Literature DB >> 33236213

Impact of Inoculation with Pseudomonas aestus CMAA 1215T on the Non-target Resident Bacterial Community in a Saline Rhizosphere Soil.

Rafael L F Vasconcellos1, Emiliana Manesco Romagnoli2, Rodrigo G Taketani2, Suikinai Nobre Santos2, Tiago Domingues Zucchi3, Itamar Soares Melo2.   

Abstract

Plant growth reduction caused by osmotic stress, pathogens, and nutrient scarcity can be overcome by inoculation with plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR). Knowing the effects of PGPR on the microbial community beyond those on plant growth can bring new options of soil microbiota management. The present study aimed to investigate the effect of inoculation with the newly described Pseudomonas aestus CMAA 1215T [a 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate (ACC) deaminase and glycine-betaine producer] on the rhizosphere bacterial community of Zea mays in natural (non-salinized) and saline soil. The bacterial community structure was assessed by sequencing the V6-V7 16S ribosomal RNA using the Ion Personal Genome Machine™. The non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) of the OTU profile (ANOSIM P < 0.01) distinguishes all the treatments (with and without inoculation under saline and natural soils). Inoculated samples shared 1234 OTUs with non-inoculated soil. The most abundant classes in all samples were Alphaproteobacteria, Gammaproteobacteria, Actinobacteria, Acidobacteriia, Bacteroidia, Thermoleophilia, Verrucomicrobiae, Ktenodobacteria, and Bacilli. The inoculation, on the other hand, caused an increase in the abundance of the genera Bacillus, Bryobacter, Bradyrhizobium, "Candidatus Xiphinematobacter", and "Candidatus Udaeobacter" independent of soil salinization. "Candidatus Udaeobacter" has the largest Mean Decrease in Gini Values with higher abundance on inoculated salted soil. In addition, Pseudomonas inoculation reduced the abundance of Gammaproteobacteria and Phycisphaerae. Understanding how inoculation modifies the bacterial community is essential to manage the rhizospheric microbiome to create a multi-inoculant approach and to understand its effects on ecological function.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33236213     DOI: 10.1007/s00284-020-02285-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Microbiol        ISSN: 0343-8651            Impact factor:   2.188


  32 in total

1.  Effects of the inoculant strain Pseudomonas putida KT2442 (pNF142) and of naphthalene contamination on the soil bacterial community.

Authors:  Newton C M Gomes; Irina A Kosheleva; Wolf-Rainer Abraham; Kornelia Smalla
Journal:  FEMS Microbiol Ecol       Date:  2005-09-01       Impact factor: 4.194

2.  Deciphering the rhizosphere microbiome for disease-suppressive bacteria.

Authors:  Rodrigo Mendes; Marco Kruijt; Irene de Bruijn; Ester Dekkers; Menno van der Voort; Johannes H M Schneider; Yvette M Piceno; Todd Z DeSantis; Gary L Andersen; Peter A H M Bakker; Jos M Raaijmakers
Journal:  Science       Date:  2011-05-05       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  Effect of on-field inoculation of Phaseolus vulgaris with rhizobia on soil bacterial communities.

Authors:  Darine Trabelsi; Alessio Mengoni; Haroun Ben Ammar; Ridha Mhamdi
Journal:  FEMS Microbiol Ecol       Date:  2011-04-26       Impact factor: 4.194

4.  Inoculation of Phaseolus vulgaris with the nodule-endophyte Agrobacterium sp. 10C2 affects richness and structure of rhizosphere bacterial communities and enhances nodulation and growth.

Authors:  Saif-Allah Chihaoui; Darine Trabelsi; Ahmed Jdey; Haythem Mhadhbi; Ridha Mhamdi
Journal:  Arch Microbiol       Date:  2015-05-13       Impact factor: 2.552

5.  Effect of bacterial inoculation, plant genotype and developmental stage on root-associated and endophytic bacterial communities in potato (Solanum tuberosum).

Authors:  Fernando Dini Andreote; Ulisses Nunes da Rocha; Welington Luiz Araújo; João Lúcio Azevedo; Leonard Simon van Overbeek
Journal:  Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek       Date:  2010-02-21       Impact factor: 2.271

Review 6.  Microbial inoculants and their impact on soil microbial communities: a review.

Authors:  Darine Trabelsi; Ridha Mhamdi
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2013-07-11       Impact factor: 3.411

7.  Defining the Pseudomonas genus: where do we draw the line with Azotobacter?

Authors:  Asli I Özen; David W Ussery
Journal:  Microb Ecol       Date:  2011-08-03       Impact factor: 4.552

8.  Comparative genomics of plant-associated Pseudomonas spp.: insights into diversity and inheritance of traits involved in multitrophic interactions.

Authors:  Joyce E Loper; Karl A Hassan; Dmitri V Mavrodi; Edward W Davis; Chee Kent Lim; Brenda T Shaffer; Liam D H Elbourne; Virginia O Stockwell; Sierra L Hartney; Katy Breakwell; Marcella D Henkels; Sasha G Tetu; Lorena I Rangel; Teresa A Kidarsa; Neil L Wilson; Judith E van de Mortel; Chunxu Song; Rachel Blumhagen; Diana Radune; Jessica B Hostetler; Lauren M Brinkac; A Scott Durkin; Daniel A Kluepfel; W Patrick Wechter; Anne J Anderson; Young Cheol Kim; Leland S Pierson; Elizabeth A Pierson; Steven E Lindow; Donald Y Kobayashi; Jos M Raaijmakers; David M Weller; Linda S Thomashow; Andrew E Allen; Ian T Paulsen
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2012-07-05       Impact factor: 5.917

9.  Successional Trajectories of Rhizosphere Bacterial Communities over Consecutive Seasons.

Authors:  Shengjing Shi; Erin Nuccio; Donald J Herman; Ruud Rijkers; Katerina Estera; Jiabao Li; Ulisses Nunes da Rocha; Zhili He; Jennifer Pett-Ridge; Eoin L Brodie; Jizhong Zhou; Mary Firestone
Journal:  MBio       Date:  2015-08-04       Impact factor: 7.867

10.  Amplicon-based metagenomics identified candidate organisms in soils that caused yield decline in strawberry.

Authors:  Xiangming Xu; Thomas Passey; Feng Wei; Robert Saville; Richard J Harrison
Journal:  Hortic Res       Date:  2015-06-03       Impact factor: 6.793

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.