| Literature DB >> 26379644 |
Xuejian Yu1, Jinshui Yang1, Entao Wang2, Baozhen Li1, Hongli Yuan1.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to learn the interactions among the endophytic bacteria, the plant growth, the foliar spray of fulvic acid, and the accumulation of steviol glycosides in the leaves of Stevia rebaudiana. Metagenomic DNA was extracted from the Stevia leaves at different growth stages with or without the fulvic acid treatment; and the diversity of endophytic bacteria in Stevia leaves was estimated by pyrosequencing of 16S rRNA genes. As results, Proteobacteria, Actinobacteria, Bacteroidetes, and Firmicutes were found to be the dominant phyla despite the growth stages and fulvic acid application. Stevia growth stages strongly regulated composition of endophytic community. The genera Agrobacterium (12.3%) and Erwinia (7.2%) dominated in seedling stage were apparently declined in the vegetable and initial flowering stages, while Sphingomonas and Methylobacterium increased in mature leaves at harvest time, which showed that the mature leaves of Stevia preferred to accumulate some certain endophytic bacteria. Sphingomonas and Methylobacterium constituted an important part of the core endophytic community and were positively correlated with the stevioside content and UGT74G1 gene expression, respectively; while Erwinia, Agrobacterium, and Bacillus were negatively correlated with the stevioside accumulation. Fulvic acid treatment accelerated the variation of endophytes along the growth stages and increased the steviol glycosides content. This is the first study to reveal the community composition of endophytic bacteria in the Stevia leaves, to evidence the strong effects of growth stage and fulvic acid application on the endophytes of Stevia, and to demonstrate the correlation between the endophytic bacteria and the steviol glycosides accumulation.Entities:
Keywords: Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni; bacterial diversity; endophytes; fulvic acid; growth stage; pyrosequencing
Year: 2015 PMID: 26379644 PMCID: PMC4548236 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2015.00867
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
General data of pyrosequencing results of leaf endophytic bacteria and growth/quality characters of .
| Reads | 3670 | 10,228 | 10,752 | 8210 | 16,429 |
| OTUs | 595 | 825 | 773 | 629 | 632 |
| Chao1 | 1073 | 1256 | 1467 | 928 | 1006 |
| ACE | 1492 | 1264 | 1900 | 1219 | 983 |
| Shannon | 6.68 | 4.73 | 5.24 | 2.97 | 4.34 |
| Simpson | 0.032 | 0.211 | 0.101 | 0.461 | 0.163 |
| Plant height (cm) | 12.60 e | 38.10 d | 89.40 b | 41.9 c | 99.00 a |
| RA content (%) | 8.08 c | 10.20 b | 11.95 ab | 13.20 a | 13.65 a |
| ST content (%) | 0.50 c | 0.80 bc | 1.77 ab | 0.97 bc | 2.28 a |
| RC content (%) | 0.23 c | 0.96 ab | 1.42 a | 0.70 bc | 1.31 a |
| SGs content (%) | 8.81 c | 11.96 b | 15.14 a | 14.87 a | 17.24 a |
| 76G1 gene expression | 1.00 c | 0.46 d | 0.16 e | 2.04 b | 4.34 a |
| 85C2 gene expression | 1.00 b | 0.50 c | 0.04 d | 2.52 a | 0.25 cd |
| 74G1 gene expression | 1.00 d | 9.40 ab | 3.67 c | 10.49 a | 8.52 b |
Data were average of four replicates and numbers in the same line followed by different letters presented significant difference at P = 0.05.
C, control; F, fulvic acid treatment; 0, seedling stage; 2, middle vegetable growth stage; 4, initial flowering stage.
Calculated at a distance level of 0.03.
Ninety-five percent confidence interval. ACE, abundance-based coverage estimators.
Figure 1OTU distribution of . Data were obtained from all the five samples of the two treatments and three growth stages.
Figure 2Relative abundance of bacterial phyla (A) and families (B, taxa represented occurred at >1% abundance in at least one sample) associated with . Percentages represent the portion of 16S rRNA gene 454 reads which were classified to that phylum and family.
Figure 3Heatmap of the shared and unique phyla in . C-0-2-4 C: common phyla for stages C-0, C-2, and C-4; C-0-2 C: common phyla for stages; C-0-4 C: common phyla for stages C-0 and C-4; C-2-4 C: common phyla for stages C-2 and C-4; C-0 U: unique phyla for stage C-0; C-2 U: unique phyla for stage C-2; C-4 U: unique phyla for stage C-4.
Figure 4PCoA (A) and CCA (B) analysis of the endophytic samples in .
Figure 5Networks representing sample/OTU interaction. OTU nodes are yellow, with edges indicated according to FA treatment (purple: with FA treatment; green: without FA treatment). Sample nodes are shown in red color with different shapes according to growth time and FA treatment (Hexagon, C-0; Triangle, C-2; Rect, C-4; Vee, F-2; diamond, F-4).
Figure 6Heatmap of taxonomic distribution of the core community of the endophytic samples in .
Correlation analysis of the core community and steviol glycoside content.
| 4.28 | 19.2 | 46.6 | 16.2 | 58.8 | 0.926 | 0.970 | ||||||
| 4.74 | 16.5 | 9.89 | 20.3 | 6.92 | 0.917 | |||||||
| 2.48 | 2.39 | 3.34 | 1.16 | 4.02 | 0.883 | 0.925 | ||||||
| 0.05 | 1.06 | 0.19 | 7.28 | 0.77 | 0.883 | |||||||
| 12.4 | 0.33 | 1.32 | 0.12 | 0.30 | −0.914 | |||||||
| 3.02 | 0.97 | 0.26 | 0.74 | 1.92 | 0.882 | |||||||
| 7.28 | 0.63 | 2.00 | 0.18 | 0.19 | −0.981 | |||||||
| 0.00 | 1.86 | 0.28 | 0.83 | 1.51 | ||||||||
| 0.54 | 2.65 | 0.07 | 1.23 | 0.29 | ||||||||
| 0.08 | 1.83 | 0.21 | 1.36 | 0.43 | ||||||||
| 0.16 | 1.18 | 0.35 | 0.55 | 1.12 | ||||||||
| 0.03 | 0.66 | 0.25 | 3.03 | 0.29 | ||||||||
| 3.57 | 0.08 | 0.41 | 0.02 | 0.96 | 0.968 | |||||||
| 1.09 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 2.03 | 0.03 | ||||||||
| 1.17 | 0.29 | 0.31 | 0.82 | 0.09 | 0.907 | |||||||
| 0 | 1.59 | 0 | 0.16 | 0 | ||||||||
| 1.44 | 0.33 | 0.01 | 0.39 | 0.02 | −0.990 | −0.949 | −0.960 | −0.884 | ||||
| 0 | 0.06 | 0.07 | 0 | 0.57 | ||||||||
| 0 | 0.11 | 0.04 | 0.91 | 0.07 | 0.893 | |||||||
| 2.13 | 0 | 0.06 | 0 | 0 | ||||||||
Only significant (P < 0.05) correlations with a Pearson correlation coefficient >0.600 or <−0.600 for the dependent variables are shown.