| Literature DB >> 32825476 |
Ahmad Ali1,2, Muhammad Imran Ghani1, Ding Haiyan1, Muhammad Iqbal3, Zhihui Cheng1, Zucong Cai2,4,5.
Abstract
Entities:
Keywords: Fusarium incidence inhibition; cucumber yield; garlic substrate; microbial community structure; microbial interaction; plant growth
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32825476 PMCID: PMC7504009 DOI: 10.3390/ijms21176008
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Effect of different concentrations of garlic substrate on plant growth, fruit yield and Fusarium wilt incidence rate.
| Plant Growth Indexes | CK | T1 (1:100) | T2 (3:100) | T3 (5:100) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plant height (cm) | 75.16 ± 8.34 b | 81.58 ± 3.33 b | 88.27 ± 1.46 ab | 94.53 ± 4.23 a |
| Leaf area (cm−2) | 163.05 ± 7.48 b | 166.82 ± 3.73 b | 177.65 ± 3.39 b | 219.91 ± 4.69 a |
| Shoot fresh weight (g/plant) | 75.84 ± 10.92 b | 72.51 ± 8.27 b | 91.79 ± 3.44 ab | 107.85 ± 4.64 a |
| Shoot dry weight (g/plant) | 12.47 ± 2.90 b | 10.94 ± 2.74 b | 16.69 ± 0.99 a | 17.21 ± 0.98 a |
| Root fresh weight (g/plant) | 5.90 ± 0.65 bc | 5.02 ± 0.32 c | 8.97 ± 0.88 a | 7.13 ± 0.31 ab |
| Root dry weight (g/plant) | 0.86 ± 0.14 b | 0.87 ± 0.06 b | 1.87 ± 0.12 a | 1.45 ± 0.23 a |
| Fruit fresh weight (g/plant) | 171.45 ± 6.39 b | 163.74 ± 5.49 b | 213.98 ± 5.82 a | 197.30 ± 9.41 a |
| Fruit length (cm) | 31.60 ± 1.16 a | 32.75 ± 1.43 a | 34.74 ± 1.03 a | 35.01 ± 1.53 a |
| Cucumber yield (g/plant) | 725.12 ± 7.72 c | 749.50 ± 16.76 c | 822.8 ± 9.25 b | 876.92 ± 6.00 a |
| Fusarium wilt incidence % | 33.63 ± 0.52 c | 30.12 ± 1.21 b | 26.53 ± 2.52 ab | 21.53 ± 1.32 a |
Values within a column followed by the same letter(s) are not significantly different at p < 0.05, based on one-way analysis of variance with least significant difference test (LSD) test.
Figure 1Chlorophyll a (Chl a), chlorophyll b (Chl b) and total chlorophyll contents (Chl a + b) in the leaves of cucumber under different concentrations of garlic substrate. Values represent the mean SE (n = 3). Different letters indicate a significant difference between treatments at p < 0.05, according to the LSD test.
Figure 2Photosynthetic gas exchange parameter analysis. Net photosynthetic assimilation (Pn) (a); stomatal conductance (Gs) (b); intercellular CO2 concentration (Ci) (c); and transpiration rate (Tr) (d) in fully expanded cucumber leaves in response to garlic substrate addition. Data are the mean ± SD from three replicates.
Soil physicochemical and biological properties affected by different concentrations of garlic substrate.
| Soil Properties | CK | T1 (1:100) | T2 (3:100) | T3 (5:100) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soil pH (1:5 soil: Water) | 7.75 ± 0.04 b | 7.94 ± 0.01 a | 7.80 ± 0.04 b | 7.63 ± 0.02 c |
| EC (µs·cm−1) | 588.56 ± 2.93 bc | 581.12 ± 1.81 c | 595.57 ± 0.11 b | 611.59 ± 1.09 a |
| Organic matter (g·kg−1) | 25.70 ± 2.93 c | 28.16 ± 1.81 bc | 31.94 ± 0.11 ab | 35.89 ± 1.09 a |
| Available N (mg·kg−1) | 75.16 ± 1.97 c | 94.64 ± 2.15 b | 107.83 ± 1.07 a | 113.39 ± 1.46 a |
| Available P (mg·kg−1) | 72.83 ± 3.07 c | 119.26 ± 2.34 b | 129.83 ± 1.09 a | 136.61 ± 2.91 a |
| Available K (mg·kg−1) | 333.18 ± 1.46 c | 348 ± 1.60 b | 355.83 ± 1.83 a | 346.35 ± 3.31 b |
| Soil invertase (glucose mg·g−1 soil d−1) | 27.3 ± 1.97 b | 31.08 ± 1.47 b | 32.64 ± 1.14 b | 39.31 ± 1.94 a |
| Urease (NH3-N mg·g−1 soil d−1) | 3.06 ± 0.23 c | 4.27 ± 0.39 b | 4.69 ± 0.44 b | 6.71 ± 0.23 a |
| Catalase (KMnO4 mL·g−1 20 min−1) | 10.71 ± 0.64 b | 11.08 ± 0.81 b | 12.78 ± 0.23 ab | 13.96 ± 0.97 a |
| Alkaline phosphatase (P2O5 mg 100 g−1 soil d−1) | 1.56 ± 0.10 c | 1.93 ± 0.26 bc | 2.28 ± 0.10 b | 3.35 ± 0.27 a |
Values are means ± SE, n = 3. Mean values within columns followed by different letters are significantly different using the LSD test (p < 0.05).
Figure 3(a) Relative abundances (%) of bacterial community composition at the genus level. (b) Relative abundances of community proportions of bacteria samples at the phylum level under different treatments.
Figure 4(a) Relative abundances of fungal community composition at the genus level. (b) Relative abundances of community proportions of fungal samples at the phylum level under different treatments.
Comparison of the estimated OTUs richness and diversity indices of microbes clustering at 97% identity, as obtained from Illumina sequencing under different treatments. Taxonomic alpha diversity was measured as OTU richness (number of OTUs), estimated richness (Chao1 and ACE), and diversity (Shannon index).
| Treat-Ments | Bacterial 16S rRNA | Fungal 18S rRNA | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OTUs | ACE | Chao1 | Shannon | OTUs | ACE | Chao1 | Shannon | |
| CK | 2190 ± 24.36 ab | 2601 ± 13.09 b | 2612 ± 13.5 b | 6.66 ± 0.05 ab | 110.9 ± 7.24 bc | 125 ± 7.0 b | 124 ± 8.08 b | 2.13 ± 0.23 ab |
| T1 | 2232 ± 23.48 ab | 2625 ± 24.42 ab | 2637 ± 23.11ab | 6.59 ± 0.08 ab | 141.3 ± 11.31 a | 153.3 ± 8.37 a | 155 ± 10.40 a | 2.45 ± 0.38 ab |
| T2 | 2268 ± 47.92 a | 2680 ± 21.36 a | 2691 ± 16.55 a | 6.98 ± 0.03 a | 141.7 ± 6.43 a | 150.3 ± 6.11 a | 152.7 ± 7.35 a | 2.89 ± 0.24 a |
| T3 | 2134 ± 26.74 b | 2627 ± 17.98 ab | 2605 ± 26.92 b | 6.32 ± 0.43 b | 128.7 ± 13.9 ab | 151 ± 4.93 a | 147 ± 7.0 ab | 2.08 ± 0.19 b |
Average of three replicates with standard error (n = 3, mean ± SE) of each treatment. CK (control), T1 (1:100), T2 (3:100), T3 (5:100).
Figure 5Principal component analysis of the bacteria (a) and fungi (b), revealing the community differences among all the soil samples.
Figure 6The heat map depicts the relationship of key soil edaphic factors, cucumber yield and Fusarium wilt incidence rate % with top bacterial (a) and fungal taxa (b). Soil samples were clustered using an unweighted pair group method with arithmetic mean (UPGMA) dendrogram based on Bray–Curtis similarities. The color legend and scale are provided in the figure (blue means low relative abundance with negative association while yellow and red mean higher abundance with positive correlation). Shaded values indicate statistically significant (* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01) associations with correlation.