| Literature DB >> 35126404 |
Huixiu Li1,2, Ning Wang1,3, Jia Ding1, Yingjie Liu1, Xiaoyan Ding3, Yuquan Wei1,3, Ji Li1,3, Guo-Chun Ding1,3.
Abstract
The properties of plant rhizosphere are dynamic and heterogeneous, serving as different habitat filters for or against certain microorganisms. Herein, we studied the spatial distribution of bacterial communities in the rhizosphere of pepper plants treated with a disease-suppressive or non-suppressive soil. The bacterial richness was significantly (p < 0.05) higher in plants treated with the disease-suppressive soil than in those treated with the non-suppressive soil. Bacterial richness and evenness greatly differed between root parts, with decrease from the upper taproot to the upper fibrous root, the lower taproot, and the lower fibrous root. As expected, the bacterial community in the rhizosphere differed between suppressive and non-suppressive soil. However, the spatial variation (36%) of the bacterial community in the rhizosphere was much greater than that explained by soils (10%). Taxa such as subgroups of Acidobacteria, Nitrosospira, and Nitrospira were known to be selectively enriched in the upper taproot. In vitro Bacillus antagonists against Phytophthora capsici were also preferentially colonized in the taproot, while the genera such as Clostridium, Rhizobium, Azotobacter, Hydrogenophaga, and Magnetospirillum were enriched in the lower taproot or fibrous root. In conclusion, the spatial distribution of bacterial taxa and antagonists in the rhizosphere of pepper sheds light on our understanding of microbial ecology in the rhizosphere.Entities:
Keywords: disease- suppressive soil; microbial community; pepper blight; rhizosphere; spatial distribution
Year: 2022 PMID: 35126404 PMCID: PMC8813743 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2021.748542
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Plant Sci ISSN: 1664-462X Impact factor: 5.753
FIGURE 1Bacterial diversity in the rhizosphere of the upper (U) or lower (D) part of the taproot (T) or fibrous (F) roots treated by the disease-suppressive (S) or non-suppressive soil (C). Relative abundance of dominant phyla (A), Chao1 richness (B), Pielous’ evenness (C), UPGMA cluster (D), and variation explained by different soils or different parts of roots (E). Significant differences in bacterial alpha-diversity among four parts of root under disease-suppressive or non-suppressive soil are indicated by different letters.
FIGURE 2Genera with significantly different relative abundance in the rhizosphere of the upper (U) or lower (L) part of the taproot (T) or fibrous (F) roots treated by the disease-suppressive (S) or non-suppressive soil (C). Significant difference is indicated by a different color. A box with two colors indicates no significant difference from other treatment containing one of the two colors.
FIGURE 3Co-occurrence network analysis of dominant bacteria (A), relative abundance of modules (B–G), and significantly correlated modules (H–J).
FIGURE 4Heatmap analysis of in vitro antagonist belonging to each phylotype in the rhizosphere of the upper (U) or lower (D) part of the taproot (T) or fibrous (F) roots treated by the disease-suppressive (S) or non-suppressive soil (C). Those phylotypes with significantly different relative abundance at four parts of roots are indicated by green or red triangle for the disease-suppressive or non-suppressive soil, respectively. The minus symbol indicates decreased relative abundance in the suppressive soil. Phylotype that significantly differed at relative abundance in the rhizosphere of different root parts under suppressive or non-suppressive soil is indicated by red or green triangle, respectively.