| Literature DB >> 34961190 |
Karima Bencherif1,2, Frédéric Laruelle2, Yolande Dalpé3, Anissa Lounès-Hadj Sahraoui2.
Abstract
(1) Background: Soil degradation is an increasingly important problem in many parts of the world, particularly in arid and semiarid areas. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) isolated from arid soils are recognized to be better adapted to these edaphoclimatic conditions than exogenous ones. Nevertheless, little is known about the importance of AMF inoculum sources on Tamarix articulata development in natural saline soils. Therefore, the current study aims at investigating the efficiency of two AMF-mixed inoculums on T. articulata growth, with consideration of its rhizosphere microbiota. (2)Entities:
Keywords: ergosterol; mycorrhizal inoculation; phospholipid fatty acids; soil salinity
Year: 2021 PMID: 34961190 PMCID: PMC8707033 DOI: 10.3390/plants10122716
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Effect of AMF treatments on total AMF colonization of T. articulata cultivated in the four studied soils.
| Mycorrhizal Rate/Studied Soils | LG (1.1 dS·m−1) | HB (2.1 dS·m−1) | DU (3.1 dS·m−1) | BG (4.5 dS·m−1) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NI | CI | AI | NI | CI | AI | NI | CI | AI | NI | CI | AI | |
| Total mycorrhizal rate (%) | 15.4 c | 15.1 c | 21.9 a | 14.7 c | 10.9 c | 26.7 a | 12.2 c | 11.8 b | 29.1 a | 9.4 b | 15.4 b,c | 33.2 a |
| Total arbuscules (%) | 8.1 c’ | 11.6 b’ | 16.6 a’ | 9.3 c’ | 5.6 c’ | 12.2 a’ | 8.6 c’ | 8.8 c’ | 13.6 a’ | 4.2 c’ | 6.6 c’ | 16.6 a’ |
| Total vesicles (%) | 11.2 c,† | 14.8 b,† | 25.7 a,† | 13.2 c,† | 9.2 b,† | 16.6 a,† | 10.3 b,c,† | 10.6 c,† | 22.1 a,† | 8.3 c,† | 11.6 c,† | 28.3 a,† |
NI: non-inoculated. CI: commercial inoculum. AI: Indigenous inoculum. Data are represented as mean ± standard deviation. Means were obtained from five replicates (n = 5). Different letters with according symbols indicate significant differences between treatments for each group separately according to the Tukey HSD test (p < 0.05). Values within a line followed by the same letter are not significantly different at p < 0.05.
Pearson’s correlation coefficient between mycorrhizal colonization rates, shoot dry weight and the different measured parameters under AMF inoculation treatments.
| NI Treatment | CI Treatment | AI Treatment | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MCR | SDW | MCR | SDW | MCR | SDW | |
| SDW | 0.5 * | – | 0.7 * | – | 0.9 ** | – |
| RDW | 0.6 * | – | –0.2 | 0.9 *** | 0.8 ** | 0.9 *** |
| Shoot Phosphorus | 0.6 * | 0.6 * | 0.7 * | 0.5 * | 0.9 ** | 0.7 * |
| Soil phosphorus | –0.3 | 0.9 *** | 0.3 | 0.7 ** | –0.8 ** | 0.2 |
| Shannon index | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.9 ** | 0.4 ** |
| AMF species richness | 0.5 | 0.3 | −0.4 | –0.5 | 0.9 ** | 0.2 ** |
| NLFA C16:1ω5 | 0.6 * | 0.4 * | −0.1 | –0.5 | 0.7 * | 0.5 * |
| PLFA C16:1ω5 | –0.00 | 0.6 | −0.00 | 0.5 | 0.6 * | 0.2 * |
| NLFA/PLFA C16:1ω5 | 0.6 * | 0.3 ** | −0.1 | −0.3 | 0.6 * | 0.00 * |
| Ergosterol | 0.4 | 0.6 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.6 * | 0.2 * |
| Gram positive bacteria | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.5 * | 0.2 * |
| Gram negative bacteria | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.00 | 0.1 | 0.6 * | 0.2 ** |
MCR: Mycorrhizal colonization rate. SDW: Shoot dry weight. RDW: root dry weight.* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level. ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level. *** Correlation is significant at the 0.0001 level. NI: non-inoculated. CI: commercial inoculum. AI: indigenous inoculum.
One-way ANOVA for specific factors with three inoculation treatment levels and their interactions with studied parameters.
| Sources of Variation/Parameters | Mycorrhizal Rate | Shoot Phosphorus | Total Dry Weight | NLFA | PLFA | Ergosterol | Gram + | Gram − | Soil Phosphorus | AMF Spore Biodiversity | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soil salinity effect | R² | –0.461 | 0.135 | 0.313 | 0.564 | 0.304 | 0.161 | 0.329 | 0.409 | 0.139 | 0.78 | |
| F | 2.381 | 0.434 | 1.267 | 3.595 | 1.212 | 0.532 | 1.361 | 1.926 | 0.447 | 27.668 | ||
| Pr > F | 0.042 * | 0.904 | 0.302 | 0.005 ** | 0.331 | 0.838 | 0.257 | 0.095 * | 0.896 | 0.001 * | ||
| Intergroup Inoculum sources | NI | R² | 0.580 | 0.53 | 0.567 | 0.521 | 0.478 | 0.53 | 0.43 | 0.12 | 0.78 | 0.618 |
| F | 15.5 | 3.56 | 31.23 | 2.15 | 1.99 | 1.52 | 2.89 | –2.26 | 3.87 | 23.5 | ||
| Pr > F | 0.05 * | 0.05 * | 0.02 * | 0.05 * | 0.05 * | 0.02 * | 0.45 ns | 0.02 * | 0.05 * | |||
| IC | R² | 0.406 | 0.135 | 0.479 | 0.46 | 0.347 | 0.19 | 0.32 | 0.24 | 0.24 | 0.56 | |
| 3.17 | 1.9 | 32.15 | 1.091 | 1.12 | 0.51 | 1.36 | –1.8 | 2.5 | 21.03 | |||
| FPr > F | 0.009 ** | 0.8 | 0.05 * | 0.1 | 0.12 | 0.8 | 0.1 | 0.19 | 0.4 | 0.05 * | ||
| AI | R² | 0.593 | 0.624 | 0.618 | 0.65 | 0.74 | 0.65 | 0.67 | 0.62 | 0.798 | 0.65 | |
| F | 14.9 | 4.34 | 7.62 | 4.12 | 2.39 | 2.11 | 2.06 | 6.19 | 21.34 | 2.758 | ||
| Pr > F | 0.001 ** | 0.002 ** | 0.002 ** | 0.05 * | 0.05 * | 0.01 ** | 0.02* | 0.05* | 0.001 ** | |||
| Contrast | NI vs. IC | 0.02 * | ||||||||||
| NI vs. AI | ||||||||||||
| IC vs. AI | ||||||||||||
NLFA: Neutral lipid fatty acid, PLFA: phospholipid fatty acids, R2: Coefficient of regression, F: F Value, p: significance level. * p <: 0.05, ** p < 0.01. ns: non-significant. NI: non-inoculated, CI: commercial inoculum, AI: indigenous inoculum.
Figure 1Effect of AMF inoculum sources on T. articulata total seedling biomass in the four studied soils. NI: non-inoculated. CI: commercial inoculum. AI: Indigenous inoculum. Data are represented as mean ± standard deviation. Means are obtained from five replicates (n = 5). Different letters indicate significant differences between treatments in the four studied soils according to the Tukey HSD test (p < 0.05).
Figure 2Impact of AMF inoculum sources on T. articulata shoots phosphorus content in the four studied soils. NI: non-inoculated. CI: commercial inoculum. AI: Indigenous inoculum. Data are represented as mean ± standard deviation. Means were obtained from five replicates. Different letters indicate significant differences between treatments according to the Tukey HSD test (p < 0.05).
Figure 3Effect of AMF inoculum sources on C16:1ω5 soil content of T. articulata cultivated soils. (a) PLFA amount. (b) NLFA amount. (c) NLFA: PLFA C16:1w5 ratio. NI: non-inoculated. CI: commercial inoculum. AI: Indigenous inoculum. Data are represented as mean ± standard deviation. Means were obtained from five replicates. Different letters indicate significant differences between treatment and different symbols indicate significant differences between soils according to the Tukey HSD test (p < 0.05).
Figure 4Effect of AMF inoculum sources on ergosterol levels of the soils of T. articulata in the four studied soils. NI: non-inoculated. CI: commercial inoculum. AI: Indigenous inoculum. Data are represented as mean ± standard deviation. Means were obtained from five replicates. Different letters indicate significant differences between treatments and different symbols indicate significant differences between soils according to the Tukey HSD test (p < 0.05).
Figure 5Influence of AMF inoculum sources on PLFA bacteria Gram + and Gram - amounts of the soils of T. articulata in the four studied soils. NI: non-inoculated. CI: commercial inoculum. AI: indigenous inoculum. Data are represented as mean ± standard deviation. Means were obtained from five replicates (n = 5). Different letters indicate significant differences between treatment and different symbols indicate significant differences between soils according to the Tukey HSD test (p < 0.05).