Advertisement

Plant Growth Regulation

, Volume 75, Issue 1, pp 281–295 | Cite as

Effective microorganisms improve growth performance, alter nutrients acquisition and induce compatible solutes accumulation in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) plants subjected to salinity stress

  • Neveen B. Talaat
  • Ahmed E. Ghoniem
  • Magdi T. Abdelhamid
  • Bahaa T. Shawky
Original paper

Abstract

No information is available concerning effective microorganisms (EM) influence on the ionic and osmotic responses in plants grown in salty soils. Therefore, as a first approach, this study focuses on the contribution of EM to nutrient acquisition and compatible solutes accumulation in salt-stressed plants. It assesses some mechanisms underlying alleviation of salt toxicity by EM application, and also directs to establish a possible interrelationship between EM application as well as ionic and osmotic stresses tolerance in plants exposed to saline soils. Phaseolus vulgaris cv. Nebraska plants were grown under non-saline or saline conditions (2.5 and 5.0 dS m−1) with and without EM application. Salinity stress significantly decreased growth, productivity, membrane stability index, relative water content, concentrations of N, P, K+, Fe, Zn and Cu, and the ratios of K+/Na+, Ca2+/Na+ and Mg2+/Na+. However, EM application protected plants against the detrimental effect of salinity and significantly improved the above parameters. Concentrations of Ca+2, Mg+2, soluble sugars, free amino acids, proline and glycinebetaine were increased under saline conditions; moreover they further increased in salt-stressed plants treated with EM. Lipid peroxidation, hydrogen peroxide content, electrolyte leakage and Na+ level were increased in response to salinity and significantly decreased when stressed plants treated by EM. Reduction in Na uptake together with a concomitant increase in N, P, K, Ca, Mg, Fe, Zn and Cu absorption and a high compatible solutes accumulation may be an efficient mechanism used by EM-treated plants to gain tolerance against salinity stress.

Keywords

Effective microorganisms Osmoregulation Plant growth Nutrients Phaseolus vulgaris Salinity 

References

  1. Abdel-Fattah GM, Asrar AA (2012) Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal application to improve growth and tolerance of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) plants grown in saline soil. Acta Physiol Plant 34:267–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen SE (1989) Chemical analysis of ecological materials, 2nd edn. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  3. Apel K, Hirt H (2004) Reactive oxygen species: metabolism, oxidative stress, and signal transduction. Annu Rev Plant Biol 55:373–399PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bates LS, Aldren RP, Teare LD (1973) Rapid determination of free proline for water stress studies. Plant Soil 39:205–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bayuelo-Jimenez JS, Jasso-Plata N, Ochoa I (2012) Growth and physiological responses of phaseolus species to salinity stress. Int J Agron 2012:1–13Google Scholar
  6. Cottenie A, Verloo M, Kiekens L, Velghe G, Camerlynck R (1982) Chemical analysis of plants and soils. Laboratory of Analytical and Agrochemistry. State University, Ghent, pp 14–24Google Scholar
  7. D’Souza MR, Devaraj VR (2010) Biochemical responses of Hyacinth bean (Lablab purpureus) to salinity stress. Acta Physiol Plant 32:341–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Demidchik V, Davenport RJ, Tester M (2002) Nonselective cation channels in plants. Annu Rev Plant Biol 53:67–107PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Grieve CM, Grattan SR (1983) Rapid assay for determination of water soluble quaternary ammonium compounds. Plant Soil 70:303–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hayat S, Ali B, Hasan SA, Ahmad A (2007) Brassinosteroid enhanced the level of antioxidants under cadmium stress in Brassica juncea. Environ Exp Bot 60:33–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Higa T (2000) What is EM technology? EM world J 1:1–6Google Scholar
  12. Higa T (2004) Effective microorganisms—a new dimension for nature farming. In: Parr JF, Hornick SB, Simpson ME (eds) Proceedings of the 2nd international nature farming conference. U.S. Department of Agriculture; Washington, DC, USA, pp 20–22Google Scholar
  13. Hodges MD, DeLong JM, Forney CF, Prange RK (1999) Improving the thiobarbituric acid-reactive-substances assay for lipid peroxidation in plant tissues containing anthocyanin and other interfering compounds. Planta 207:604–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hu C, Qi Y (2013) Long-term effective microorganisms application promote growth and increase yields and nutrition of wheat in China. Eur J Agron 46:63–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Irigoyen JJ, Emerich DW, Sanchez-Dıaz M (1992) Water stress induced changes in concentrations of proline and total soluble sugar in nodulated alfalfa (Medicago sativa) plants. Physiol Plant 84:55–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ismail SM (2013) Influence of effective microorganisms and green manure on soil properties and productivity of pearl millet and alfalfa grown on sandy loam in Saudi Arabia. Afr J Microbiol Res 7:375–382Google Scholar
  17. Jana S, Choudhari MA (1981) Glycolate metabolism of three submerged aquatic angiosperms during ageing. Aquat Bot 12:345–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Javaid A, Bajwa R (2011) Field evaluation of effective microorganisms (EM) application for growth, nodulation, and nutrition of mung bean. Turk J Agric For 35:443–452Google Scholar
  19. Kavi Kishor PB, Sangam S, Amrutha RN, Sri Laxmi P, Naidu KR, Rao KRSS, Rao S, Reddy KJ, Theriappan P, Sreenivasulu N (2005) Regulation of proline biosynthesis, degradation, uptake and transport in higher plants: its implications in plant growth and abiotic stress tolerance. Curr Sci 88:424–438Google Scholar
  20. Khedr AH, Abbas MA, Abdel Wahid AA, Quick WP, Abogadallah GM (2003) Proline induces the expression of salt-stress responsive proteins and may improve the adaptation of Pancratium maritimum L. to salt-stress. J Exp Bot 54:2553–2562PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Köhler B, Raschke K (2000) The delivery of salts to the xylem. Three types of anion conductance in the plasmalemma of the xylem parenchyma of roots of barley. Plant Physiol 122:243–254PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lutts S, Kinet JM, Bouharmont J (1996) NaCl-induced senescence in leaves of rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivars differing in salinity resistance. Ann Bot 78:389–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Miklas PN, Kelly JD, Beebe SE, Blair MW (2006) Common bean breeding for resistance against biotic and abiotic stresses: from classical to MAS breeding. Euphytica 147:105–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mittler R (2002) Oxidative stress, antioxidants and stress tolerance. Trends Plant Sci 7:405–410PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Moller IM, Jensen PE, Hansson A (2007) Oxidative modifications to cellular components in plants. Annu Rev Plant Biol 58:459–481PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Moore S, Stein WH (1954) A modified ninhydrin reagent for the photometric determination of amino acids and related compounds. J Biol Chem 211:907–913PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Munns R (1993) Physiological responses limiting plant growth in saline soils: some dogmas and hypotheses. Plant, Cell Environ 16:15–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ndona RK, Friedel JK, Spornberger A, Rinnofner T, Jezik K (2011) Effective micro-organisms (EM): an effective plant strengthening agent for tomatoes in protected cultivation. Biol Agric Hortic 27:189–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Panda SK, Khan MH (2009) Growth, oxidative damage and antioxidant responses in greengram (Vigna radiata L.) under short-term salinity stress and its recovery. J Agron Crop Sci 195:442–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pareek-Singla SL, Grover A (1997) Salt responsive proteins/genes in crop plants. In: Jaiwal PK, Singh RP, Gulati A (eds) Strategies for improving salt tolerance in higher plants. Oxford and IBH Publishing Co, New Delhi, pp 365–391Google Scholar
  31. Parida AK, Das AB (2005) Salt tolerance and salinity effect of plants: a review. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 60:324–349PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Parida AK, Das AB, Das P (2002) NaCl stress causes changes in photosynthetic pigments, proteins and other metabolic components in the leaves of a true mangrove, Bruguiera parviflora, in hydroponic cultures. J Plant Biol 45:28–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Plaut Z, Grieve CM (1988) Photosynthesis of salt stressed maize as influenced by Ca:Na ratios in the nutrient solution. Plant Soil 105:283–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pregl F (1945) Quantitative organic micro analysis, 4th edn. A. Churchill Ltd., LondonGoogle Scholar
  35. Rabie GH, Almadini AM (2005) Role of bioinoculants in development of salt-tolerance of Vicia faba plants under salinity stress. Afr J Biotech 4:210–222Google Scholar
  36. Ramoliya P, Patel H, Pandey AN (2004) Effect of salinization of soil on growth and macro- and micro-nutrient accumulation in seedlings of Salvadora persica (Salvadoraceae). For Ecol Manag 2002:181–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sairam RK (1994) Effects of homobrassinolide application on plant metabolism and grain yield under irrigated and moisture stress conditions of two wheat varieties. Plant Growth Regul 14:173–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Shiyab SM, Shatnawi MA, Shibli RA, Al Smeirat NG, Ayad J, Akash MW (2013) Growth, nutrient acquisition and physiological responses of hydroponic grown tomato to sodium chloride salt induced stress. J Plant Nutr 36:665–676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Snedecor GW, Cochran WG (1980) Statistical methods, 7th edn. Iowa State Univ. Press, AmesGoogle Scholar
  40. Szabados L, Savouré A (2010) Proline: a multifunctional amino acid. Trends Plant Sci 15:89–97PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Talaat NB, Shawky BT (2013a) 24-Epibrassinolide alleviates salt-induced inhibition of productivity by increasing nutrients and compatible solutes accumulation and enhancing antioxidant system in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Acta Physiol Plant 35:729–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Talaat NB, Shawky BT (2013b) Modulation of nutrient acquisition and polyamine pool in salt-stressed wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) plants inoculated with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Acta Physiol Plant 35:2601–2610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Talaat NB, Shawky BT (2014a) Protective effects of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) plants exposed to salinity. Environ Exp Bot 98:20–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Talaat NB, Shawky BT (2014b) Modulation of the ROS-scavenging system in salt-stressed wheat plants inoculated with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 177:199–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Yang X, Liang Z, Wen X, Lu C (2008) Genetic engineering of the biosynthesis of glycinebetaine leads to increased tolerance of photosynthesis to salt stress in transgenic tobacco plants. Plant Mol Biol 66:73–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Yildirim E, Karlidag H, Turan M (2009) Mitigation of salt stress in strawberry by foliar K, Ca and Mg nutrient supply. Plant Soil Environ 55:213–221Google Scholar
  47. Yokoi S, Quintero FJ, Cubero B, Ruiz MT, Bressan RA, Hasegawa PM, Pardo JM (2002) Differential expression and function of Arabidopsis thaliana NHX Na+/H+ antiporters in the salt stress response. Plant J 30:529–539PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Neveen B. Talaat
    • 1
  • Ahmed E. Ghoniem
    • 2
  • Magdi T. Abdelhamid
    • 3
  • Bahaa T. Shawky
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Plant Physiology, Faculty of AgricultureCairo UniversityGizaEgypt
  2. 2.Department of Botany, Faculty of AgricultureCairo UniversityGizaEgypt
  3. 3.Department of Botany, Agriculture and Biology Research DivisionNational Research CenterGizaEgypt
  4. 4.Department of Microbial Chemistry, Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology Research DivisionNational Research CenterGizaEgypt

Personalised recommendations