| Literature DB >> 28645648 |
Di Liu1, Qianqian Yang1, Ke Ge1, Xiuna Hu1, Guozhen Qi1, Binghai Du1, Kai Liu1, Yanqin Ding2.
Abstract
This study aimed to explore the effects of two siderophore-producing bacterial strains on iron absorption and plant growth of peanut in calcareous soil. Two siderophore-producing bacterial strains, namely, YZ29 and DZ13, isolated from the rhizosphere soil of peanut, were identified as Paenibacillus illinoisensis and Bacillus sp., respectively. In potted experiments, YZ29 and DZ13 enhanced root activity, chlorophyll and active iron content in leaves, total nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium accumulation of plants and increased the quality of peanut kernels and plant biomass over control. In the field trial, the inoculated treatments performed better than the controls, and the pod yields of the three treatments inoculated with YZ29, DZ13, and YZ29+DZ13 (1:1) increased by 37.05%, 13.80% and 13.57%, respectively, compared with the control. Based on terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis, YZ29 and DZ13 improved the bacterial community richness and species diversity of soil surrounding the peanut roots. Therefore, YZ29 and DZ13 can be used as candidate bacterial strains to relieve chlorosis of peanut and promote peanut growth. The present study is the first to explore the effect of siderophores produced by P. illinoisensis on iron absorption.Entities:
Keywords: Iron; Paenibacillus illinoisensis; Peanut; Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria; Siderophores
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28645648 PMCID: PMC5628301 DOI: 10.1016/j.bjm.2017.02.006
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Braz J Microbiol ISSN: 1517-8382 Impact factor: 2.476
Fig. 1General arrangement of blocks in the field assay. I, II, III and IV represent the four replicates; the arrow represents the direction of peanut lines. C: control, received no inoculation; Y: received YZ29 inoculation; D: received DZ13 inoculation; Y + D: received YZ29 and DZ13 inoculation.
Fig. 2Orange circles produced by strains YZ29 and DZ13 on the CAS (chrome azurol S) plate.
Physiological and biochemical characteristics of YZ29 and DZ13.
| Characteristic | YZ29 | DZ13 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| + | + | + | + | |
| − | − | + | ND | |
| − | ND | + | + | |
| − | − | + | + | |
| | + | + | + | + |
| Mannitol | − | ND | − | − |
| | + | + | + | − |
| Glycerinum | + | + | + | ND |
| Utilization of citrate | − | − | − | d |
| Starch | + | + | − | + |
| Gelatin | + | ND | + | + |
| Tyrosine | − | ND | + | d |
| 4 °C | + | ND | − | d |
| 30 °C | + | ND | + | + |
| 50 °C | − | ND | + | − |
| 5% NaCl | − | − | + | ND |
| 7% NaCl | − | ND | − | d |
Note: Paenibacillus illinoisensis and Bacillus mycoides are type strains. +, positive; −, negative; d, 11%–89% strains are positive; ND, not detected. Analysis of 16S rRNA gene sequences.
Fig. 3Phylogenetic tree showing the relationships between YZ29 and other Paenibacillus strains as well as DZ13 and other Bacillus strains based on 16S rRNA genes.
Fig. 4Chlorophyll and active iron contents in the leaves of different treatments in each growth period. (A) Chlorophyll content of leaves in each growth period in the pot assay in 2013. (B) Active iron contents of leaves in each growth period in the pot assay in 2013. (C) Chlorophyll content of leaves in each growth period in the field trial. (D) Active iron contents of leaves in each growth period in the field trial. Data were presented as mean ± standard deviation. * indicates significant difference comparing with the control group (p < 0.05). C: control, received no inoculation; Y: received YZ29 inoculation; D: received DZ13 inoculation; Y + D: received YZ29 and DZ13 inoculation.
Fig. 5Root activities in different growth periods of peanuts in the pot assay in 2012. (A) Total absorption area of peanut roots and (B) active absorption area of peanut roots. TAAR, total absorption area; AAAR, active absorption area. Data were presented as mean ± standard deviation. * indicates significant difference comparing with the control group (p < 0.05). C: control, received no inoculation; Y: received YZ29 inoculation; D: received DZ13 inoculation; Y + D: received YZ29 and DZ13 inoculation.
Fig. 6Total nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium accumulation of peanut plants of different treatments in each growth period. (A) Total nitrogen accumulation of peanut plants of different treatments in each growth period in the pot assay in 2013. (B) Total phosphorus accumulation of peanut plants of different treatments in each growth period in the pot assay in 2013. (C) Total potassium accumulation of peanut plants of different treatments in each growth period in the pot assay in 2013. (D) Total nitrogen accumulation of peanut plants of different treatments in each growth period in the field trial. (E) Total phosphorus accumulation of peanut plants of different treatments in each growth period in the field trial. (F) Total potassium accumulation of peanut plants of different treatments in each growth period in the field trial. Data were presented as mean ± standard deviation. * indicates significant difference comparing with the control group (p < 0.05). C: control, received no inoculation; Y: received YZ29 inoculation; D: received DZ13 inoculation; Y + D: received YZ29 and DZ13 inoculation.
Fig. 7Biomass and yield factors in the pot assays. (A) Percentage of full pods in different treatment groups after harvest in the pot assay in 2012. (B) Fresh weight of 100 pods in different treatment groups after harvest in the pot assay in 2012. (C) Dry weight of peanut plants in different treatment groups in the seedling and blossom stages in the pot assay in 2013. Data were presented as mean ± standard deviation. * indicates significant difference comparing with the control group (p < 0.05). C: control, received no inoculation; Y: received YZ29 inoculation; D: received DZ13 inoculation; Y + D: received YZ29 and DZ13 inoculation.
Differences of plant biomass and yield factors after harvest in the field trial.
| Treatments | Plant biomass (g plant−1) | Yield factors | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blossom stage | Needling stage | Pod stage | Maturation stage | Percentage of full pods (%) | Shelling percentage (%) | Pod yield (kg ha−1) | Yield increase percentage (%) | |
| C | 4.00 ± 0.62 | 12.13 ± 1.96 | 22.33 ± 2.43 | 31.81 ± 3.56 | 57.79 ± 2.03 | 65.41 ± 2.33 | 3547.50 ± 30.98 | |
| Y | 4.17 ± 0.35 | 12.20 ± 0.59 | 24.74 ± 2.58 | 32.97 ± 3.16 | 61.27 ± 3.26 | 68.91 ± 3.78 | 4614.45 ± 24.98 | 37.05 |
| D | 4.41 ± 0.44 | 12.18 ± 1.54 | 24.46 ± 3.01 | 33.48 ± 5.23 | 62.53 ± 3.25 | 67.34 ± 3.33 | 4036.9 ± 12.01 | 13.80 |
| Y + D | 4.16 ± 0.60 | 12.93 ± 2.38 | 23.69 ± 2.98 | 31.43 ± 1.73 | 61.11 ± 1.77 | 67.21 ± 1.78 | 4028.70 ± 27.43 | 13.57 |
Note: Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation. C, control, received no inoculation; Y, YZ29 inoculation; D, DZ13 inoculation; Y + D, YZ29 and DZ13 inoculation.
Significant difference compare with the control (p < 0.05).
Differences of protein and crude fat contents of peanut kernels after harvest in the pot assay in 2013 and field trial.
| Treatments | Pot assay | Field trial | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Protein content (%) | Crude fat content (%) | Protein content (%) | Crude fat content (%) | |
| C | 28.38 ± 1.17 | 50.69 ± 1.45 | 27.23 ± 0.82 | 49.71 ± 3.29 |
| Y | 32.14 ± 2.19 | 53.07 ± 0.83 | 28.31 ± 0.71 | 52.04 ± 0.78 |
| D | 31.25 ± 2.41 | 51.87 ± 0.90 | 27.28 ± 0.76 | 52.30 ± 1.13 |
| Y + D | 29.86 ± 0.40 | 53.71 ± 0.18 | 27.79 ± 0.89 | 53.29 ± 5.56 |
Note: Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation. C, control, received no inoculation; Y, YZ29 inoculation; D, DZ13 inoculation; Y + D, YZ29 and DZ13 inoculation.
Significant difference compare with the control (p < 0.05).
Differences of T-RFs on the T-RFLP map of soil samples at the pod stage.
| Treatments | Number of effective T-RFs | Added effective fragment size (bp) and species they may represent compared with the control | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The pot assay in 2012 | C | 10 | ||
| Y | 18 | |||
| D | 14 | |||
| Y + D | 17 | |||
| The pot assay in 2013 | C | 11 | ||
| Y | 19 | |||
| D | 15 | |||
| Y + D | 24 | |||
| C | 13 | |||
| Y | 15 | |||
| D | 16 | |||
| Y + D | 18 | |||
| C | 12 | |||
| Y | 14 | |||
| D | 16 | |||
| Y + D | 14 | |||
| The field assay in 2013 | C | 19 | ||
| Y | 27 | |||
| D | 29 | |||
| Y + D | 26 | |||
| C | 14 | |||
| Y | 17 | |||
| D | 19 | |||
| Y + D | 18 | |||
| C | 14 | |||
| Y | 21 | |||
| D | 20 | |||
| Y + D | 20 | |||
Note: A = n/N × 100, where n represents the peak area of one distinct T-RF and N is the sum of all peak areas in the T-RFLP map. Species with bold numbers cannot be speculated by T-RFLP Phylogenetic Assignment Tool. C, control, received no inoculation; Y, YZ29 inoculation; D, DZ13 inoculation; Y + D, YZ29 and DZ13 inoculation.
Effective T-RFs represent the percentage abundance (A) of each T-RF equal or greater than 1% between 50 and 600 bp.
Bacterial diversity of soil samples at the pod stage.
| Treatments | Pot assay in 2012 | Pot assay in 2013 | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ma | Sh | Si | Ma | Sh | Si | Ma | Sh | Si | Ma | Sh | Si | |
| C | 1.979 ± 0.142 | 1.38 ± 0.11 | 0.151 ± 0.021 | 2.604 ± 0.217 | 1.94 ± 0.17 | 0.148 ± 0.015 | 3.999 ± 0.293 | 2.51 ± 0.27 | 0.076 ± 0.004 | 3.805 ± 0.423 | 2.56 ± 0.11 | 0.064 ± 0.003 |
| Y | 3.025 ± 0.264 | 2.12 ± 0.21 | 0.027 ± 0.001 | 5.608 ± 0.487 | 2.94 ± 0.16 | 0.034 ± 0.002 | 4.052 ± 0.218 | 2.64 ± 0.19 | 0.047 ± 0.002 | 4.013 ± 0.216 | 2.63 ± 0.21 | 0.048 ± 0.003 |
| D | 2.050 ± 0.182 | 2.01 ± 0.19 | 0.040 ± 0.005 | 3.618 ± 0.285 | 2.36 ± 0.18 | 0.062 ± 0.003 | 4.017 ± 0.176 | 2.61 ± 0.29 | 0.050 ± 0.002 | 4.488 ± 0.337 | 2.65 ± 0.21 | 0.052 ± 0.002 |
| Y + D | 2.814 ± 0.214 | 2.05 ± 0.16 | 0.053 ± 0.007 | 6.469 ± 0.320 | 3.14 ± 0.29 | 0.030 ± 0.002 | 4.873 ± 0.362 | 2.85 ± 0.32 | 0.046 ± 0.001 | 4.445 ± 0.273 | 2.72 ± 0.23 | 0.054 ± 0.004 |
Note: Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation. Ma, Margalef index; Sh, Shannon–Wiener index; Si, Simpson index; C, control, received no inoculation; Y, YZ29 inoculation; D, DZ13 inoculation; Y + D, YZ29 and DZ13 inoculation.
Significant difference compare with the control (p < 0.05).