Plant Growth-Promoting Rhizobacteria Allow Reduced Application Rates of Chemical Fertilizers
- 4.6k Downloads
The search for microorganisms that improve soil fertility and enhance plant nutrition has continued to attract attention due to the increasing cost of fertilizers and some of their negative environmental impacts. The objectives of this greenhouse study with tomato were to determine (1) if reduced rates of inorganic fertilizer coupled with microbial inoculants will produce plant growth, yield, and nutrient uptake levels equivalent to those with full rates of the fertilizer and (2) the minimum level to which fertilizer could be reduced when inoculants were used. The microbial inoculants used in the study were a mixture of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) strains Bacillus amyloliquefaciens IN937a and Bacillus pumilus T4, a formulated PGPR product, and the arbuscular mycorrhiza fungus (AMF), Glomus intraradices. Results showed that supplementing 75% of the recommended fertilizer rate with inoculants produced plant growth, yield, and nutrient (nitrogen and phosphorus) uptake that were statistically equivalent to the full fertilizer rate without inoculants. When inoculants were used with rates of fertilizer below 75% of the recommended rate, the beneficial effects were usually not consistent; however, inoculation with the mixture of PGPR and AMF at 70% fertility consistently produced the same yield as the full fertility rate without inoculants. Without inoculants, use of fertilizer rates lower than the recommended resulted in significantly less plant growth, yield, and nutrient uptake or inconsistent impacts. The results suggest that PGPR-based inoculants can be used and should be further evaluated as components of integrated nutrient management strategies.
KeywordsFertilizer Rate Hoagland Solution Microbial Inoculant PGPR Strain Week After Planting
The authors are grateful to Ms. Sheryl Morey, a former technician at the National Soil Dynamics Laboratory in Auburn, a part of the Agricultural Research Services of United States Department of Agriculture, for her help during this study.
- 9.Biswas JC, Ladha JK, Dazzo FB (2000) Rhizobia inoculation improves nutrient uptake and growth of lowland rice. Soil Sci Soc Am J 64:1644–1650Google Scholar
- 11.Clarholm M (1985) Possible roles for roots, bacteria, protozoa, and fungi in supplying nitrogen in plants. Ecol Interact Soil 4:355–365Google Scholar
- 13.Dobbelaere S, Croonenborghs A, Thys A, Ptacek D, Vanderleyden J, Dutto P, Labandera-Gonzalez C, Caballero-Mellado J, Anguirre JF, Kapulnik Y, Brener S, Burdman S, Kadouri D, Sarig S, Okon Y (2001) Response of agronomically important crops to inoculation with Azospirillum. Aust J Plant Physiol 28:871–879Google Scholar
- 18.Han HS, Lee KD (2005) Phosphate and potassium solubilizing bacteria effect on mineral uptake, soil availability, and growth of egg plant. Res J Agric Biol Sci 1:176–180Google Scholar
- 19.Hernandez MI, Chailloux M (2004) Las micorrizas arbusculares y las bacterias rizosfericas como alternativa a la nutricion mineral del tomate. Cult Trop 25(2):5–12Google Scholar
- 20.Hershley DR (1994) Solution culture hydroponics: history & inexpensive equipment. Am Biol Teach 56:111–118Google Scholar
- 21.Horwath WR, Paul EA (1994) Microbial biomass. In: Weaver RW, Angle S, Bottomley P, Bezdicek D, Smith S, Tabatabai A, Wollum A (eds) Methods of soil analysis, part 2, microbiological and biochemical properties-sssa book series, no. 5. Soil Science Society of America Inc, Madison, Wisconsin, USA, pp 753–773Google Scholar
- 24.Littell RC, Milliken GA, Stroup WW, Wolfinger RD, Schabenberger O (2006) SAS® for mixed models, 2nd edn. SAS Institute Inc, Cary, North Carolina, USA, pp 21–41Google Scholar
- 28.Maynard DN, Hochmuth GJ (2007) Knott's handbook for vegetable growers. 5th edn Wiley, Hoboken, New Jersey, pp. 65-68, 92-101, 170-213.Google Scholar
- 29.Mills HA, Jones JB (1996) Plant analysis handbook II: a practical sampling, preparation, analysis, and interpretation guide. Micromacro Publishing, Athens, Georgia, USA, pp. 6-18, 69, 81.Google Scholar
- 40.Vassey JK, Buss TJ (2002) Bacillus cereus UW85 inoculation effects on growth, nodulation, and N accumulation in grain legumes: controlled-environment studies. Can J Plant Sci 82:283–290Google Scholar