The chirality of imazethapyr herbicide selectively affects the bacterial community in soybean field soil
The chiral herbicide imazethapyr (IM) is frequently used to control weeds in soybean fields in northeast China. However, the impact of IM enantiomers on microbial communities in soil is still unknown. Genetic markers (16S rRNA V3-V4 regions) were used to characterize and evaluate the variation of the bacterial communities potentially effected by IM enantiomers. Globally, the bacterial community structure based on the OTU profiles in (−)-R-IM-treated soils was significantly different from those in (+)-S-IM-treated soils, and the differences were enlarged with the treatment dose increasing. Interestingly, the Rhizobiaceae family and several other beneficial bacteria, including Bradyrhizobium, Methylobacterium, and Paenibacillus, were strongly enriched in (−)-R-IM treatment compared to (+)-S-IM treatment. In contrast, the pathogenic bacteria, including Erwinia, Pseudomonas, Burkholderia, Streptomyces, and Agrobacterium, were suppressed in the presence of (−)-R-IM compared to (+)-S-IM. Furthermore, we also observed that the bacterial community structure in (−)-R-IM-treated soils was more quickly restored to its original state compared with those in (+)-S-IM-treated soils. These findings unveil a new role of chiral herbicide in the development of soil microbial ecology and provide theoretical support for the application of low-persistence, high-efficiency, and eco-friendly optical rotatory (−)-R-IM.
KeywordsImazethapyr Enantiomer 16s rRNA Bacterial community structure Phytopathogen Beneficial bacteria
This research was funded by the Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC, No. 41071314).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Antoun H, Beauchamp CJ, Goussard N, Chabot R, Lalande R (1998) Potential of Rhizobium and Bradyrhizobium species as plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on non-legumes: effect on radishes (Raphanus sativus L.). In: Hardarson G, Broughton WJ (eds) Molecular microbial ecology of the soil: results from an FAO/IAEA co-ordinated research programme, 1992–1996. Springer, Netherlands, pp 57–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Brown P, Attai H, Boon M, Phillips K, Noben JP, Lavigne R (2018) Larger than life: isolation and genomic characterization of a jumbo phage that infects the bacterial plant pathogen, Agrobacterium tumefaciens. Front Microbiol 9Google Scholar
- Caporaso JG, Kuczynski J, Stombaugh J, Bittinger K, Bushman FD, Costello EK, Fierer N, Peña AG, Goodrich JK, Gordon JI, Huttley GA, Kelley ST, Knights D, Koenig JE, Ley RE, Lozupone CA, McDonald D, Muegge BD, Pirrung M, Reeder J, Sevinsky JR, Turnbaugh PJ, Walters WA, Widmann J, Yatsunenko T, Zaneveld J, Knight R (2010) QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat Methods 7:335–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Castenholz R (1973) The biology of blue-green algae. Sci Act 9:320–339Google Scholar
- Dong F, Li J, Chankvetadze B, Cheng Y, Xu J, Liu X, Li Y, Chen X, Bertucci C, Tedesco D (2013) Chiral triazole fungicide difenoconazole: absolute stereochemistry, stereoselective bioactivity, aquatic toxicity, and environmental behavior in vegetables and soil. Environ Sci Technol 47:3386–3394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Goodner B, Hinkle G, Gattung S, Miller N, Blanchard M, Qurollo B, Goldman BS, Cao Y, Askenazi M, Halling C, Mullin L, Houmiel K, Gordon J, Vaudin M, Iartchouk O, Epp A, Liu F, Wollam C, Allinger M, Doughty D, Scott C, Lappas C, Markelz B, Flanagan C, Crowell C, Gurson J, Lomo C, Sear C, Strub G, Cielo C, Slater S (2001) Genome sequence of the plant pathogen and biotechnology agent agrobacterium tumefaciens C58. Science 294:2323–2328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- He J, Baldini RL, Déziel E, Saucier M, Zhang Q, Liberati NT, Lee D, Urbach J, Goodman HM, Rahme LG (2004) The broad host range pathogen Pseudomonas aeruginosa strain PA14 carries two pathogenicity islands harboring plant and animal virulence genes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 101:2530–2535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Herrero A, Flores E (2007) The cyanobacteria: molecular biology, genomics and evolution. Caister Academic PressGoogle Scholar
- Jamali F, Sharifi-Tehrani A, Lutz MP, Maurhofer M (2009) Influence of host plant genotype, presence of a pathogen, and coinoculation with Pseudomonas fluorescens strains on the rhizosphere expression of hydrogen cyanide- and 2,4-diacetylphloroglucinol biosynthetic genes in P. fluorescens biocontrol strain CHA0. Microb Ecol 57:267–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Koskey G, Simon MW, Kimiti JM, Ombori O, Maingi JM, Njeru EM (2018) Genetic characterization and diversity of rhizobium isolated from root nodules of mid-altitude climbing bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) varieties. Front Microbiol 9Google Scholar
- Li J (2005) Issues and some strategies of sustainable development of black soil resources in black soil zone in northeast China. Chin Agric Sci Bull 21:352–352Google Scholar
- Maheshwari DK (2012) Bacteria in agrobiology: plant probiotics. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
- Miller AA, Bundy GL, Mott JE, Skepner JE, Boyle TP, Harris DW, Hromockyj AE, Marotti KR, Zurenko GE, Munzner JB, Sweeney MT, Bammert GF, Hamel JC, Ford CW, Zhong WZ, Graber DR, Martin GE, Han F, Dolak LA, Seest EP, Ruble JC, Kamilar GM, Palmer JR, Banitt LS, Hurd AR, Barbachyn MR (2008) Discovery and characterization of QPT-1, the progenitor of a new class of bacterial topoisomerase inhibitors. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 52:2806–2812CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sawicka A, Selwet M (1998) Effect of active ingredients on rhizobium and bradyrhizobium legume dinitrogen fixation. Pol J Environ Stud 7:317–320Google Scholar
- Tanaka H, Negishi H, Maeda H (2009) Control of tobacco bacterial wilt by an avirulent strain of Pseudomonas solanacearum M4S and its bacteriophage. Jpn J Physiol 56:243–246Google Scholar
- Toth IK, Moleleki L, Pritchard L, Liu H, Humphris S, Hyman L, Axelsen GW, Brurberg MB, Ravensdale M, Gilroy E (2006) Erwiniae: genomics and the secret life of a plant pathogen. Microbial Ecology of Aerial Plant Surfaces, 191–199 ppGoogle Scholar
- Warnes G, Bolker B, Gorjanc G, Grothendieck G, Korosec A, Lumley T, MacQueen D, Magnusson A, Rogers J (2005) gdata: Various R programming tools for data manipulationGoogle Scholar