| Literature DB >> 35056500 |
Sagar Maitra1, Marian Brestic2,3, Preetha Bhadra4, Tanmoy Shankar1, Subhashisa Praharaj1, Jnana Bharati Palai1, M Mostafizur Rahman Shah5, Viliam Barek6, Peter Ondrisik2, Milan Skalický3, Akbar Hossain5.
Abstract
Agricultural sustainability is of foremost importance for maintaining high food production. Irresponsible resource use not only negatively affects agroecology, but also reduces the economic profitability of the production system. Among different resources, soil is one of the most vital resources of agriculture. Soil fertility is the key to achieve high crop productivity. Maintaining soil fertility and soil health requires conscious management effort to avoid excessive nutrient loss, sustain organic carbon content, and minimize soil contamination. Though the use of chemical fertilizers have successfully improved crop production, its integration with organic manures and other bioinoculants helps in improving nutrient use efficiency, improves soil health and to some extent ameliorates some of the constraints associated with excessive fertilizer application. In addition to nutrient supplementation, bioinoculants have other beneficial effects such as plant growth-promoting activity, nutrient mobilization and solubilization, soil decontamination and/or detoxification, etc. During the present time, high energy based chemical inputs also caused havoc to agriculture because of the ill effects of global warming and climate change. Under the consequences of climate change, the use of bioinputs may be considered as a suitable mitigation option. Bioinoculants, as a concept, is not something new to agricultural science, however; it is one of the areas where consistent innovations have been made. Understanding the role of bioinoculants, the scope of their use, and analysing their performance in various environments are key to the successful adaptation of this technology in agriculture.Entities:
Keywords: agricultural sustainability; bioinoculants; climate change mitigation; green revolution; negative impact
Year: 2021 PMID: 35056500 PMCID: PMC8780112 DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms10010051
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microorganisms ISSN: 2076-2607
Figure 1The negative impact of the Green Revolution on agriculture.
Inoculation of microorganisms facilitated crop growth by the availability of nutrients.
| Microorganisms | Crop Performance over Control (Untreated) | Associated Crop | References |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 30% increase in yield | Banana | [ |
| 12% enhancement in yield, increase in the tillers number and yield | Paddy | [ | |
|
| Increase in yield up to 70% | Sword bean | [ |
|
| Increase yield up to 74% | Wheat | [ |
|
| Higher Nitrogen shoot content, enhanced nutrient uptake, increased root and shoot weight | Alfalfa | [ |
|
| Increased plant height and yield | Wheat | [ |
|
| Increase in root nodule formation | Clover | [ |
| Growth parameters, head diameter, test weight, seed yield and potassium content | Sunflower | [ | |
| Co-inoculation of | Increase in dry matter, nodule and dry root weight | Bean | [ |
|
| Enhanced root nodule formation and yield | Soybean | [ |
| Shoot yield, P accumulation in cane, reduced P fertilization by 75% | Sugarcane | [ | |
| Enhanced nodulation and growth | Pea | [ | |
|
| Increased leaf chlorophyll index, stem girth, grain yield | Maize | [ |
|
| Seed inoculation increased growth and grain yield (26.7%), nutrient uptake | Wheat | [ |
| Increase of growth and yield | Finger millet | [ | |
| Increased growth, yield and nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) | Maize | [ | |
| Acinetobacter sp. RC04 and Sinorhizobium sp. RC02 | Seed germination, seedling growth | Safflower | [ |
| Co-inoculation of | Increased nodule number (11.40%) and biomass of nodule (6.47%), root (12.84%), and shoot (6.53%) | Soybean | [ |
Growth hormone-producing microbes.
| Phytohormone/ACC | PGP Bacteria | References |
|---|---|---|
| ACC | [ | |
| Auxin/IAA | [ | |
| Cytokinins | [ | |
| Gibberellin | [ |
Antibiotic producing actinobacteria.
| Actinobacterial Species | Antibiotic | References |
|---|---|---|
| Alnumycin, coronamycins, fungichromin, goadsporin, | [ | |
|
| Everninomicin | [ |
| Purpuromycin | [ | |
|
| Sisomicin | [ |
|
| Lipiarmycin | [ |
| Cationomycin, | [ | |
|
| Teichomycins, teicoplanin | [ |
| Clostomicins | [ | |
|
| Echinocandin | [ |
|
| Pyralomicins | [ |
| Cochinmicins, | [ | |
|
| Lomaiviticins A and B | [ |
| Friulimicins | [ | |
|
| Microbiaeratin | [ |
| Nocathiacins | [ | |
| Chemomicin A | [ | |
|
| New thiopeptide antibiotic | [ |
Antagonistic actinomycetes suppressing plant pathogens.
| Diseases | Pathogen | Antagonistic Strain | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crown rot |
|
| [ |
| Damping-off |
| [ | |
| Lupin root rot |
| [ | |
| Root rot of lupine |
|
| [ |
| Root rot of turfgrass |
| [ | |
| Wood rot |
| [ |
Figure 2Prospective bioinoculants which may be used in green agriculture.