Physiology and Molecular Biology of Plants

, Volume 19, Issue 4, pp 515–519 | Cite as

Plant growth stimulation of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) by inoculation of salinity tolerant Azotobacter strains

  • Deepika Chaudhary
  • Neeru Narula
  • S. S. Sindhu
  • R. K. Behl
Research Article

Abstract

Five salinity tolerant Azotobacter strains i.e., ST3, ST6, ST9, ST17 and ST24 were obtained from saline soils. These Azotobacter strains were used as inoculant for wheat variety WH157 in earthen pots containing saline soil under pot house conditions, using three fertilizer treatment doses i.e., control (no fertilizer, no inoculation), 90 Kg N ha−1 and 120 Kg N ha−1. Inoculation with salinity tolerant Azotobacter strains caused significant increase in total nitrogen, biomass and grain yield of wheat. Maximum increase in plant growth parameters were obtained after inoculation with Azotobacter strain ST24 at fertilization dose of 120 kg N ha−1 and its inoculation resulted in attaining 89.9 cms plant height, 6.1 g seed yield, 12.0 g shoot dry weight and 0.7 % total nitrogen. The survival of Azotobacter strain ST24 in the soil was also highest in all the treatments at 30, 60 and 90 days after sowing (DAS). However, the population of Azotobacter decreased on 90 DAS as compared to counts observed at 60 DAS at all the fertilization treatments.

Keywords

Azotobacter Wheat Salinity tolerance Plant height Shoot dry weight Seed yield 

References

  1. Alikhan S, Kathiresan K, Ravikumar SL, Williams GP, Gracelin NAA (2007) Growth of Avicennia marina and Ceriops decandra seedlings inoculated with halophilic azotobacters. J Environ Biol 28:601–603Google Scholar
  2. Ananthanaik T, Earanna N, Suresh CK (2007) Influence of Azotobacter chroococcum strains on growth and biomass of Adathoda vasica. J Agric Sci 20:613–615Google Scholar
  3. Chaudhary D, Anand RC, Narula N (2011) Isolation and characterization of salinity tolerant free living diazotrophs. Environ Ecol 29:1138–1142Google Scholar
  4. Cordovilla MP, Ligero F, Lluch C (1999) Effect of salinity on growth, nodulation and nitrogen fixation of faba bean (Vicia faba L.). Appl Soil Ecol 11:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. de-Basan LE, Hernandez JP, Bashan Y (2012) The potential contribution of plant growth-promoting bacteria to reduce environmental degradation—A comprehensive evaluation. Appl Soil Ecol 61:171–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Doran JW, Zeiss MR (2000) Soil health and sustainability: managing the biotic component of soil quality. Appl Soil Ecol 15:3–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Egamberdieva D, Kamilova F, Validov S, Gafurova Z, Lugtenberg B (2008) High incidence of plant growth stimulating bacteria associated with the rhizosphere of wheat in Uzbekistan. Environ Microbiol 10:1–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Flower TJ, Garcia A, Koyama M, Yeo AR (1997) Breeding for salt tolerance in crop plants the role of molecular biology. Acta Physiol Plant 19:427–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goel A, Sindhu SS, Dadarwal KR (1997) Nodule competence between bacteriocin producing effective and ineffective Rhizobium strains of Vigna. Indian J Microbiol 37:51–52Google Scholar
  10. Gonzalez-Lopez J, Salmeron V, Martinez-Toledo MV, Ballesteros F, Ramos-Cormenzana A (1986) Production of auxins, gibberellins and cytokinins by Azotobacter vinelandii ATCC 12837 in chemically-defined media and dialized soil media. Soil Biol Biochem 18:119–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hussain N, Ali A, Khan AG, Rehman OU, Tahir M (2003) Selectivity of ions absorption as mechanism of salt tolerance in rice (variety Shaheen Basmati). Asian J Plant Sci 2:445–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ibekwe AM, Poss JA, Grattan SR, Grieve CM, Suarez D (2010) Bacterial diversity in cucumber (Cucumis sativus) rhizosphere in response to salinity, soil pH and boron. Soil Biol Biochem 42:567–575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jadhav GG, Salunkhe DS, Nerkar DP, Bhadekar RK (2010) Isolation and characterization of salt tolerant nitrogen fixing microorganisms from food. J Eur Asia Bio Sci 4:33–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jensen V (1951) Notes on biology of Azotobacter. Proc Soc Appl Bacteriol 74:89–93Google Scholar
  15. Jones MG (2009) Using resources from the model plant Arabidopsis thaliana to understand effects of abiotic stress. Salinity Water Stress 44:129–132Google Scholar
  16. Lakshminarayana KR, Shukla B, Sindhu SS, Kumari P, Narula N, Sheoran RK (2000) Analogue-resistant mutants of Azotobacter chroococcum derepressed for nitrogenase activity and early ammonia excretion having potential as inoculants for cereal crops. Indian J Expt Biol 38:373–378Google Scholar
  17. Lakshminarayana K (1993) Influence of Azotobacter on nitrogen nutrition of plants and crop productivity. Proc Indian Nat Sci Acad B59:303–308Google Scholar
  18. Magda MA, Sabbagh SM, El-shouny WA, Ebrahim KH (2003) Physiological response of Zea mays to NaCl stress with respect to Azotobacter chroococcum and Streptomyces niveus. Pakistan J Biol Sci 6:2073–2080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mahmoud A, Mohamed H (2008) Impact of biofertilizers application on improving wheat (T. aestivum L.) resistance to salinity. J Agric Biol Sci 4:520–528Google Scholar
  20. Moradi A, Tahmourespour A, Hoodaji M, Khorsandi F (2011) Effect of salinity on free-living diazotroph and total bacterial populations of two saline soils. Afr J Microbiol Res 5:144–148Google Scholar
  21. Nadeem SM, Zahir ZA, Naveed M, Arshad M (2007) Preliminary investigations on inducing salt tolerance in maize through inoculation with rhizobacteria containing ACC deaminase activity. Can J Microbiol 53:1141–1149PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Narula N, Remus R, Deubel A, Granse A, Dudeja SS, Behl RK, Merbach W (2007) Comparison of the effective wheat root colonization by A. chroococcum and Panotea agglomeraus using serological techniques. Plant Soil Environ 53:167–176Google Scholar
  23. Naz I, Bano A, Rehman B, Pervaiz S, Iqbal M, Sarwar A, Yasmin F (2012) Potential of Azotobacter vinelandii Khsr1 as bio-inoculant. Afr J Biotechnol 11:10368–10372Google Scholar
  24. Poljakoff-Mayber A, Somers GF, Werker E, Gallagher JL (1994) Seeds of Koteletzkya virginica (Malvaceae): their structure, germination and salt tolerance. Am J Bot 81:54–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rashid S, Charles TC, Glick BR (2012) Isolation and characterization of new plant-growth promoting bacterial endophytes. Appl Soil Ecol 61:217–224Google Scholar
  26. Sindhu SS, Dadarwal KR (2000) Competition for nodulation among rhizobia in legume-Rhizobium symbiosis. Indian J Microbiol 40:211–246Google Scholar
  27. Sindhu SS, Lakshminarayana K, Singh D (1994) Expression of hydrogenase activity in Azotobacter chroococcum and its possible role in crop productivity. Indian J Expt Biol 32:423–426Google Scholar
  28. Sindhu SS, Dua S, Verma MK, Khandelwal A (2010) Growth promotion of legumes by inoculation of rhizosphere bacteria. In: Khan MS, Zaidi A, Musarrat J (eds) Microbes for legume improvement. Springer-Wien, NewYork, pp 195–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sindhu SS, Rakshiya YS, Sahu G (2009) Biological control of soilborne plant pathogens with rhizosphere bacteria. Pest Technol 3:10–21Google Scholar
  30. Singh SS, Lakshminarayana K (1982) Survival and competitive ability of ammonia excreting and non-ammonia excreting Azotobacter chroococcum strains in sterile soil. Plant Soil 69:79–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sturz AV, Nowak J (2000) Endophytic communities of rhizobacteria and the strategies required to create yield enhancing associations with crops. Appl Soil Ecol 15:183–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tiwari S, Singh P, Tiwari R, Meena KK, Yandigeri M, Singh DP, Arora DK (2011) Salt-tolerant rhizobacteria mediated induced tolerance in wheat (Triticum aestivum) and chemical diversity in rhizosphere enhance plant growth. Biol Fertil Soils 47:907–916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. van Veen JA, van Overbeek LS, van Elsas JD (1997) Fate and activity of microorganisms introduced into soil. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 61:121–135Google Scholar
  34. Verma S, Kumar V, Narula N, Merbach W (2001) Studies on in vivo production of antimicrobial substances by A. chroococcum isolates/mutants. J Plant Dis Protect 108:152–165Google Scholar
  35. Weyens N, van der Lelie D, Taghavi S, Newman L, Vangronsveld J (2009) Exploiting plant-microbe parternerships to improve biomass production and remediation. Trends Biotech 27:591–598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wu CH, Bernard SM, Anderson GL, Chen W (2009) Developing microbe-interactions for applications in plant growth promotion and disease control, production of useful compounds, remediation and carbon sequestration. Microbiol Biotechnol 2:428–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Yang CH, Chai Q, Huang GB (2010) Root distribution and yield responses of wheat/maize intercropping to alternate irrigation in the arid areas of northwest china. Plant Soil Environ 56:253–262Google Scholar
  38. Yang J, Kloepper JW, Ryu CM (2008) Rhizosphere bacteria help plants tolerate abiotic stress. Trends Plant Sci 14:1–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Zahir ZA, Arshad M, Frankenberger WT (2004) Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria: applications and perspectives in agriculture. Adv Agron 81:97–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Prof. H.S. Srivastava Foundation for Science and Society 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Deepika Chaudhary
    • 1
  • Neeru Narula
    • 1
  • S. S. Sindhu
    • 1
  • R. K. Behl
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Microbiology, College of Basic Sciences & HumanitiesCCS Haryana Agricultural UniversityHisarIndia

Personalised recommendations