Plant growth promotion of Miscanthus × giganteus by endophytic bacteria and fungi on non-polluted and polluted soils
- 120 Downloads
Putative endophytes of Miscanthus × giganteus were isolated, and screened in the laboratory, greenhouse and field for their plant growth promoting properties in this host. Pantoea ananatis and Pseudomonas savastanoi were the predominant bacteria in leaves whereas other pseudomonads prevailed in roots. Almost all fungal endophytes belonged to the Pezizomycotina and most were isolated from roots; Fusarium oxysporum was most abundant, followed by the genera Periconia, Exophiala, Microdochium and Leptodontidium. All endophytic groups produced phytohormones and some bacteria also produced siderophores, solubilised P and exhibited ACC-deaminase activity in vitro. In subsequent pot experiments with pre-selected endophytes, several isolates including pseudomonads, Variovorax paradoxus, Verticillium leptobactrum, Halenospora sp. and Exophiala sp. enhanced Miscanthus growth in gamma-sterilised soil. These promising Miscanthus-derived isolates were tested either as single or mixed inocula along with a mixed bacterial inoculum originating from poplar. No significant effects of inocula were detected in a pot experiment in non-sterilised soil. On two marginal field sites the mixture of bacterial endophytes from poplar had a consistently negative effect on survival and growth of Miscanthus. Contrarily, mixtures consisting of bacteria or fungi originating from Miscanthus promoted growth of their host, especially on the heavy metals-polluted site. The combination of bacteria and fungi was inferior to the mixtures consisting of bacteria or fungi alone. Our observations indicate extensive potential of mixed bacterial and fungal endophytic inocula to promote establishment and yield of Miscanthus grown on marginal and polluted land and emphasise the necessity to test particular microbial-plant host combinations.
Morphotypes of fungi isolates from Miscanthus × giganteus
KeywordsAntioxidative activity Heavy metals Miscanthus Plant growth promotion Variovorax Halenospora Verticillium leptobactrum
We thank MSc. Dušan Kunc and RNDr. Helena Koblihová for skilful technical assistance.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Research involving human participants and/or animals
No animals or data from human participants were involved in the study.
- Bashan Y, Kamnev AA, de-Bashan LE (2013) Tricalcium phosphate is inappropriate as a universal selection factor for isolating and testing phosphate-solubilizing bacteria that enhance plant growth: a proposal for an alternative procedure. Biol Fertil Soils 49(4):65–479. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-012-0737-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Cherkaoui A, Hibbs J, Emonet S, Tangomo M, Girard M, Francois P, Jacques Schrenzel J (2016) Comparison of two matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization–time of flight mass spectrometry methods with conventional phenotypic identification for routine identification of bacteria to the species level. J Clinic Microbiol 48:1169–1175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Eskes AB, Mendes MDL, Robbs CF (1991) Laboratory and field studies on parasitism of Hemileia vastatrix with Verticillium lecani and V. leptobactrum. Café Cacao Thé 35:275–282Google Scholar
- FAO (2006) World reference base for soil resources. A framework for international classification, correlation and communication. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, RomeGoogle Scholar
- Hajšlova J, Fenclova M, Zachariašova M (2013) Methodology for the rapid screening of isolates of endophytic microorganisms and identification of strains with phytohormonal activity [in Czech]. ISBN 978-80-7080-869-6Google Scholar
- ISO 10390 (2005) Soil quality: determination of pH. International Organization for Standardization, ISOGoogle Scholar
- Jiang F, Chen L, Belimov AA, Shaposhnikov AI, Gong F, Meng X, Hartung W, Jeschke DW, Davies WJ, Dodd IC (2012) Multiple impacts of the plant growth-promoting rhizobacterium Variovorax paradoxus 5C-2 on nutrient and ABA relations of Pisum sativum. J Exp Bot 63:6421–6430. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/ers301 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Khan AL, Hamayun M, Kang S-M, Kim Y-H, Jung H-Y, Lee J-H, Lee I-J (2012b) Endophytic fungal association via gibberellins and indole acetic acid can improve plant growth under abiotic stress: an example of Paecilomyces formosus LHL10. BMC Microbiol 12:32. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2180-12-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kuffner M, De Maria S, Puschenreiter M, Fallmann K, Wieshammer G, Gorfer M, Strauss J, Rivelli AR, Sessitsch A (2010) Culturable bacteria from Zn- and Cd-accumulating Salix caprea with differential effects on plant growth and heavy metal availability. J Appl Microbiol 108:1471–1484. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2010.04670.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Lane DJ (1991) 16S/23S rRNA sequencing. Nucleic acid techniques. In: Stackebrandt E, Goodfellow M (eds) Bacterial systematics. Wiley, New York, pp 115–175Google Scholar
- Li Z, Chang S, Lin L, Li Y, An Q (2011a) A colorimetric assay of 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate (ACC) based on ninhydrin reaction for rapid screening of bacteria containing ACC deaminase. Lett Appl Microbiol 53:178–185. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-765X.2011.03088.x/full CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Mejri D, Gamalero E, Tombolini R, Musso C, Massa N, Berta G, Souissi T (2010) Biological control of great brome (Bromus diandrus) in durum wheat (Triticum durum): specificity, physiological traits and impact on plant growth and root architecture of the fluorescent pseudomonad strain X33d. Biocontrol 55:561–572. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10526-010-9285-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Moore PD, Chapman SB (1986) Methods in plant ecology, 2nd edn. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Olsen RS, Sommers LE (1982) Phosphorus. In: Page AL et al (eds) Methods in soil analysis, Part 2, chemical and microbiological properties, agronomy monograph 9.2. Agronomy series 9, ASAS publications. American Society of Agronomy, Soil Science Society of America. Madison, pp 403–430Google Scholar
- Pii Y, Mimmo T, Tomasi N, Terzano R, Cesco S, Crecchio C (2015) Microbial interactions in the rhizosphere: beneficial influences of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria on nutrient acquisition process. A review. Biol Fertil Soils 51:403–415. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-015-0996-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Reddy CA, Saravanan RS (2013) Polymicrobial multi-functional approach for enhancement of crop productivity. In: Gadd GM, Sariaslani S (eds) Advances in applied microbiology. Oxford Academic, Oxford, pp 53–113Google Scholar
- Schmidt CS, Lovecká P, Mrnka L, Vychodilová A, Strejček M, Fenclová M, Demnerová K (2017) Distinct communities of poplar endophytes on an unpolluted and a risk elements-polluted site and their plant growth promoting potential in vitro. Microb Ecol, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-017-1103-y Google Scholar
- Sundara-Rao WVB, Sinha MK (1963) Phosphate dissolving microorganisms in the soil and rhizosphere. Indian J Agric Sci 33:272–278Google Scholar
- Tóth B, Csösz M, Dijksterhuis J, Frisvad JC, Varga J (2007) Pithomyces chartarum as pathogen on wheat. J Plant Pathol 89:405–408Google Scholar
- Unterseher M, Schnittler M (2009) Dilution-to-extinction cultivation of leaf-inhabiting endophytic fungi in beech (Fagus sylvatica L.)—different cultivation techniques influence fungal biodiversity assessment. Mycol Res 113:645–654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mycres.2009.02.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- White TJ, Bruns TD, Lee S, Taylor J (1990) Analysis of phylogenetic relationship by amplification and direct sequencing of ribosomal RNA genes. In: Innis MA, Gelfand DH, Sninsky JJ, White TJ (eds) PCR protocols: a guide to methods and applications. Academic Press Inc., New York, pp 315–322Google Scholar