| Literature DB >> 32117343 |
Simon E Dupin1,2, René Geurts2, E Toby Kiers1.
Abstract
Organisms rely on symbiotic associations for metabolism, protection, and energy. However, these intimate partnerships can be vulnerable to exploitation. What prevents microbial mutualists from parasitizing their hosts? In legumes, there is evidence that hosts have evolved sophisticated mechanisms to manage their symbiotic rhizobia, but the generality and evolutionary origins of these control mechanisms are under debate. Here, we focused on the symbiosis between Parasponia hosts and N2-fixing rhizobium bacteria. Parasponia is the only non-legume lineage to have evolved a rhizobial symbiosis and thus provides an evolutionary replicate to test how rhizobial exploitation is controlled. A key question is whether Parasponia hosts can prevent colonization of rhizobia under high nitrogen conditions, when the contribution of the symbiont becomes nonessential. We grew Parasponia andersonii inoculated with Bradyrhizobium elkanii under four ammonium nitrate concentrations in a controlled growth chamber. We measured shoot and root dry weight, nodule number, nodule fresh weight, nodule volume. To quantify viable rhizobial populations in planta, we crushed nodules and determined colony forming units (CFU), as a rhizobia fitness proxy. We show that, like legumes and actinorhizal plants, P. andersonii is able to control nodule symbiosis in response to exogenous nitrogen. While the relative host growth benefits of inoculation decreased with nitrogen fertilization, our highest ammonium nitrate concentration (3.75 mM) was sufficient to prevent nodule formation on inoculated roots. Rhizobial populations were highest in nitrogen free medium. While we do not yet know the mechanism, our results suggest that control mechanisms over rhizobia are not exclusive to the legume clade.Entities:
Keywords: Parasponia; host control; nitrogen fertilizer; nitrogen fixing bacteria; nodulation; non-legume; plant nutrition; rhizobium fitness
Year: 2020 PMID: 32117343 PMCID: PMC7019102 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2019.01779
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Plant Sci ISSN: 1664-462X Impact factor: 5.753
Figure 1Inoculated and non-inoculated Parasponia andersonii plant mass under four nitrogen levels. (A) Mean total (shoot + root) plant dry weight. Asterisks show pair-wise comparison significance for each nitrogen level [ANOVA, Tukey honest significant difference (HSD) test]. (B) Mean root to shoot dry weight ratio. Asterisks show pair-wise comparison significance for each nitrogen level (Wilcoxon rank sum test) NR = non-rhizobial (blue), WUR3 = Rhizobial strain B. elkanii WUR3 (yellow). (C) Mean relative host growth response to rhizobia inoculation as the difference of the total dry weight of inoculated and non-inoculated control, divided by the total dry weight of non-inoculated control. Letters represent groups significantly different from each other (ANOVA, Tukey HSD test). Error bars show standard error.
Figure 2Inoculated Parasponia andersonii nodulation under four nitrogen levels. (A) Mean nodule number per plant. (B) Mean nodule fresh weight per plant. (C) Mean nodule volume per plant. Letters represent groups significantly different from each other (ANOVA, Tukey HSD test and Kruskal test, Dunn’s test). Error bars show standard error.
Figure 3Rhizobia fitness under four nitrogen levels. (A) Mean colony forming units per mg plant dry weight. (B) Mean colony forming units per milligram nodule fresh weight. (C) Mean colony forming units per volume of nodule. Letters represent groups significantly different from each other (Kruskal test, Dunn’s test). Error bars show standard error.