Advertisement

BioControl

, Volume 49, Issue 3, pp 315–322 | Cite as

Delivery methods for introducing endophytic bacteria into maize

  • Wellington Bressan
  • Marcela T. Borges
Article

Abstract

The effectiveness of fivemethods for delivery of ten endophyticbacteria into maize stem and root tissues wasstudied in greenhouse conditions at EmbrapaMilho Sorgo, Sete Lagoas, MG, Brazil. Thedelivery methods included seed inoculation,soil drench, foliar spray, pruned-root dip andseed inoculation + soil drench. The bacterialendophytes were previously isolated from maizeplants, and reinoculated and recovered aftertreatments from maize, cv BR201. Each of thefive methods led to establishment and recoveryof bacterial endophytes in root tissues, butonly four isolates were recovered by the seedtreatment method. All 10 isolates wererecovered by pruned-root dip and seed treatment+ soil drench. No isolates were recovered instem tissues by the seed treatment method, andin the root by foliar spray method. However,all isolates were recovered in stem tissue bypruned-root dip method. The pruned-root dip wasthe most efficient method to deliver bacterialendophytes into maize. The isolate, BR201, wasrecovered by almost all methods in root andstem tissues. The results demonstrate thatendophytic bacteria can be recovered from maizetissues following inoculation by the differentmethods described, but the delivery depends onthe methods used and the endophytic bacterialisolate.

colonization endophytic bacteria root stem 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adams, P.D. and J.W. Kloepper, 1996. Seed borne bacterial endophytes in different cotton cultivars. Phytopatology 86: S97 (abstr.).Google Scholar
  2. Bell, C.R., G.A. Dickie, W.L.G. Harvey and J.W.Y.F. Chan, 1995. Endophytic bacteria in grapevine. Can. J. Microbiol. 41: 46–53.Google Scholar
  3. Beattie, G.A. and S.E. Lindow, 1995. The secret of foliar bacterial pathogens on leaves. Annu. Rev. Phytopatol. 33: 145–172.Google Scholar
  4. Bretschneider, K.E., M.P. Gonella and D.J. Roberson, 1989. A comparative light and electron miscroscopical study of compatible and incompatible interactions between Xanthomonas campestris pv. campestris and cabbage (Brassica oleracea). Physiol. Mol. Plant Pathol. 34: 285–297.Google Scholar
  5. Dong, Z., M.J. Canny, M.E. McCully, M.R. Roboredo, C.F. Cabadilla, E. Ortega and R. Rodes, 1994. A nitrogen fixing endophyte of sugarcane stems. Plant Physiol. 105: 1139–1147.Google Scholar
  6. Gagné, S., C. Richard, H. Rousseau and H. Antoun, 1987. Xylem-residing bacteria in alfafa roots. Can. J. Microbiol. 33: 996–1000.Google Scholar
  7. Gantar, M., N.W. Kerby and P. Rowell, 1991. Colonization of wheat (Triticum vulgare L.) by N2–fixing cyanobacteria. II. An utrastructural study. New Phytol. 118: 485–492.Google Scholar
  8. Hallman, J., A. Quadt-Hallmann, R. Rodriguez-Kabana and J.W. Kloepper, 1997. Interactions between Meloidogyne incognita and endophytic bacteria in cotton and cucumber. Soil Biol. Biochem. 23: 117–131.Google Scholar
  9. Haefele, D.M. and S.E. Lindow, 1987. Flagellar motility confers epiphytic fitness advantages upon Pseudomonas syringae. Appl. Environm. Microbiol. 53: 2528–2533.Google Scholar
  10. Hinton, D.M. and C.W. Bacon, 1995. Enterobacter cloacae is an endophytic symbiont of corn. Mycopathologia 129: 117–125.Google Scholar
  11. Huang, J.S., 1986. Ultrastructure of bacterial penetration in plants. Annu. Rev. Phytopatol. 24: 141–157.Google Scholar
  12. Hurek, T., B. Reinhold-Hrek, M. Van Montagu and E. Kellenberger, 1994. Root colonization and systemic spreading of Azoarcus sp. Strain BH72 in grasses. J. Bacteriol. 176: 1913–1923.Google Scholar
  13. Kado, C.I. and M.G. Heskett, 1970. Selective media for isolation of Agrobacterium, Corynebacterium, Erwinia, Psendomonas, and Xantomonas. Phytopathology 60: 969–976.Google Scholar
  14. Knuden, G.E. and H.W. Spurr, 1987. Field persistence and efficacy of five bacterial prepations to control peanut leaf spot. Plant Disease 71: 442–445.Google Scholar
  15. Kumar, B.S.D. and H.C. Dube, 1992. Seed bacterization with a fluorescent Pseudomonas for enhanced plant growth and yield and disease control. Soil Biol. Biochem. 26: 539–542.Google Scholar
  16. Lamb, T.G., D.W. Tonkyn and D.A. Kluepfel, 1996. Movement of Pseudomonas aureofaciens from the rhizosphere to aerial plant tissue. Can. J. Microbiol. 43: 1112–1120.Google Scholar
  17. Levanony, H., Y. Bashan, B. Romano and E. Klein, 1989. Ultrastructural localization and identification of Azospirilum brasiliense Cd on within wheat root by immunological labeling. Plant Soil 117: 207–218.Google Scholar
  18. Mahaffe, W.F. and J.W. Kloepper, 1997. Microbial changes in the bacterial communities of soil, rhizosphere, and mycorrhiza. Microbiol. Ecol. 43: 58–61.Google Scholar
  19. Mahaffe, W.F., J.W. Kloepper, J.W.L. Van Vuurde, J.M. Van Der Wolf and M. Van Den Brink, 1997. Endophytic colonization of Phaseolus vulgaris by Pseudomonas fluorescens strain 89B-27 and Enterobactr asburiae strain JM22. In: M.H. Ryder, P.M. Stephens and G.D. Bowen (eds), Improving Plant Productivity in Rhizosphere Bacteria. CSIRO, Melbourne, Australia, p. 180.Google Scholar
  20. Misaghi, I.L. and C.R. Donndelinger, 1996. Endophytic bactéria in symptom-free cotton plants. Pytopathology 80: 808–811.Google Scholar
  21. Musson, G., 1994. Ecology and effects of endophytic bacteria in plant. Masters thesis, Auburn University, Auburn, Al, USA.Google Scholar
  22. Musson, G., J.A. McIntoy and J.W. Kloepper, 1995. Development of delivery systems for introducing endophytic bacteria into cotton. Biocont. Sci. Tecnol. 5: 407–416.Google Scholar
  23. Pleban, S., F. Ingel and I. Chet, 1995. Control of Rhizoctonia solani and Sclerotium rolfsi in the greenhouse using endophytic Bacillus spp. Europ. J. Plant Pathol. 101: 665–672.Google Scholar
  24. Quadt-Hallmann, A., N. Benhamou and J.W. Kloepper, 1997. Bacterial endophytes in cotton; mechanisms of entering the plant. Can. J. Microbiol. 43: 577–582.Google Scholar
  25. Reinhold, B. and T. Hurek, 1988. Location of diazotrophs in the interior with special attention to the kallar grass association. Plant Soil 110: 259–268.Google Scholar
  26. Shishido, M., B.M. Loeb and C.P. Chanway, 1995. External and internal root colonization of lodgepole pine seedlings by two growth-promoting Bacillus strains originated from different root microsites. Can. J. Microbiol. 41: 707–713.Google Scholar
  27. Sturz, A.V., 1995. The role of endophytic bacteria during seed piece decay and potato tuberization. Plant and Soil 175: 257–263.Google Scholar
  28. Surico, G., 1993. Scanning electron microscopy of olive and oleander leaves colonized by Pseudomonas syringae subsp. Savastanoi. J. Phytopathol. 138: 31–10.Google Scholar
  29. Van Der Peer, R., H.L.M. Puente, L.A. De Weger and B. Shipper, 1990. Characterization of root surface and endorhizosphere pseudomonas in relation to their colonization of roots. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 56: 2462–2470.Google Scholar
  30. Wiehe, W., C. Hecht-Bucholz and G. Hoflich, 1994. Electron microscopic investigations on root colonization of Lupinus albus and Pisum sativum with two associative plant growth promoting rhizobacteria, Pseudomonas fluorescens and Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifoli. Symbiosis 86: 221–224.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Embrapa Milho e Sorgo, Microbiology DepartmentSete Lagoas, MGBrazil
  2. 2.Centro Universitário Izabela HendrixBelo Horizonte, MGBrazil

Personalised recommendations