4.5 Article

Tripartite interactions among Paenibacillus lentimorbus NRRL B-30488, Piriformospora indica DSM 11827, and Cicer arietinum L.

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF MICROBIOLOGY & BIOTECHNOLOGY
卷 26, 期 8, 页码 1393-1399

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11274-010-0312-z

关键词

Paenibacillus; Piriformospora; Consortium; Microbial communities; Chickpea; Rhizosphere

资金

  1. Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), New Delhi, India [NWP-006]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tripartite interactions among Paenibacillus lentimorbus NRRL B-30488 (B-30488), Piriformospora indica DSM 11827 (DSM 11827) and their consortia (B-30488:DSM 11827:: 1:1) with native rhizobial population in the rhizosphere of Cicer arietinum L. (Chick pea) was tested for enhancing nodulations and plant growth promotion. Number of nodules and dry weight per plant significantly enhanced (P = 0.05), which is further evident by N, P, and K uptake by plants and were found to be maximum in B-30488 treated followed by B-30488: DSM 11827 and DSM 11827, as compared with uninoculated control, in 60 days grown chickpea plants. Microbial community structure in the rhizosphere of the four treatments was assessed, using Biolog Eco and MT plates. Principal component analysis (PCA) of carbon source utilization pattern on Biolog Eco plates did not show any clustering among the four samples indicating that in case of individually DSM 11827 and B-30488 treated chickpea rhizosphere there was significant change in microbial community structure, compared with lesser changes in un-inoculated and B-30488 and DSM 11827 consortium treated chickpea rhizosphere microflora. Additional carbon sources tested using Biolog MT plates, higher activity of lignin, chitin, and cellulose utilizing microbial communities in the rhizosphere being stimulated by root exudates treated with B-30488 alone or in consortia with DSM 11827, and, in turn, should encourage beneficial symbiotic or mutualistic microorganisms that can act as plant growth promoting and biocontrol agents.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据