf Kauer; Matthias Frisch; Andreas Dahl; Harald Kellner
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-06-20       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  The Fungal and Bacterial Rhizosphere Microbiome Associated With Grapevine Rootstock Genotypes in Mature and Young Vineyards.

Authors:  Carmen Berlanas; Mónica Berbegal; Georgina Elena; Meriem Laidani; José Félix Cibriain; Ana Sagües; David Gramaje
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2019-05-22       Impact factor: 5.640

8.  Endophytes and Epiphytes From the Grapevine Leaf Microbiome as Potential Biocontrol Agents Against Phytopathogens.

Authors:  Sébastien Bruisson; Mónica Zufferey; Floriane L'Haridon; Eva Trutmann; Abhishek Anand; Agnès Dutartre; Mout De Vrieze; Laure Weisskopf
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2019-11-29       Impact factor: 5.640

9.  Impact of Olive Saplings and Organic Amendments on Soil Microbial Communities and Effects of Mineral Fertilization.

Authors:  Miquel Llimós; Guillem Segarra; Marc Sancho-Adamson; M Isabel Trillas; Joan Romanyà
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 5.640

10.  The Rhizosphere Bacterial Microbiota of Vitis vinifera cv. Pinot Noir in an Integrated Pest Management Vineyard.

Authors:  Giorgia Novello; Elisa Gamalero; Elisa Bona; Lara Boatti; Flavio Mignone; Nadia Massa; Patrizia Cesaro; Guido Lingua; Graziella Berta
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2017-08-14       Impact factor: 5.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.