| Literature DB >> 35601203 |
Xiumei Yu1, Min Yan1, Yongliang Cui2, Zhongyi Liu1, Han Liu1, Jie Zhou1, Jiahao Liu1, Lan Zeng1, Qiang Chen1, Yunfu Gu1, Likou Zou1, Ke Zhao1, Quanju Xiang1, Menggen Ma1, Shuangcheng Li1.
Abstract
Cadmium pollution is a serious threat to the soil environment. The application of bio-based fertilizers in combination with beneficial microbial agents is a sustainable approach to solving Cd pollution in farm soil. The present study investigated the effects of co-application of a Cd-immobilizing bacterial agent and two fermented organic fertilizers (fermentative edible fungi residue; fermentative cow dung) on Houttuynia cordata and its microbial communities in a Cd-polluted field. It showed that both the application of the Cd-immobilizing bacterial agent alone and the combined application of bio-based soil amendments and the bacterial agent effectively reduced >20% of the uptake of Cd by the plant. Soil nitrogen level was significantly raised after the combined fertilization. The multivariate diversity analysis and co-occurrence network algorithm showed that a significant shift of microbial communities took place, in which the microbial populations tended to be homogeneous with reduced microbial richness and increased diversity after the co-application. The treatment of fermentative cow dung with the addition of the bacterial agent showed a significant increase in the microbial community dissimilarity (R = 0.996, p = 0.001) compared to that treated with cow dung alone. The co-application of the bacterial agent with both organic fertilizers significantly increased the abundance of Actinobacteria and Bacteroidetes. The FAPROTAX soil functional analysis revealed that the introduction of the microbial agent could potentially suppress human pathogenic microorganisms in the field fertilized with edible fungi residue. It also showed that the microbial agent can reduce the nitrite oxidation function in the soil when applied alone or with the organic fertilizers. Our study thus highlights the beneficial effects of the Cd-immobilizing bacterial inoculant on H. cordata and provides a better understanding of the microbial changes induced by the combined fertilization using the microbial agent and organic soil amendments in a Cd-contaminated field.Entities:
Keywords: Houttuynia cordata; bacterial community; biofertilizer; cadmium; cadmium-immobilizing bacteria
Year: 2022 PMID: 35601203 PMCID: PMC9122265 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.809834
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 6.064
Contents of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, and cadmium in roots and shoots of Houttuynia cordata.
| Measured parameter | Plant tissue | CK | MB | FE | FEMB | FC | FCMB |
| Cd (mg kg–1) | Roots | 1.86 ± 0.05b | 1.39 ± 0.23c | 2.46 ± 0.26a | 1.92 ± 0.14ab | 2.41 ± 0.23a | 1.84 ± 0.16ab |
| Aboveground parts | 0.30 ± 0.03c | 0.36 ± 0.03bc | 0.40 ± 0.01ab | 0.33 ± 0.02bc | 0.46 ± 0.06a | 0.36 ± 0.07bc | |
| TN (g kg–1) | Roots | 8.30 ± 0.92ab | 8.30 ± 1.44ab | 7.20 ± 2.79bc | 4.44 ± 2.30c | 9.85 ± 1.05ab | 10.51 ± 0.49a |
| Aboveground parts | 11.95 ± 1.46a | 14.97 ± 1.71a | 13.63 ± 1.83a | 11.64 ± 2.62a | 13.82 ± 1.89a | 12.41 ± 2.63a | |
| TP (g kg–1) | Roots | 24.21 ± 3.29a | 11.45 ± 2.68b | 11.70 ± 3.52b | 11.03 ± 2.28b | 22.77 ± 4.44a | 11.33 ± 1.78b |
| Aboveground parts | 23.48 ± 2.10a | 21.73 ± 1.37a | 21.27 ± 3.88a | 22.64 ± 2.50a | 13.78 ± 3.96b | 9.83 ± 2.17b | |
| TK (g kg–1) | Roots | 34.17 ± 1.50a | 33.90 ± 1.69a | 33.95 ± 3.65a | 33.35 ± 1.50a | 33.28 ± 1.19a | 30.28 ± 1.95a |
| Aboveground parts | 28.93 ± 0.70b | 29.47 ± 0.62b | 31.38 ± 0.97a | 28.78 ± 1.40b | 31.60 ± 1.07a | 31.60 ± 0.81a |
Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05). Italic bold superscript letters indicate differences between CK and MB; italic superscript letters indicate differences between FE and FEMB; bold superscript letters indicate differences between FC and FCMB. Conventional letters indicate differences of the same measured parameter among all treatments.
Soil cadmium content and physicochemical properties.
| Soil property | CK | MB | FE | FEMB | FC | FCMB |
| ACd (mg kg–1) | 0.17 ± 0.01ab | 0.15 ± 0.01bc | 0.18 ± 0.01a | 0.14 ± 0.01c | 0.16 ± 0.01bc | 0.14 ± 0.02c |
| TCd (mg kg–1) | 0.59 ± 0.03a | 0.57 ± 0.04a | 0.58 ± 0.03a | 0.61 ± 0.03a | 0.59 ± 0.05a | 0.58 ± 0.02a |
| pH | 5.85 ± 0.08bc | 5.88 ± 0.09bc | 6.10 ± 0.20a | 5.94 ± 0.09abc | 6.05 ± 0.08ab | 5.78 ± 0.03c |
| TO (%) | 9.84 ± 0.41ab | 10.48 ± 0.68a | 10.39 ± 0.22a | 9.73 ± 0.44ab | 10.36 ± 0.42ab | 9.55 ± 0.21b |
| AN (mg kg–1) | 216.83 ± 6.29b | 252.47 ± 8.50a | 195.73 ± 9.32c | 204.13 ± 4.88bc | 195.73 ± 4.76c | 207.10 ± 7.47bc |
| AP (mg kg–1) | 82.04 ± 3.78d | 86.48 ± 6.10cd | 95.19 ± 1.66abc | 87.65 ± 4.08bcd | 96.11 ± 6.04ab | 102.04 ± 4.32a |
| AK (mg kg–1) | 210.83 ± 8.81a | 101.17 ± 6.87d | 132.50 ± 5.44c | 141.33 ± 4.82c | 105.33 ± 5.22d | 184.33 ± 7.91b |
| TN (g kg–1) | 2.21 ± 0.27a | 2.52 ± 0.52a | 2.65 ± 0.14a | 2.74 ± 0.43a | 2.30 ± 0.20a | 2.94 ± 0.59a |
| TP (g kg–1) | 1.01 ± 0.07b | 1.04 ± 0.08b | 1.09 ± 0.14ab | 1.26 ± 0.09a | 1.01 ± 0.07b | 1.06 ± 0.16ab |
| TK (g kg–1) | 11.09 ± 0.63a | 11.29 ± 0.78a | 11.30 ± 0.78a | 11.49 ± 0.58a | 10.94 ± 0.54a | 11.47 ± 0.91a |
Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05). Italic bold superscript letters indicate differences between CK and MB; italic superscript letters indicate differences between FE and FEMB; bold superscript letters indicate differences between FC and FCMB. Conventional letters indicate differences of the same test index among all treatments.
Alpha-diversity of bacteria communities in the soil grown with Houttuynia cordata under different fertilization regimens.
| Treatment | CK | MB | FEMB | FE | FCMB | FC |
| Observed ASVs | 2011 ± 65ab | 2001 ± 149ab | 1898 ± 180b | 1885 ± 208b | 2022 ± 150ab | 2193 ± 126a |
| Good’s coverage | 0.92 ± 0.01ab | 0.92 ± 0.01ab | 0.94 ± 0.02a | 0.93 ± 0.02a | 0.93 ± 0.02ab | 0.90 ± 0.01b |
| Chao1 | 2477 ± 162ab | 2474 ± 259ab | 2199 ± 329b | 2200 ± 361b | 2354 ± 312ab | 2824 ± 270a |
| ACE | 2657 ± 171ab | 2668 ± 283ab | 2318 ± 363b | 2355 ± 410ba | 2509 ± 360ab | 3019 ± 302a |
| Shannon | 9.82 ± 0.11a | 9.75 ± 0.21a | 9.80 ± 0.24a | 9.72 ± 0.34a | 10.03 ± 0.10a | 10.00 ± 0.13a |
| Simpson | 0.997 ± 0.001a | 0.996 ± 0.001a | 0.996 ± 0.002a | 0.996 ± 0.002a | 0.998 ± 0.000a | 0.997 ± 0.000a |
Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05); italic bold superscript letters indicate differences between CK and MB; italic superscript letters indicate differences between FE and FEMB; bold superscript letters indicate differences between FC and FCMB. Conventional letters indicate differences of the same index among all treatments.
FIGURE 1Bacterial community composition in the field grown with Houttuynia cordata under different fertilization regimens. (A) Relative abundance heatmap of the top 12 phyla. (B) Dissimilarity distance of the bacterial community structures; different lowercase letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05).
FIGURE 2Significance and differential analysis of bacterial communities in the soil grown with H. cordata under different fertilization regimens. (A) Volcano plots indicating differential ASV changes between different treatments. (B) Histogram of linear discriminant analysis (LDA) Effect Size (LEfSe) showing taxa with log10 (LDA scores) ≥ 3.5.
FIGURE 3The Bray–Curtis distance-based redundancy analysis (bcRDA) of bacterial ASVs and characteristics of the soil grown with H. cordata under different fertilization regimens. Soil variables: pH, AN (available nitrogen), AP (available phosphorus), AK (available potassium), ACd (available Cd), and TO (total organic matter).
FIGURE 4Co-occurrence network of bacterial communities at genus level in the soil grown with H. cordata under different fertilization regimens. Different colors of nodes in networks refer to different modularity classes. The size of each node reflects the degree of connection. Red lines represent positive correlations and green lines represent negative correlations.
FIGURE 5Microbial functional diversity (FAPROTAX) in the field grown with H. cordata under different fertilization regimens. (A) Relative abundance heatmap of the functions. (B) Relative abundance barplot of the functions. (C) Linear discriminant analysis (LDA) showing the prominent functions.