| Literature DB >> 34378980 |
Nabeel Imam1, Ignacio Belda1,2, Beatriz García-Jiménez1, Adrian J Duehl3, James R Doroghazi4, Daniel E Almonacid1, Varghese P Thomas5, Alberto Acedo1.
Abstract
Understanding the effectiveness and potential mechanism of action of agricultural biological products under different soil profiles and crops will allow more precise product recommendations based on local conditions and will ultimately result in increased crop yield. This study aimed to use bulk soil and rhizosphere microbial composition and structure to evaluate the potential effect of a Bacillus amyloliquefaciens inoculant (strain QST713) on potatoes and to explore its relationship with crop yield. We implemented next-generation sequencing (NGS) and bioinformatics approaches to assess the bacterial and fungal biodiversity in 185 soil samples, distributed over four different time points-from planting to harvest-from three different geographical locations in the United States. In addition to location and sampling time (which includes the difference between bulk soil and rhizosphere) as the main variables defining the microbiome composition, the microbial inoculant applied as a treatment also had a small but significant effect in fungal communities and a marginally significant effect in bacterial communities. However, treatment preserved the native communities without causing a detectable long-lasting effect on the alpha- and beta-diversity patterns after harvest. Using information about the application of the microbial inoculant and considering microbiome composition and structure data, we were able to train a Random Forest model to estimate if a bulk soil or rhizosphere sample came from a low- or high-yield block with relatively high accuracy (84.6%), concluding that the structure of fungal communities gives us more information as an estimator of potato yield than the structure of bacterial communities. IMPORTANCE Our results reinforce the notion that each cultivar on each location recruits a unique microbial community and that these communities are modulated by the vegetative growth stage of the plant. Moreover, inoculation of a Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain QST713-based product on potatoes also changed the abundance of specific taxonomic groups and the structure of local networks in those locations where the product caused an increase in the yield. The data obtained, from in-field assays, allowed training a predictive model to estimate the yield of a certain block, identifying microbiome variables-especially those related to microbial community structure-even with a higher predictive power than the geographical location of the block (that is, the principal determinant of microbial beta-diversity). The methods described here can be replicated to fit new models in any other crop and to evaluate the effect of any agricultural input in the composition and structure of the soil microbiome.Entities:
Keywords: agricultural biological; machine learning; soil microbiome; yield prediction
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34378980 PMCID: PMC8386434 DOI: 10.1128/mSphere.00130-21
Source DB: PubMed Journal: mSphere ISSN: 2379-5042 Impact factor: 4.389
FIG 1Yield data (t/ha) for control and treated blocks across locations. Yield = 30 separates blocks into two categorical variables (≤30 t/ha, >30 t/ha) and corresponds to one of the natural zero-probability density points in the bimodal yield distribution. The box limits correspond to the 25th and 75th percentiles, and the central line is the median. The whiskers are the 5th and 95th percentiles. The dots represent outliers [points below 25th percentile − (1.5 × IQR) and above 75th percentile + (1.5 × IQR), where IQR is the interquartile range or absolute difference between 75th and 25th percentiles].
FIG 2Beta- and alpha-diversity of bacterial and fungal populations in samples across locations and sampling times. (A and C) Beta-diversity (PCoA ordination) of bacterial and fungal populations. (B and D) Alpha-diversity (OTU richness and Shannon [H′] index) of bacterial and fungal populations. T0, before planting; T1, 1 month after planting; T2, 2 months after planting; T3, after harvesting. Box plot limits are the same as defined for Fig. 1.
FIG 3Local network properties across locations and sampling times. (A and B) Local network properties of bacterial and fungal populations in samples from the three locations (Grant, Sutton, and White Pigeon) at all sampling times (from T0 to T3). (C) Significant changes from T0 to T1 and from T0 to T2 in treated versus untreated blocks (no significant changes were detected from T0 to T3).
FIG 4Random Forest yield model fitted to predict blocks with yields of ≤30 t/ha or >30 t/ha based on soil microbiome composition and structure data. (A) Confusion matrix for the Random Forest model over the test set samples. (B) Importance figures of the main variables contributing to the predictive power of the Random Forest model.