| Literature DB >> 34778957 |
Zhilong Bian1, Mei Wang2, Yan Yang2, Yuxia Wu1, Haiping Ni1, Xu Yu2, Jing Shi2, Hanna Chen1, Xiaoying Bian1, Deng Pan1, Tao Li3, Youming Zhang1, Lei Yu3, Lihua Jiang2, Qiang Tu1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Excessive nitrogen (N) fertilization in glasshouse fields greatly increases N loss and fossil-fuel energy consumption resulting in serious environmental risks. Microbial inoculants are strongly emerging as potential alternatives to agrochemicals and offer an eco-friendly fertilization strategy to reduce our dependence on synthetic chemical fertilizers. Effects of a N-fixing strain Pseudomonas protegens CHA0-ΔretS-nif on ginger plant growth, yield, and nutrient uptake, and on earthworm biomass and the microbial community were investigated in glasshouse fields in Shandong Province, northern China.Entities:
Keywords: biofertilizer; biological nitrogen fixation; ginger; glasshouse vegetable fields; heavy nitrogen fertilization
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34778957 PMCID: PMC9299100 DOI: 10.1002/jsfa.11645
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Sci Food Agric ISSN: 0022-5142 Impact factor: 4.125
Figure 1Effects of different treatments on shoot and root weight (a), plant height (b), stem diameter (c) and branch number (d). Values are means with standard error bars (n = 3). Means sharing the same letter are not significantly different between treatments (P < 0.05).
Figure 2Effects of different treatments on ginger rhizome yields. Values are means with standard error bars (n = 3). Means sharing the same letter are not significantly different between treatments (P < 0.05).
Effects of different treatments on economic income
| Treatment | Nitrogen application (kg ha−1) | Plant nitrogen content (kg ha−1) | Yield (×105 kg ha−1) | Increase in yield (%) | Nitrogen production efficiency (kg kg−1) | Economic income ($ ha−1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 675.0 | 137.51 ± 8.54 b | 1.27 ± 0.05 d | — | 188.04 | 78 696.6 d |
| WI‐N100% | 675.0 | 145.14 ± 3.91 b | 1.34 ± 0.02 a | 5.45 | 198.30 | 82 987.0 a |
| MI‐N100% | 675.0 | 177.46 ± 10.52 a | 1.43 ± 0.01 c | 12.93 | 212.36 | 88 870.8 c |
| MI‐N85% | 573.8 | 162.50 ± 12.22 a | 1.31 ± 0.01 b | 3.33 | 228.58 | 81 319.2 b |
| MI‐N70% | 472.5 | 141.02 ± 3.60 b | 1.19 ± 0.02 e | −6.48 | 251.22 | 73 594.0 e |
Values presented are mean ± standard error (n = 3). Means sharing the same letter are not significantly different between treatments (P < 0.05). Plant nitrogen (N) content refers to the whole plant N acquisition measured on October 15.
Effects of different treatments on plant acquisition of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K)
| Treatment | Control (kg ha−1) | WI‐N100% (kg ha−1) | MI‐N100% (kg ha−1) | MI‐N85% (kg ha−1) | MI‐N70% (kg ha−1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| July 13 | 22.08 ± 0.44bC | 17.74 ± 0.99cC | 21.65 ± 2.07bC | 25.79 ± 1.45aC | 13.21 ± 2.32dC |
| August 12 | 49.66 ± 2.27dB | 64.10 ± 3.26bB | 69.08 ± 1.74aB | 66.34 ± 0.33abB | 59.62 ± 1.54cB |
| September 11 | 130.43 ± 16.36bA | 132.02 ± 5.69bA | 169.37 ± 12.01aA | 157.18 ± 14.84aA | 114.64 ± 9.40bA |
| October 15 | 137.51 ± 8.54bA | 145.14 ± 3.91bD | 177.46 ± 10.52aA | 162.50 ± 12.22aA | 141.02 ± 3.60bD |
|
| |||||
| July 13 | 4.20 ± 1.11aC | 15.22 ± 1.34bC | 5.42 ± 1.25aC | 4.25 ± 0.36aC | 8.98 ± 1.63cC |
| August 12 | 13.98 ± 0.51bB | 18.17 ± 2.75aAC | 18.92 ± 1.05aB | 17.42 ± 0.44aB | 16.89 ± 0.93aB |
| September 11 | 23.60 ± 1.77aA | 28.93 ± 0.41bA | 25.39 ± 2.33aA | 27.22 ± 1.08aA | 27.98 ± 1.34bA |
| October 15 | 34.20 ± 1.87aD | 26.87 ± 1.93bB | 35.36 ± 1.57aD | 35.00 ± 1.69aD | 26.16 ± 1.81bD |
|
| |||||
| July 13 | 68.96 ± 6.52dC | 196.31 ± 13.06bcC | 236.40 ± 8.98abC | 275.16 ± 33.16aC | 157.88 ± 36.05cC |
| August 12 | 240.96 ± 11.53cB | 424.25 ± 22.64abB | 467.06 ± 32.64abB | 476.03 ± 35.61aB | 415.11 ± 42.93bB |
| September 11 | 505.54 ± 44.37dA | 608.91 ± 10.41cA | 759.04 ± 61.02aA | 723.20 ± 75.91abA | 637.98 ± 24.90bcA |
| October 15 | 837.37 ± 51.98dD | 900.74 ± 45.83cdD | 1031.52 ± 27.75abD | 1072.19 ± 31.59aD | 948.80 ± 71.80bcD |
All values presented are mean ± standard error (n = 3). Means sharing the same lowercase letter are not significantly different between treatments (P < 0.05). The capital letters indicate significant differences for time effects (P < 0.05).
Figure 3Effects of different treatments on plant contents of N (a), P (b) and K (c), and total protein (d) in the ginger rhizome. Values are means with standard error bars (n = 3). Means sharing the same letter are not significantly different between treatments (P < 0.05). DW, dry weight.
Effects of different treatments on microbial populations in ginger rhizosphere
| Treatment | Microbial biomass (×106 CFU g−1) | Bacteria (×106 CFU g−1) | Actinomycetes (×105 CFU g−1) | Fungi (×104 CFU g−1) | Percentage (%) | Bacteria/Fungi | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bacteria | Actinomycetes | Fungi | ||||||
|
| ||||||||
| Control | 2.23 ± 0.05d | 2.03 ± 0.05d | 1.83 ± 0.13b | 1.60 ± 0.20a | 91.07 | 8.21 | 0.72 | 126.49 |
| WI‐N100% | 2.13 ± 0.05d | 1.83 ± 0.06d | 2.83 ± 0.22a | 1.60 ± 0.13a | 85.96 | 13.29 | 0.75 | 114.61 |
| MI‐N100% | 2.57 ± 0.21c | 2.43 ± 0.21c | 1.30 ± 0.07c | 0.53 ± 0.06b | 94.73 | 5.06 | 0.21 | 451.10 |
| MI‐N85% | 3.67 ± 0.28a | 3.57 ± 0.29a | 0.93 ± 0.07d | 0.63 ± 0.11c | 97.28 | 2.55 | 0.17 | 572.24 |
| MI‐N70% | 3.09 ± 0.26b | 3.03 ± 0.17b | 0.50 ± 0.05e | 1.10 ± 0.14c | 98.03 | 1.62 | 0.36 | 272.31 |
|
| ||||||||
| Control | 0.53 ± 0.01d | 0.43 ± 0.02d | 0.80 ± 0.16c | 1.47 ± 0.18b | 82.07 | 15.15 | 2.78 | 29.52 |
| WI‐N100% | 0.78 ± 0.07c | 0.63 ± 0.07c | 1.37 ± 0.07a | 1.13 ± 0.08c | 80.77 | 17.56 | 1.45 | 55.70 |
| MI‐N100% | 1.89 ± 0.20a | 1.77 ± 0.21a | 1.17 ± 0.08b | 0.53 ± 0.04d | 93.54 | 6.18 | 0.28 | 334.07 |
| MI‐N85% | 1.06 ± 0.13b | 1.03 ± 0.13b | 0.23 ± 0.06d | 0.60 ± 0.08d | 97.24 | 2.20 | 0.56 | 173.64 |
| MI‐N70% | 1.10 ± 0.02b | 0.97 ± 0.09b | 1.10 ± 0.03b | 2.03 ± 0.07a | 88.12 | 10.03 | 1.85 | 47.63 |
Values presented are mean ± standard error (n = 3). Means sharing the same lowercase letter are not significantly different between treatments (P < 0.05).
Figure 4Effects of different treatments on earthworm number (a) and weight (b) per m3. Values are means with standard error bars (n = 3). Means sharing the same letter are not significantly different between treatments (P < 0.05).