Agronomy for Sustainable Development

, Volume 34, Issue 3, pp 649–656 | Cite as

Fertilization with beneficial microorganisms decreases tomato defenses against insect pests

Research Article


The adverse effects of chemical fertilizers on agricultural fields and the environment are compelling society to move toward more sustainable farming techniques. “Effective microorganisms” is a beneficial microbial mixture that has been developed to improve soil quality and crop yield while simultaneously dramatically reducing organic chemical application. Additional indirect benefits of beneficial microorganisms application may include increased plant resistance to herbivore attack, though this has never been tested till now. Tomato plants were grown in controlled greenhouse conditions in a full-factorial design with beneficial microorganisms inoculation and commercial chemical fertilizer application as main factors. We measured plant yield and growth parameters, as well as resistance against the generalist pest Spodoptera littoralis moth larval attack. Additionally, we measured plant defensive chemistry to underpin resistance mechanisms. Overall, we found that, comparable to chemical fertilizer, beneficial microorganisms increased plant growth fruit production by 35 and 61 %, respectively. Contrary to expectations, plants inoculated with beneficial microorganisms sustained 25 % higher insect survival and larvae were in average 41 % heavier than on unfertilized plants. We explain these results by showing that beneficial microorganism-inoculated plants were impaired in the induction of the toxic glycoalkaloid molecule tomatine and the defense-related phytohormone jasmonic acid after herbivore attack. For the first time, we therefore show that biofertilizer application might endure unintended, pest-mediated negative effects, and we thus suggest that biofertilizer companies should incorporate protection attributes in their studies prior to commercialization.


Chemical fertilizer Induced resistance Insect herbivore Phytohormone Plant defense Plant–microbe interaction Sustainable agriculture 



This project was supported by Swiss National Science Foundation Ambizione grant PZ00P3_131956/1 to SR. We are grateful to Ueli Rothenbuhler for providing the microbial substrate, to Julia Bilat and Dr. Armelle Vallat for laboratory analyses, and to Eros Gentilini for stimulating the ideas that prompted this study.


  1. Azcón-Aguilar C, Barea JM (1996) Arbuscular mycorrhizas and biological control of soil-borne plant pathogens—an overview of the mechanisms involved. Mycorrhiza 6(6):457–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bennett AE, Alers-Garcia J, Bever JD (2006) Three-way interactions among mutualistic mycorrhizal fungi, plants, and plant enemies: hypotheses and synthesis. Am Nat 167(2):141–152PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Coley PD, Bryant JP, Chapin FS (1985) Resource availability and plant antiherbivore defense. Science 230(4728):895–899PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Compant S, Duffy B, Nowak J, Clément C, Barka EA (2005) Use of plant growth-promoting bacteria for biocontrol of plant diseases: principles, mechanisms of action, and future prospects. Appl Environ Microbiol 71(9):4951–4959. doi: 10.1128/aem.71.9.4951-4959.2005 PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Cóndor Golec AF, Lokare C, González Pérez P (2007) Effective microorganisms: myth or reality? Rev Peru Biol 14(2):315–319Google Scholar
  6. Daly MJ, Stewart DPC (1999) Influence of "effective microorganisms" (EM) on vegetable production and carbon mineralization—a preliminary investigation. J Sustainable Agric 14(2–3):15–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dicke M, Baldwin IT (2010) The evolutionary context for herbivore-induced plant volatiles: beyond the ‘cry for help’. Trends Plant Sci 15(3):167–175. doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2009.12.002 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dilly O, Blume HP (1996) Indicators to assess sustainable land use with reference to soil microbiology. In: Blume HP, Eger H, Fleischhauer E, Hebel A, Reij C, Steiner KG (eds) 9th Conference of the International-Soil-Conservation-Organisation. Catena, Bonn, Germany, pp 29–36Google Scholar
  9. Duffey SS, Stout MJ (1996) Antinutritive and toxic components of plant defense against insects. Arch Insect Biochem Physiol 32(1):3–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Foley JA, Ramankutty N, Brauman KA, Cassidy ES, Gerber JS, Johnston M, Mueller ND, O’Connell C, Ray DK, West PC, Balzer C, Bennett EM, Carpenter SR, Hill J, Monfreda C, Polasky S, Rockstrom J, Sheehan J, Siebert S, Tilman D, Zaks DPM (2011) Solutions for a cultivated planet. Nature 478(7369):337–342. doi: 10.1038/nature10452 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Glauser G, Vallat A, Balmer D (2014) Hormone profiling. In: Sanchez-Serrano JJ, Salinas J (eds) Arabidopsis protocols, methods in molecular biology, vol 1062. Springer, Netherlands, pp 597–608. doi:  10.1007/978-1-62703-580-4_31
  12. Gomiero T, Pimentel D, Paoletti MG (2011) Is there a need for a more sustainable agriculture? Crit Rev Plant Sci 30(1–2):6–23. doi: 10.1080/07352689.2011.553515 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Higa T (2000) What is EM technology? EM World Journal 1:1–6Google Scholar
  14. Higa T, Parr J (1994) Beneficial and effective microorganisms for a sustainable agriculture and environment. International Nature Farming Research Center, Atami, JapanGoogle Scholar
  15. Howe GA (2004) Jasmonates as signals in the wound response. J Plant Growth Regul 23(3):223–237. doi: 10.1007/s00344-004-0030-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hussain T, Javaid T, Parr JF, Jilani G, Haq MA (1999) Rice and wheat production in Pakistan with effective microorganisms. Am J Alternative Agric 14(01):30–36. doi: 10.1017/S0889189300007980 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hussain T, Anjum AD, Tahir J (2002) Technology of beneficial microorganisms. Nature Farming and Environment 3:1–14Google Scholar
  18. Iwaishi S (2001) Effect of organic fertilizer and effective microorganisms on growth, yield and quality of paddy-rice varieties. J Crop Prod 3(1):269–273. doi: 10.1300/J144v03n01_22 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Javaid A (2006) Foliar application of effective microorganisms on pea as an alternative fertilizer. Agron Sustain Dev 26(4):257–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Javaid A (2010) Beneficial microorganisms for sustainable agriculture. In: Lichtfouse E (ed) Genetic engineering, biofertilisation, soil quality and organic farming. Sustainable agriculture reviews, vol 4. Springer, Netherlands, pp 347–369. doi: 10.1007/978-90-481-8741-6_12 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Javaid A (2011) Effects of biofertilizers combined with different soil amendments on potted rice plants. Chil J Ag Res 71(1):157–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Javaid A, Bajwa R (2011a) Effect of effective microorganism application on crop growth, yield, and nutrition in Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek in different soil amendment systems. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 42(17):2112–2121. doi: 10.1080/00103624.2011.596240 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Javaid A, Bajwa R (2011b) Field evaluation of effective microorganisms (EM) application for growth, nodulation, and nutrition of mung bean. Turk J Agric For 35(4):443–452. doi: 10.3906/tar-1001-599 Google Scholar
  24. Javaid A, Shah MBM (2010) Growth and yield response of wheat to EM (effective microorganisms) and parthenium green manure. Afr J Biotechnol 9(23):3373–3381Google Scholar
  25. Lin DL (1991) Nature farming in Taiwan: effect of EM on growth and yield of paddy rice. In: Par JF, Hornick SB, Simpson ME (eds). The 2nd conference on Effective Microorganisms™ vol 2. International Conference on Kyusei Nature Farming, Brazil, p 196Google Scholar
  26. Mayer J, Scheid S, Widmer F, Fließbach A, Oberholzer H-R (2010) How effective are ‘Effective microorganisms® (EM)’? Results from a field study in temperate climate. Appl Soil Ecol 46(2):230–239. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2010.08.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Okorski A, Olszewski J, Głowacka K, Okorska S, Pszczółkowska A (2010) The effect of the application of the biological control agent EM1 on gas exchange parameters and productivity of Pisum sativum L. infected with Fusarium oxysporum Schlecht. Acta Agrobot 63(2):105–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pineda A, Zheng S-J, van Loon JJA, Pieterse CMJ, Dicke M (2010) Helping plants to deal with insects: the role of beneficial soil-borne microbes. Trends Plant Sci 15(9):507–514. doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2010.05.007 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pozo MJ, Azcon-Aguilar C (2007) Unraveling mycorrhiza-induced resistance. Curr Opin Plant Biol 10(4):393–398PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schenck zu Schweinsberg-Mickan M, Müller T (2009) Impact of effective microorganisms and other biofertilizers on soil microbial characteristics, organic-matter decomposition, and plant growth. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 172(5):704–712. doi: 10.1002/jpln.200800021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Thaler JS, Humphrey PT, Whiteman NK (2012) Evolution of jasmonate and salicylate signal crosstalk. Trends Plant Sci 17(5):260–270PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ton J, De Vos M, Robben C, Buchala A, Metraux JP, Van Loon LC, Pieterse CMJ (2002) Characterization of Arabidopsis enhanced disease susceptibility mutants that are affected in systemically induced resistance. Plant J 29(1):11–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ursi Ventura M, Ototumi A, Neves PMOJ (2006) Feeding preference of Diabrotica speciosa (Ger.) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) by broccoli leaves from natural, organic and conventional farming systems. Semina Ciências Agrárias 27(1):125–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Van der Heijden MGA, Bardgett RD, Van Straalen NM (2008) The unseen majority: soil microbes as drivers of plant diversity and productivity in terrestrial ecosystems. Ecol Lett 11(3):296–310. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01139.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. van Vliet PCJ, Bloem J, de Goede RGM (2006) Microbial diversity, nitrogen loss and grass production after addition of effective micro-organisms® (EM) to slurry manure. Appl Soil Ecol 32(2):188–198. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2005.07.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wardle DA, Yeates GW, Williamson WM, Bonner KI, Barker GM (2004) Linking aboveground and belowground communities: the indirect influence of aphid species identity and diversity on a three trophic level soil food web. Oikos 107(2):283–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Xu H-L (2001) Effects of a microbial inoculant and organic fertilizers on the growth, photosynthesis and yield of sweet corn. J Crop Prod 3(1):183–214. doi: 10.1300/J144v03n01_16 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Xu H-L, Wang R, Mriddha MAU (2000) Effects of organic fertilizers and a microbial inoculant on leaf photosynthesis and fruit yield and quality of tomato plants. J Crop Prod 3(1):173–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© INRA and Springer-Verlag France 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Ecology and EvolutionUniversity of Lausanne (UNIL)LausanneSwitzerland
  2. 2.Chemical Analytical Service of the Swiss Plant Science WebUniversity of NeuchatelNeuchatelSwitzerland
  3. 3.Department of Ecology and Evolutionary BiologyUniversity of CaliforniaIrvineUSA

Personalised recommendations