| Literature DB >> 33367127 |
Pankaj Kumar1,2, Abhinav Aeron3, Niru Shaw1, Ajay Singh4, V K Bajpai5, Shailja Pant2, Ramesh Chandra Dubey3.
Abstract
Three potential rhizobacteria namely Burkholderia gladioli (MTCC 10216), Pseudomonas sp. (MTCC 9002) and Bacillus subtilis (MTCC 8528) procured from IMTECH, Chandigarh (India) were evaluated individually and as consortia for its phosphate (P) solubilizing ability and effect of growth of fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum L.) and tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum L.). Phosphate solubilizing ability of these strains individually and as consortia was tested on Pikovskayas agar medium, Phosphate solubilizing agar medium and National Botanical Research Institute phosphate agar medium containing six different sources of insoluble inorganic phosphate such as tri-calcium phosphate (TCP), di-calcium phosphate (DCP), zinc phosphate (ZP), ferric phosphate (FP), sodium di-hydrogen phosphate (SP), and aluminum phosphate (AP), and two organic P such as calcium and sodium phytate. The maximum P solubilizing ability was recorded in consortium-4 having all three potential bacterial strains. Phosphate solubilization after 7th day of incubation was 37.9 mg/100 ml of TCP, 40.01 mg/100 ml of DCP, 15.79 mg/100 ml of FP, 43.02 mg/100 ml of SP, no solubilization of ZP and AP, 39.75 mg/100 ml of calcium phytate and 24.01mg/100 ml of sodium phytate. Seed germination and the other plant parameters such as plant height and weight significantly increased in fenugreek and tomato seeds, bio-primed with consortium-4 followed by consortium-3. After bio-priming of seeds in pot assay, the level of phosphorus in soil got increased by 54% in consortium-4 treated soil followed by consortium-3 (47%) over untreated control soil. Based on these findings, consoritium-4 could be recommended as a good bio-inoculant for fenugreek, tomato and other crops in comparison to individual strains and other consortia.Entities:
Keywords: Agricultural soil science; Bioinformatics; Biotechnology; Consortia; Ecology; Fenugreek and tomato; Microbiology; Organic farming; Pesticide; Phosphate solubilization; Plant biology
Year: 2020 PMID: 33367127 PMCID: PMC7749380 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05701
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Heliyon ISSN: 2405-8440
Individual strains and its consortia composition.
| Strains and its consortia | Notations |
|---|---|
| S1 | |
| S2 | |
| S3 | |
| S1 + S2 = C1 | |
| S1 + S3 = C2 | |
| S2 + S3 = C3 | |
| S1+S2+S3 = C4 |
Abbreviation: S, Strain; C, Consortium.
Figure 1Phosphate solubilizing index (PSI) of bacteria and its consortia in different inorganic and organic sources (S, Strain; C, Consortium).
Figure 2Solubilization of inorganic phosphate (Pi) by bacteria individually and by its consortia in NBRIP with incubation time by using (a) tri-calcium phosphate (TCP) and (b) di-calcium phosphate (DCP) as inorganic phosphate sources.
Figure 3Solubilization of inorganic phosphate (Pi) by bacteria and its consortia in NBRIP with incubation time by using (a) ferric phosphate and (b) sodium di-hydrogen phosphate as inorganic phosphate sources.
Figure 4Solubilization of organic phosphate (Po) by bacteria and its consortia in PSM with incubation time by using (a) sodium phytate (b) calcium phytate as organic phosphate sources.
Figure 5Effect of PSR and its consortia with crops on rhizospheric soils available phosphate (P) at 21 days after inoculation.
Figure 6Plate assay germination study of inoculated tomato (A) and fenugreek (B) seeds with consortium-1 (B. gladioli + Pseudomonas sp.), consortium-2 (B. gladioli + B. subtilis), consortium-3 (Pseudomonas sp.+ B. subtilis), consortium-4 (B. gladioli + Pseudomonas sp.+B. subtilis), and Control (without inoculation).
Effect of PSR and its consortia on seed germination and vegetative growth of Lycopersicon esculentum L.
| PSR strains | Seed germination (%) | Root length (cm) | Shoot length (cm) | Fresh weight (g) | Dry weight (g) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Root wt. | Shoot wt. | Root wt. | Shoot wt. | ||||
| S1 | 60.9 | 1.533∗ | 4.266∗ | 0.0050∗ | 0.013ns | 0.0036ns | 0.0050∗ |
| S2 | 65.6 | 1.166ns | 7.10∗∗ | 0.0173∗∗ | 0.086∗∗ | 0.0070∗∗ | 0.0076∗∗ |
| S3 | 70.0 | 1.633∗∗ | 7.00∗∗ | 0.0103∗ | 0.070∗ | 0.0040ns | 0.0070∗∗ |
| C1 | 79.9 | 1.433∗ | 7.10∗∗ | 0.0076∗ | 0.077∗ | 0.0052∗ | 0.0060∗∗ |
| C2 | 80.1 | 1.366∗ | 8.00∗∗ | 0.0163∗∗ | 0.082∗∗ | 0.0070∗∗ | 0.0060∗∗ |
| C3 | 83.3 | 1.466∗ | 6.06∗ | 0.0146∗∗ | 0.112∗∗ | 0.0043ns | 0.0080∗∗ |
| C4 | 95.8 | 1.366∗ | 6.66∗∗ | 0.0046ns | 0.045ns | 0.0016ns | 0.0036∗ |
| Control | 56.6 | 0.600 | 2.700 | 0.0023 | 0.031 | 0.0010 | 0.0016 |
| CD at 1% | 1.028 | 1.915 | 0.0052 | 0.387 | 0.0058 | 0.0231 | |
| CD at 5% | 0.650 | 1.380 | 0.0037 | 0.0279 | 0.0042 | 0.0026 | |
Abbreviations: S1, S2, S3, C1, C2, C3, C4 (as described in Table 1), Control = Without any biological agent; CD = Critical Difference, Value are mean of 3 randomly selected plants from each set. ٭٭ significant at 1%, ٭significant at 5 %; ns = non-significant. as compared to control (non-bacterized seeds).
Effect of PSR strains and its consortia on seed germination and vegetative growth of Trigonella foenum-graecum L.
| PSR strains | Seed germination (%) | Root length (cm) | Shoot length (cm) | Fresh weight (g) | Dry weight (g) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Root wt. | Shoot wt. | Root wt. | Shoot wt. | ||||
| S1 | 76.87 | 2.03∗ | 4.26ns | 0.0050ns | 0.013ns | 0.003∗ | 0.0050ns |
| S2 | 74.00 | 2.06∗ | 6.10∗ | 0.017∗∗ | 0.086∗ | 0.007∗∗ | 0.0076∗∗ |
| S3 | 75.00 | 2.13∗ | 6.00∗ | 0.0103∗∗ | 0.080∗ | 0.004∗ | 0.0070∗∗ |
| C1 | 78.90 | 1.23ns | 7.10∗ | 0.056∗ | 0.077∗ | 0.005∗ | 0.0060∗ |
| C2 | 80.10 | 2.23∗ | 8.00∗∗ | 0.063∗∗ | 0.082∗ | 0.007∗ | 0.0060∗ |
| C3 | 80.00 | 2.33∗ | 8.63∗∗ | 0.066∗ | 0.112∗∗ | 0.004∗ | 0.0080∗∗ |
| C4 | 99.75 | 2.43∗∗ | 8.66∗∗ | 0.076∗ | 0.078∗ | 0.0016ns | 0.0056∗ |
| Control | 61.52 | 0.700 | 5.033 | 0.0036 | 0.0443 | 0.0013 | 0.0026 |
| CD at 1% | 2.234 | 2.214 | 0.0053 | 0.0446 | 0.0038 | 0.0035 | |
| CD at 5% | 1.610 | 1.596 | 0.0038 | 0.0321 | 0.0021 | 0.0025 | |
Abbreviations S1, S2, S3, C1, C2, C3, C4 (as described in Table 1), Control = Without any biological agent; CD = Critical Difference, Value are mean of 3 randomly selected plants from each set. ٭٭ significant at 1%, ٭significant at 5 %; ns = non-significant. as compared to control (non-bacterized seeds).