| Literature DB >> 29062259 |
Dilfuza Egamberdieva1,2, Kakhramon Davranov2, Stephan Wirth1, Abeer Hashem3,4, Elsayed Fathi Abd Allah5.
Abstract
The effectiveness of plant growth - promoting bacteria is variable under different biotic and abiotic conditions. Abiotic factors may negatively affect the beneficial propn>erties and efficiency of the introduced PGPR inoculants. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of plantEntities:
Keywords: Biocontrol; Nutrient uptake; Plant growth; Rhizobacteria; Soil salinity
Year: 2017 PMID: 29062259 PMCID: PMC5643845 DOI: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2017.07.004
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Saudi J Biol Sci ISSN: 1319-562X Impact factor: 4.219
Soil characterization.
| Soil | EC dS m−1 | K+ | Ca+2 | Mg+2 | CO32− | N | P | COrg | Na+ | Cl− |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (mg g−1 soil) | (µg g−1 soil) | |||||||||
| None-saline | 2.3 | 5.92 | 53.4 | 23.7 | 16.1 | 1.06 | 1.30 | 8.69 | 600.2 | 52.0 |
| Saline | 7.1 | 6.58 | 67.4 | 24.6 | 17.6 | 0.95 | 1.23 | 7.19 | 813.1 | 94.2 |
EC = Electrical Conductivity. K+ = exchangeable potassium. Ca+2 = exchangeable calcium. Mg+2 = exchangeable magnesium. Na+ = exchangeable sodium. CO32− = carbonate and Cl− = chloride. CT = total C. COrg = total organic C. N = total nitrogen. and P = total phosphorus.
Non-saline soil was collected from Tashkent province. Saline soil from Syrdarya province of Uzbekistan.
Effect of selected plant growth promoting bacteria on shoot length and dry weight of tomato growing in non-saline (EC value 2.3 dS/m) and saline soil (EC value 7.1 dS/m).
| Bacterial strains | Non-saline | Saline | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shoot length | Root length | Dry weight | Shoot length | Root length | Dry weight | |
| Control | 8.2 | 5.7 | 0.151 | 7.6 | 5.6 | 0.140 |
| 7.4 | 4.6 | 0.134 | 7.3 | 5.0 | 0.140 | |
| 7.2 | 4.9 | 0.125 | 7.4 | 5.5 | 0.126 | |
| 7.8 | 4.9 | 0.137 | 6.9 | 4.6 | 0.122 | |
| 6.9 | 5.0 | 0.128 | 7.2 | 5.2 | 0.140 | |
| 7.3 | 5.4 | 0.190 | 7.2 | 5.2 | 0.132 | |
| 8.0 | 5.4 | 0.151 | 6.3 | 4.6 | 0.126 | |
| 10.3 | 8.0 | 0.156 | 8.0 | 6.5 | 0.127 | |
| 9.4 | 7.5 | 0.127 | 8.3 | 6.6 | 0.124 | |
| 8.9 | 6.8 | 0.132 | 7.1 | 6.1 | 0.113 | |
| 9.7 | 6.8 | 0.171 | 8.8 | 6.9 | 0.163 | |
| 9.8 | 7.4 | 0.188 | 9.7 | 7.3 | 0.178 | |
| 9.6 | 6.9 | 0.209 | 9.9 | 6.9 | 0.156 | |
| 9.1 | 7.0 | 0.169 | 8.3 | 6.9 | 0.154 | |
| 8.7 | 7.5 | 0.160 | 7.6 | 6.4 | 0.138 | |
| 8.5 | 6.5 | 0.157 | 7.5 | 6.0 | 0.138 | |
Expressed as cm per plant.
Expressed as gram per plant.
Significantly different from the control at P < 0.05.
Biological control of tomato root rot by PGPR bacterial strains.
| Treatments | Diseased plants (%) | |
|---|---|---|
| Non-saline soil | Saline soil | |
| Control | 40.6 ± 8.1 | 71.9 ± 8.1 |
| 38.1 ± 9.9 | 48.2 ± 6.1 | |
| 30.2 ± 4.9 | 50.3 ± 9.4 | |
| 23.4 ± 9.4 | 42.2 ± 7.9 | |
| 14.1 ± 7.9 | 25.0 ± 5.1 | |
| 36.3 ± 8.2 | 40.9 ± 8.3 | |
Bacteria were coated on pre-germinated tomato seeds, plants were grown under open natural conditions in pots containing non-saline (EC value 2.3 dS/m) and saline soil (EC value 7.1 dS/m) infested with F. solani spores. ±SD: Standard deviation.
Significantly different from the negative control at P < 0.05.
The survival (log10 (CFU/g root) of rifampicin resistant mutants of bacterial inoculants in the rhizosphere of *tomato grown under non saline and saline conditions.
| Treatments | Survival (log10 (CFU/g root) of rifampicin resistant mutants bacterial inoculants | |
|---|---|---|
| Non-saline | Saline | |
| 3.45 ± 0.15 | 2.15 ± 0.18 | |
| 3.58 ± 0.11 | 2.75 ± 0.17 | |
| 3.61 ± 0.19 | 2.83 ± 0.18 | |
| 3.65 ± 0.22 | 2.81 ± 0.28 | |
| 3.29 ± 0.21 | 2. 43 ± 0.29 | |
±SD: Standard deviation.
Tomato plants were grown in a greenhouse conditions in potting soil for 4 weeks under non saline (0.5 dS/m) and saline (7.5 dS/m) soil condition.
Effect of Pseudomonas strains (TSAU13 and TSAU20) on tomato growth and fruit yield in greenhouse experiments.
| Treatment | Plant height (cm) | Fruit yield (kg/m2) | Elements uptake (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nitrogen | Phosphorus | Potassium | |||
| None | 125 ± 3.7 | 13.9 ± 0.9 | 2.4 ± 0.2 | 0.42 ± 0.02 | 1.91 ± 0.06 |
| TSAU13 | 145 ± 5.1 | 15.9 ± 1.4 | 2.9 ± 0.3 | 0.49 ± 0.03 | 1.89 ± 0.08 |
| TSAU20 | 157* ± 4.2 | 17.0 | 3.2 | 0.52 | 2.10 ± 0.10 |
Tomato plants were grown in greenhouse for four months. the temperature range was: 22–24 °C at day and 12–14 °C at night.
Significantly different from the negative control at P < 0.05.
Effect of P. extremorientalis TSAU20 on hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) glutathione and chlorophyll contents in tomato plants.
| Soil | Treatment | Plant weight g/plant | Hydrogen peroxide | Proline |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Non-saline | Control | 0.78 ± 0.07 | 70.25 ± 1.31 | 0.36 ± 0.03 |
| TSAU20 | 0.82 ± 0.02 | 50.43 ± 1.96 | 0.82 ± 0.04 | |
| Saline | Control | 0.29 ± 0.03 | 210.9 ± 2.07 | 1.46 ± 0.16 |
| TSAU20 | 0.38 ± 0.05 | 112.8 ± 1.54 | 3.61 ± 0.06 | |
nM/g fresh weight.
mM/g fresh weight.
Significantly different from the negative control at P < 0.05.
Fig. 1Effects of P. extremorientalis TSAU20 inoculation on antioxidant enzyme activities. A, glutathione reductase (GR); B, ascorbate peroxidase (APX); C, superoxide dismutase (SOD) and D, catalase (CAT). Tomato plants were grown in a greenhouse for six weeks in potting soil under non saline and saline soil condition. Columns represent means for four plants (N = 4) with error bars showing standard deviation.