Plant–Microbe Interaction: Aboveground to Belowground, from the Good to the Bad
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. The Two-Phase Microbial Communities
2.1. Aboveground Microbes
2.2. Microbes from Belowground
2.2.1. Root-Root Interaction
2.2.2. Root–Microbe Interactions
2.2.3. Microbe–Microbe
3. Functions of Rhizosphere Consortia
3.1. Hormones and Their Promotion of Growth and Development
3.2. Biological Processes in Nutrient Acquisition
3.3. Microbial Defense Mechanisms
4. Challenges of Emerging Plant Pathogens and Their Impacts on Plant–Microbe Interaction
5. Unraveling Plant–Microbe Interaction at the Molecular Level
5.1. Genome Sequencing
5.2. Amplicon Sequencing
5.3. Metagenomics
5.4. Soil Proteomic
6. Microbes in Sustainable Agriculture
7. Future Prospects and Challenges in Plant–Microbe Interactions
- (1)
- Identified productive microbiomes by creating conducive environments for the rhizosphere microbiome to communicate with the plant and surrounding environment.
- (2)
- Applied comparative genomics and metabolomics studies to identify specific rhizobacteria that were naturally selected based on root exudates; optimized utilization of these cultures to increase growth and development.
- (3)
- Identified microbes and their proteomes, able to trigger ISR and SAR across monocots and dicots.
- (4)
- Applied transcriptome profiling to identify defense-associated transcripts involved in innate immunity and plant resistance scenarios.
- (5)
- Identified microbes used in seeding of disease suppressive soil to enhance plant fitness and productivity.
- (6)
- Identified plant-associated microbiomes that influenced different plant traits including abiotic stress tolerance, flowering, growth, and disease suppression. Host co-evolution with the microbiome could be utilized in future crop breeding strategies for low-input sustainable agriculture.
- (7)
- Mapped microbiomes in the soil through all developmental stages, the differences in the proteins exuded. This information may be used to generate microbial concoctions for soil amendments to support growth and yield in all stages.
- (8)
- Exploited beneficial microorganisms and identified emerging pathogens.
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Sivakumar, N.; Sathishkumar, R.; Selvakumar, G.; Shyamkumar, R.; Arjunekumar, K. Phyllospheric Microbiomes: Diversity, Ecological Significance, and Biotechnological Applications. In Plant Microbiome for Sustainable Agriculture; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; Volume 25, pp. 113–172. [Google Scholar]
- Dong, C.-J.; Wang, L.-L.; Li, Q.; Shang, Q.-M. Bacterial communities in the rhizosphere, phyllosphere and endosphere of tomato plants. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0223847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Thapa, S.; Prasanna, R. Prospecting the characteristics and significance of the phyllosphere microbiome. Ann. Microbiol. 2018, 68, 229–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lakshmanan, V.; Selvaraj, G.; Bais, H.P. Functional Soil Microbiome: Belowground Solutions to an Aboveground Problem. Plant Physiol. 2014, 166, 689–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Nadarajah, K.K. Rhizosphere Interactions: Life Below Ground. In Plant-Microbe Interaction: An Approach to Sustainable Agriculture; Choudhary, D.K., Varma, A., Tuteja, N., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2016; pp. 3–23. [Google Scholar]
- Philippot, L.; Raaijmakers, J.; Lemanceau, P.; van der Putten, W. Going back to the roots: The microbial ecology of the rhizosphere. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2013, 11, 789–799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nadarajah, K.K. Microbes: An Important Resource for Sustainable Agriculture. In Microbiome in Plant Health and Disease; Kumar, V., Prasad, R., Kumar, M., Choudhary, D.K., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2019; pp. 53–77. [Google Scholar]
- Pascale, A.; Proietti, S.; Pantelides, I.S.; Stringlis, I.A. Modulation of the root microbiome by plant molecules: The basis for targeted disease suppression and plant growth promotion. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 10, 1741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hacquard, S.; Schadt, C.W. Towards a holistic understanding of the beneficial interactions across the Populus microbiome. New Phytol. 2015, 205, 1424–1430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hacquard, S. Disentangling the factors shaping microbiota composition across the plant holobiont. New Phytol. 2016, 209, 454–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Rahman, N.S.N.A.; Hamid, N.W.A.; Nadarajah, K. Effects of abiotic stress on soil microbiome. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 9036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Santos, M.S.; Nogueira, M.A.; Hungria, M. Microbial inoculants: Reviewing the past, discussing the present and previewing an outstanding future for the use of beneficial bacteria in agriculture. AMB Express 2019, 9, 205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Backer, R.; Rokem, J.S.; Ilangumaran, G.; Lamont, J.; Praslickova, D.; Ricci, E.; Subramanian, S.; Smith, D.L. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria: Context, mechanisms of action, and roadmap to commercialization of biostimulants for sustainable agriculture. Front. Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 1473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bhattacharyya, P.N.; Jha, D.K. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR): Emergence in agriculture. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2011, 28, 1327–1350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Malusá, E.; Vassilev, N. A contribution to set a legal framework for biofertilisers. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2014, 98, 6599–6607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Berg, G.; Köberl, M.; Rybakova, D.; Müller, H.; Grosch, R.; Smalla, K. Plant microbial diversity is suggested as the key to future biocontrol and health trends. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 2017, 93, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Manzoni, C.; Kia, D.; Vandrovcova, J.; Hardy, J.; Wood, N.; Lewis, P.; Ferrari, R. Genome, transcriptome and proteome: The rise of omics data and their integration in biomedical sciences. Brief. Bioinform. 2018, 19, 286–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wu, Z.; Liu, Q.; Li, Z.; Cheng, W.; Sun, J.; Guo, Z.; Li, Y.; Zhou, J.; Meng, D.; Li, H.; et al. Environmental factors shaping the diversity of bacterial communities that promote rice production. BMC Microbiol. 2018, 18, 51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ahkami, A.H.; Allen White, R.; Handakumbura, P.P.; Jansson, C. Rhizosphere engineering: Enhancing sustainable plant ecosystem productivity. Rhizosphere 2017, 3, 233–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, J.; Singh, D.; Ghosh, P.; Kumar, A. Endophytic and Epiphytic Modes of Microbial Interactions and Benefits. In Plant-Microbe Interactions in Agro-Ecological Perspectives; Springer: Singapore, 2017; Volume 1, pp. 227–253. [Google Scholar]
- Bringel, F.; Couée, I. Pivotal roles of phyllosphere microorganisms at the interface between plant functioning and atmospheric trace gas dynamics. Front. Microbiol. 2015, 6, 486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Frank, A.; Saldierna Guzmán, J.; Shay, J. Transmission of bacterial endophytes. Microorganisms 2017, 5, 70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Compant, S.; Cambon, M.; Vacher, C.; Mitter, B.; Samad, A.; Sessitsch, A. The plant endosphere world-bacterial life within plants. Environ. Microbiol. 2020, 23, 1812–1829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kandel, S.; Joubert, P.; Doty, S. Bacterial endophyte colonization and distribution within plants. Microorganisms 2017, 5, 77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vishwakarma, K.; Kumar, N.; Shandilya, C.; Mohapatra, S.; Bhayana, S.; Varma, A. Revisiting plant—Microbe interactions and microbial consortia application for enhancing sustainable agriculture: A review. Front. Microbiol. 2020, 11, 3195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wallace, J.G.; Kremling, K.A.; Kovar, L.L.; Buckler, E.S. Quantitative genetics of the maize leaf microbiome. Phytobiomes J. 2019, 2, 208–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rastogi, G.; Coaker, G.; Leveau, J. New insights into the structure and function of phyllosphere microbiota through high-throughput molecular approaches. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2013, 348, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Romero, F.; Marina, M.; Pieckenstain, F. The communities of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) leaf endophytic bacteria, analyzed by 16S-ribosomal RNA gene pyrosequencing. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2014, 351, 187–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Campisano, A.; Antonielli, L.; Pancher, M.; Yousaf, S.; Pindo, M.; Pertot, I. bacterial endophytic communities in the grapevine depend on pest management. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e112763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Aleklett, K.; Hart, M.; Shade, A. The microbial ecology of flowers: An emerging frontier in phyllosphere research. Botany 2014, 92, 253–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trouvelot, S.; Héloir, M.-C.; Poinssot, B.; Gauthier, A.; Paris, F.; Guillier, C.; Combier, M.; Trdá, L.; Daire, X.; Adrian, M. Carbohydrates in plant immunity and plant protection: Roles and potential application as foliar sprays. Front. Plant Sci. 2014, 5, 592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Ma, A.; Lv, D.; Zhuang, X.; Zhuang, G. Quorum quenching in culturable phyllosphere bacteria from tobacco. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2013, 14, 14607–14619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Monier, J.-M.; Lindow, S.E. Differential survival of solitary and aggregated bacterial cells promotes aggregate formation on leaf surfaces. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2003, 100, 15977–15982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vorholt, J.A. Microbial life in the phyllosphere. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2012, 10, 828–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Köhl, J.; Kolnaar, R.; Ravensberg, W.J. Mode of action of microbial biological control agents against plant diseases: Relevance beyond efficacy. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Jacoby, R.; Peukert, M.; Succurro, A.; Koprivova, A.; Kopriva, S. the role of soil microorganisms in plant mineral nutrition—current knowledge and future directions. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 1617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nadarajah, K.K. Induced Systemic Resistance in Rice. In Microbial-Mediated Induced Systemic Resistance in Plants; Choudhary, D.K., Varma, A., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2016; pp. 103–124. [Google Scholar]
- Mendes, L.W.; Kuramae, E.E.; Navarrete, A.A.; Van Veen, J.A.; Tsai, S.M. Taxonomical and functional microbial community selection in soybean rhizosphere. ISME J. 2014, 8, 1577–1587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Igiehon, N.O.; Babalola, O.O. Below-ground-above-ground plant-microbial interactions: Focusing on soybean, rhizobacteria and mycorrhizal fungi. Open Microbiol. J. 2018, 12, 261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Li, T.; Wu, S.; Yang, W.; Selosse, M.-A.; Gao, J. How mycorrhizal associations influence orchid distribution and population dynamics. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 833. [Google Scholar]
- Egamberdieva, D.; Wirth, S.J.; Alqarawi, A.A.; Abd_Allah, E.F.; Hashem, A. Phytohormones and beneficial microbes: Essential components for plants to balance stress and fitness. Front. Microbiol. 2017, 8, 2104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Patel, J.S.; Singh, A.; Singh, H.B.; Sarma, B.K. Plant genotype, microbial recruitment and nutritional security. Front. Plant Sci. 2015, 6, 608. [Google Scholar] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Nadarajah, K.K. In Silico Identification of Plant-Derived Secondary Metabolites in Defense. In In Silico Approach for Sustainable Agriculture; Choudhary, D.K., Kumar, M., Prasad, R., Kumar, V., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2018; pp. 275–293. [Google Scholar]
- Ma, Y.; Oliveira, R.S.; Freitas, H.; Zhang, C. Biochemical and molecular mechanisms of plant-microbe-metal interactions: Relevance for phytoremediation. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 918. [Google Scholar]
- Santoyo, G.; Guzmán-Guzmán, P.; Parra-Corta, F.; Santos-Villalobos, S.D.; del Carmen Orozco-Mosqueda, M.; Glick, B.R. Plant growth stimulation by microbial consortia. Agronomy 2021, 11, 219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mendes, R.; Garbeva, P.; Raaijmakers, J.M. The rhizosphere microbiome: Significance of plant beneficial, plant pathogenic, and human pathogenic microorganisms. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 2013, 37, 634–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Vishwakarma, K.; Sharma, S.; Kumar, V.; Upadhyay, N.; Kumar, N.; Mishra, R.; Yadav, G.; Verma, R.K.; Tripathi, D.K. Current Scenario of Root Exudate–Mediated Plant-Microbe Interaction and Promotion of Plant Growth. In Probiotics in Agroecosystem; Kumar, V., Kumar, M., Sharma, S., Prasad, R., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2017; Volume 1, pp. 349–369. [Google Scholar]
- Vishwakarma, K.; Mishra, M.; Jain, S.; Singh, J.; Upadhyay, N.; Verma, R.K.; Verma, P.; Tripathi, D.K.; Kumar, V.; Mishra, R.; et al. Exploring the Role of Plant-Microbe Interactions in Improving Soil Structure and Function Through Root Exudation: A Key to Sustainable Agriculture. In Plant-Microbe Interactions in Agro-Ecological Perspectives; Singh, D., Singh, H.B., Prabha, R., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2017; Volume 1, pp. 467–487. [Google Scholar]
- Canarini, A.; Kaiser, C.; Merchant, A.; Richter, A.; Wanek, W. Root Exudation of primary metabolites: Mechanisms and their roles in plant responses to environmental stimuli. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Vetterlein, D.; Carminati, A.; Kögel-Knabner, I.; Bienert, G.P.; Smalla, K.; Oburger, E.; Schnepf, A.; Banitz, T.; Tarkka, M.T.; Schlüter, S. Rhizosphere spatiotemporal organization—A key to rhizosphere functions. Front. Agron. 2020, 2, 10-3389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gill, S.; Gill, R.; Trivedi, D.; Anjum, N.; Sharma, K.; Ansari, M.; Ansari, A.; Johri, A.; Prasad, R.; Pereira, E.; et al. Piriformospora indica: Potential and significance in plant stress tolerance. Front. Microbiol. 2016, 7, 332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Leyva-Rojas, J.; Coy-Barrera, E.; Hampp, R. Interaction with soil bacteria affects the growth and amino acid content of Piriformospora indica. Molecules 2020, 25, 572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Eschweiler, J.; van Holstein-Saj, R.; Kruidhof, H.M.; Schouten, A.; Messelink, G.J. Tomato inoculation with a non-pathogenic strain of Fusarium oxysporum enhances pest control by changing the feeding preference of an omnivorous predator. Front. Ecol. Evol. 2019, 7, 213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gao, Y.; Lu, Y.; Lin, W.; Tian, J.; Cai, K. Microorganisms biochar suppresses bacterial wilt of tomato by improving soil chemical properties and shifting soil microbial community. Microorganisms 2019, 7, 676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jin, J.; Tang, C.; Sale, P. The impact of elevated carbon dioxide on the phosphorus nutrition of plants: A review. Ann. Bot. 2015, 116, 987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Meller, S.; Frossard, E.; Spohn, M.; Luster, J. Plant nutritional status explains the modifying effect of provenance on the response of beech sapling root traits to differences in soil nutrient supply. Front. For. Glob. Chang. 2020, 3, 110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dai, J.; Qiu, W.; Wang, N.; Nakanishi, H.; Zuo, Y. From Leguminosae/Gramineae intercropping systems to see benefits of intercropping on iron nutrition. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zemunik, G.; Lambers, H.; Turner, B.L.; Laliberté, E.; Oliveira, R.S. High abundance of non-mycorrhizal plant species in severely phosphorus-impoverished Brazilian campos rupestres. Plant Soil 2017, 424, 255–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, N.; Wang, D.; Liu, Y.; Li, S.; Shen, Q.; Zhang, R. Effects of different plant root exudates and their organic acid components on chemotaxis, biofilm formation and colonization by beneficial rhizosphere-associated bacterial strains. Plant Soil 2014, 374, 689–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bais, H.; Weir, T.; Perry, L.; Gilroy, S.; Vivanco, J. The role of root exudates in rhizosphere interactions with plants and other organism. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2006, 57, 233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Tharayill, N. To survive or to slay: Resource-foraging role of metabolites implicated in allelopathy. Plant Signal. Behav. 2009, 4, 580–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Mommer, L.; Hinsinger, P.; Prigent-Combaret, C.; Visser, E.J.W. Advances in the rhizosphere: Stretching the interface of life. Plant Soil 2016, 407, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nadarajah, K.K. Induction of Systemic Resistance for Disease Suppression. In Crop Improvement; Abdullah, S.N.A., Ho, C.-L., Wagstaff, C., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 335–357. [Google Scholar]
- Kong, C.; Xuang, T.; Tran, H.; Trung, N. Allelochemicals and signaling chemicals in plants. Molecules 2019, 24, 2737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Semchenko, M.; Lepik, A.; Abakumova, M.; Zobel, K. Different sets of belowground traits predict the ability of plant species to suppress and tolerate their competitors. Plant Soil 2017, 424, 157–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weidlich, E.W.A.; Temperton, V.M.; Faget, M. Neighbourhood stories: Role of neighbour identity, spatial location and order of arrival in legume and non-legume initial interactions. Plant Soil 2017, 424, 171–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Montazeaud, G.; Violle, C.; Fréville, H.; Luquet, D.; Ahmadi, N.; Courtois, B.; Bouhaba, I.; Fort, F. Crop mixtures: Does niche complementarity hold for belowground resources? An experimental test using rice genotypic pairs. Plant Soil 2018, 424, 187–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berruti, A.; Lumini, E.; Balestrini, R.; Bianciotto, V. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi as natural biofertilizers: Let’s benefit from past successes. Front. Microbiol. 2016, 6, 1559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Bargaz, A.; Lyamlouli, K.; Chtouki, M.; Zeroual, Y.; Dhiba, D. Soil microbial resources for improving fertilizers efficiency in an integrated plant nutrient management system. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 1606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Hayat, R.; Ali, S.; Amara, U.; Khalid, R.; Ahmed, I. Soil beneficial bacteria and their role in plant growth promotion: A review. Ann. Microbiol. 2010, 60, 579–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nadarajah, K.; Ali, H.; Muni, N.M. The host pathogen interactions observed between Fusarium sp. F2 and rice. Plants Omics J. 2015, 8, 572–580. [Google Scholar]
- Callerja-Cabrera, J.; Boter, M.; Oñate-Sánchez, L.; Pernas, M. Root growth adaptation to climate changes in crops. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Igiehon, N.; Babalola, O. Rhizosphere microbiome modulators: Contributions of nitrogen fixing bacteria towards sustainable agriculture. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pankievicz, V.C.S.; Irving, T.B.; Maia, L.G.S.; Ané, J.-M. Are we there yet? The long walk towards the development of efficient symbiotic associations between nitrogen-fixing bacteria and non-leguminous crops. BMC Biol. 2019, 17, 99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Larrainzar, E.; Wienkoop, S. A proteomic view on the role of legume symbiotic interactions. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 1267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Lorite, M.J.; Estrella, M.J.; Escaray, F.J.; Sannazzaro, A.; e Castro, I.M.V.; Monza, J.; Sanjuán, J.; León-Barrios, M. The rhizobia-lotus symbioses: Deeply specific and widely diverse. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 2055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wan, J.; Torres, M.; Ganapathy, A.; Thelen, J.; DaGue, B.; Mooney, B.; Xu, D.; Stacey, G. Proteomic analysis of soybean root hairs after infection by Bradyrhizobium japonicum. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact. 2005, 18, 458–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Lévy, J.; Bres, C.; Geurts, R.; Chalhoub, B.; Kulikova, O.; Duc, G.; Journet, E.-P.; Ané, J.-M.; Lauber, E.; Bisseling, T.; et al. A putative Ca2+ and calmodulin-dependent protein kinase required for bacterial and fungal symbiosesle. Science. 2004, 303, 1361–1364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mathesius, U. Comparative proteomic studies of root—Microbe interactions. J. Proteom. 2009, 72, 353–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van Noorden, G.E.; Kerim, T.; Goffard, N.; Wiblin, R.; Pellerone, F.I.; Rolfe, B.G.; Mathesius, U. Overlap of proteome changes in Medicago truncatula in response to auxin and Sinorhizobium meliloti. Plant Physiol. 2007, 144, 1115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Van Loon, L.C.; Rep, M.; Pieterse, C.M.J. Significance of inducible defense-related proteins in infected plants. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 2006, 44, 135–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Wienkoop, S.; Saalbach, G. Proteome analysis: Novel proteins identified at the peribacteriod membrane from Lotus japonicus root nodules. Plant Physiol. 2003, 131, 1080–1090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Davidson, A.; Dassa, E.; Orelle, C.; Chen, J. Structure, function, and evolution of bacterial ATP-binding cassette systems. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 2008, 72, 317–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Baslam, M.; Mitsui, T.; Sueyoshi, K.; Ohyama, T. Recent advances in carbon and nitrogen metabolism in C3 plants. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, M.; Ding, L.; Gao, L.; Li, Y.; Shen, Q.; Guo, S. The interactions of aquaporins and mineral nutrients in higher plants. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2016, 17, 1229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Manthey, K.; Krajinski, F.; Hohnjec, N.; Firnhaber, C.; Pühler, A.; Perlick, A.; Küster, H. Transcriptiome profiling in root-nodules and arbuscualr mycorrhiza identifies a collection of novel genes induced during Medicago truncatula root endosymbioses. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact. 2004, 17, 1063–1077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Liu, A.; Contador, C.A.; Fan, K.; Lam, H.-M. Interaction and regulation of carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus metabolisms in root nodules of legumes. Front. Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 1860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Larrainzar, E.; Wienkoop, S.; Weckwerth, W.; Ladrera, R.; Arrese-Igor, C.; González, E.M. Medicago truncatula root nodule proteome analysis reveals differential plant and bacteroid responses to drought stress. Plant Physiol. 2007, 144, 1495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kohlen, W.; Ng, J.; Deinum, E.; Mathesius, U. Auxin transport, metabolism, and signalling during nodule initiation: Indeterminate and determinate nodules. J. Exp. Bot. 2018, 69, 229–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shen, C.; Yue, R.; Sun, T.; Zhang, L.; Xu, L.; Tie, S.; Yang, Y. Genome-wide identifcation and expression analysis of auxin response factor gene family in Medicago truncatula. Front. Plant Sci. 2015, 6, 73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chaulagain, D.; Frugoli, J. The regulation of nodule number in legumes is a balance of three signal transduction pathways. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 1117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sellstedt, A.; Richau, K.H. Aspects of nitrogen-fixing Actinobacteria, in particular free-living and symbiotic Frankia. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2013, 342, 179–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Santi, C.; Bogusz, D.; Franche, C. Biological nitrogen fixation in non-legume plants. Ann. Bot. 2013, 111, 743–767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Nouioui, I.; Cortés-albayay, C.; Carro, L.; Castro, J.F.; Gtari, M.; Ghodhbane-Gtari, F.; Klenk, H.-P.; Tisa, L.S.; Sangal, V.; Goodfellow, M. Genomic insights into plant-growth-promoting potentialities of the genus frankia. Front. Microbiol. 2019, 10, 1457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nadarajah, K.; Kumar, I.S. Molecular Microbial Biodiversity Assessment in the Mycorrhizosphere. In Mycorrhizosphere and Pedogenesis; Varma, A., Choudhary, D.K., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2019; pp. 401–420. [Google Scholar]
- Begum, N.; Qin, C.; Ahanger, M.A.; Raza, S.; Khan, M.I.; Ashraf, M.; Ahmed, N.; Zhang, L. Role of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in plant growth regulation: Implications in abiotic stress tolerance. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 1068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Amiour, N.; Recorbet, G.; Robert, F.; Gianinazzi, S.; Dumas-Gaudot, E. Mutations in DMI3 and SUNN modify the appressorium-responsive root proteome in arbuscular mycorrhiza. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact. 2006, 19, 988–997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Lai, Y.; Eulgen, T. Transcript-level expression control of plant NLR genes. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2018, 19, 1267–1281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Repetto, O.; Bastel-Corre, G.; Dumas-Gaudot, E.; Berta, G.; Gianinazzi-Pearson, V.; Gianinazzi, S. Targeted proteomics to identify cadmium-induced protein modification in Glomus mosseae-inoculated pea roots. New Phytol. 2003, 157, 555–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nadarajah, K. The signalling pathway involved in plant-pathogen interactions in Arabidopsis thaliana. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 2001, 4, 508–510. [Google Scholar]
- Morán-Diez, E.; Rubio, B.; Domínguez, S.; Hermosa, R.; Monte, E.; Nicolás, C. Transcriptomic response of Arabidopsis thaliana after 24 h incubation with the biocontrol fungus Trichoderma harzianum. J. Plant Physiol. 2012, 169, 614–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Manching, H.; Balint-Kurti, P.; Stapleton, A. Southern leaf blight disease severity is correlated with decreased maize leaf epiphytic bacterial species richness and the phyllosphere bacterial diversity declines is enhanced by nitrogen fertilization. Front. Plant Sci. 2014, 5, 403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Singh, K.P.; Kumari, P.; Rai, P.K. Current status of the disease-resistant gene(s)/QTLs, and strategies for improvement in Brassica juncea. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neik, T.X.; Barbetti, M.J.; Batley, J. Current status and challenges in identifying disease resistance genes in Brassica napus. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 1788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Prince, D.C.; Rallapalli, G.; Xu, D.; Schoonbeek, H.; Çevik, V.; Asai, S.; Kemen, E.; Cruz-Mireles, N.; Kemen, A.; Belhaj, K.; et al. Albugo -imposed changes to tryptophan-derived antimicrobial metabolite biosynthesis may contribute to suppression of non-host resistance to Phytophthora infestans in Arabidopsis thaliana. BMC Biol. 2017, 15, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Mathesius, U.; Mulders, S.; Gao, M.; Teplitski, M.; Caetano-Anollés, G.; Rolfe, B.G.; Bauer, W.D. Extensive and specific responses of a eukaryote to bacterial quorum-sensing signals. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2003, 100, 1444–1449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Ramey, B.E.; Koutsoudis, M.; Bodman, S.B.V.; Fuqua, C. Biofilm formation in plant–microbe associations. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 2004, 7, 602–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chaudhry, V.; Runge, P.; Sengupta, P.; Doehlemann, G.; Parker, J.E.; Kemen, E. Shaping the leaf microbiota: Plant–microbe–microbe interactions. J. Exp. Bot. 2021, 72, 36–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Peyraud, R.; Mbengue, M.; Barbacci, A.; Raffaele, S. Intercellular cooperation in a fungal plant pathogen facilitates host colonization. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2019, 116, 3193–3201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Budiharjo, A.; Chowdhury, S.; Dietel, K.; Beator, B.; Dolgova, O.; Fan, B.; Bleiss, W.; Ziegler, J.; Schmid, M.; Hartmann, A.; et al. Transposon mutagenesis of the plant-associated Bacillus amyloliquefaciens ssp. plantarum FZB42 revealed that the nfrA and RBAM17410 genes are involved in plant–microbe-interactions. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e98267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Farrar, K.; Bryant, D.; Cope-Selby, N. Understanding and engineering beneficial plant-microbe interactions: Plant growth promotion in energy crops. Plant Biotechnol. J. 2014, 12, 1193–1206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Busby, P.E.; Ridout, M.; Newcombe, G. Fungal endophytes: Modifiers of plant disease. Plant Mol. Biol. 2015, 90, 645–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tétard-Jones, C.; Edwards, R. Potential roles for microbial endophytes in herbicide tolerance in plants. Pest Manag. Sci. 2016, 72, 203–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jakuschkin, B.; Fievet, V.; Schwaller, L.; Fort, T.; Robin, C.; Vacher, C. Deciphering the Pathobiome: Intra- and Interkingdom Interactions Involving the Pathogen Erysiphe alphitoides. Microb. Ecol. 2016, 72, 870–880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ludlow, E.J.; Vassiliadis, S.; Ekanayake, P.N.; Hettiarachchige, I.K.; Reddy, P.; Sawbridge, T.I.; Rochfort, S.J.; Spangenberg, G.C.; Guthridge, K.M. Analysis of the indole diterpene gene cluster for biosynthesis of the epoxy-janthitrems in Epichloë endophytes. Microorganisms 2019, 7, 560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Raghavendra, A.; Newcombe, G. The contribution of foliar endo-phytes to quantitative resistance to Melampsora rust. New Phytol. 2013, 197, 909–918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhou, Y.; Choi, Y.; Sun, M.; Yu, Z. Novel roles of Bacillus thuringiensis to control plant diseases. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2008, 80, 563–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rajesh, P.; Ravishankar, R. Quorum quenching activity in cell-free-lysate of endophytic bacteria isolated from Pterocarpus santalinus Linn and its effect on quorum sensing regulated biofilm in Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO. Microbiol. Res. 2014, 169, 561–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kloepper, J.; Ryu, C. Bacterial endophytes as elicitors of induced systemic resistance. Soil Biol. 2006, 9, 33–52. [Google Scholar]
- Nadarajah, K.K. Rhizobium in Rice Yield and Growth Enhancement. In Rhizobium Biology and Biotechnology; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 83–103. [Google Scholar]
- Adame-Álvarez, R.; Mendiola-Soto, J.; Heil, M. Order of arrival shifts endophyte-pathogen interactions in bean from resistance induction to disease facilitation. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2014, 355, 100–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pan, J.; Baumgarten, A.; May, G. Effects of host plant environment and Ustilago maydis infection on the fungal endophyte community of maize (Zea mays). New Phytol. 2008, 178, 147–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eitzen, K.; Sengupta, P.; Kroll, S.; Kremen, E.; Doehlemann, G. A fungal member of the Arabidopsis thaliana phyllosphere antagonizes Albugo laibachii via a GH25 lysozyme. Elife 2021, 10, e65306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Slama, H.B.; Cherif-Silini, H.; Chenari Bouket, A.; Qader, M.; Silini, A.; Yahiaoui, B.; Alenezi, F.N.; Luptakova, L.; Triki, M.A.; Vallat, A.; et al. Screening for fusarium antagonistic bacteria from contrasting niches designated the endophyte Bacillus halotolerans as plant warden against fusarium. Front. Microbiol. 2019, 9, 3236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- De lamo, F.; Takken, F.L. Biocontrol by Fusarium oxysporum using endophyte-mediated resistance. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kruse, J.; Doehlemann, G.; Kemen, E.; Thines, M. Asexual and sexual morphs of Moesziomyces revisited. IMA Fungus 2017, 8, 117–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Nishad, R.; Ahmed, T.; Rahman, V.J.; Kareem, A. Modulation of plant defense system in response to microbial interactions. Front. Microbiol. 2020, 12, 1298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vargas, W.A.; Martín, J.M.S.; Rech, G.E.; Rivera, L.P.; Benito, E.P.; Díaz-Mínguez, J.M.; Thon, M.R.; Sukno, S.A. Plant defense mechanisms are activated during biotrophic and necrotrophic development of Colletotricum graminicola in maize. Plant Physiol. 2012, 158, 1342–1358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Gu, X.; Hua, Y.-H.; Zhang, Y.-D.; Bao, D.; Lv, J.; Hu, H.-F. The pathogenesis of Aspergillus fumigatus, host defense mechanisms, and the development of AFMP4 antigen as a vaccine. Pol. J. Microbiol. 2021, 70, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malik, N.A.A.; Kumar, I.S.; Nadarajah, K. Elicitor and receptor molecules: Orchestrators of plant defense and immunity. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Mhlongo, M.; Piater, L.; Madala, N.; Labuschagne, N.; Dubery, I. The chemistry of plant-microbe interactions in the rhizosphere and the potential for metabolomics to reveal signaling related to defense priming and induced systemic resistance. Front. Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Noman, A.; Aqeel, M.; Lou, Y. PRRs and NB-LRRs: From signal perception to activation of plant innate immunity. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 1882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Tanaka, S.; Han, X.; Kahmann, R. Microbial effectors target multiple steps in the salicylic acid production and signaling pathway. Front. Plant Sci. 2015, 6, 349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Cesari, S.; Bernoux, M.; Moncuquet, P.; Kroj, T.; Dodds, P.N. A novel conserved mechanism for plant NLR protein pairs: The ‘integrated decoy’ hypothesis. Front. Plant Sci. 2014, 5, 606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Andersen, E.J.; Ali, S.; Byamukama, E.; Yen, Y.; Nepal, M.P. Disease resistance mechanisms in plants. Genes 2018, 9, 339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Backer, R.; Naidoo, S.; van den Berg, N. The nonexpressor of pathogenenis-related genes 1 (NPR1) and related family: Mechanistic insights in plant disease resistance. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dreischhoff, S.; Das, I.S.; Jakobi, M.; Kasper, K.; Polle, A. local responses and systemic induced resistance mediated by ectomycorrhizal fungi. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 1908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharma, M.; Sudheer, S.; Usmani, Z.; Rani, R.; Gupta, P. Deciphering the omics of plant-microbe interaction: Perspectives and new insights. Curr. Genom. 2020, 21, 343–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Das, A.; Chai, J.C.; Kim, S.H.; Park, K.S.; Lee, Y.S.; Jung, K.H.; Chai, Y.G. Dual RNA sequencing reveals the expression of unique transcriptomic signatures in lipopolysaccharide-induced BV-2 microglial cells. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0121117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Westermann, A.J.; Förstner, K.U.; Amman, F.; Barquist, L.; Chao, Y.; Schulte, L.N.; Müller, L.; Reinhardt, R.; Stadler, P.F.; Vogel, J. Dual RNA-seq unveils noncoding RNA functions in host–pathogen interactions. Nature 2016, 529, 496–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Islam, W.; Noman, A.; Qasim, M.; Wang, L. Plant responses to pathogen attack: Small RNAs in focus. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018, 19, 515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Enguita, F.J.; Costa, M.C.; Fusco-Almeida, A.M.; Mendes-Giannini, M.J.; Leitão, A.L. Transcriptomic crosstalk between fungal invasive pathogens and their host cells: Opportunities and challenges for next-generation sequencing methods. J. Fungi 2016, 2, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Meyer, F.; Shuey, L.; Naidoo, S.; Mammi, T.; Berger, D.; Myburg, A.; van de Berg, N.; Naidoo, S. Dual RNA-sequencing of Eucalyptus nitens during Phytophthora cinnamomi challenge reveals pathogen and host factors influencing compatibility. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Klessig, D.; Choi, H.; Dempsey, D. Systemic acquired resistance and salicylic acid: Past, present, and future. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact. 2018, 31, 871–888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Maruri-López, I.; Aviles-Baltazar, N.Y.; Buchala, A.; Serrano, M. Intra and extracellular journey of the phytohormone salicylic acid. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 16, 423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yuan, M.; Huang, Y.; Ge, W. Involvement of jamonic acid, ethylene, and salicylic acid signaling pathways behind the systemic resistance induced by Trichoderma longibrachiatum H9 in cucumber. BMC Genom. 2019, 20, 144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Cameron, R.K.; Paiva, N.L.; Lamb, C.J.; Dixon, R.A. Accumulation of salicylic acid and PR-1 gene transcripts in relation to the systemic acquired resistance (SAR) response induced by Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato in Arabidopsis. Physiol. Mol. Plant Pathol. 1999, 55, 121–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manosalva, P.M.; Park, S.-W.; Forouhar, F.; Tong, L.; Fry, W.E.; Klessig, D.F. Methyl Esterase 1 (StMES1) is required for systemic acquired resistance in potato. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact. 2010, 23, 1151–1163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Chanda, B.; Xia, Y.; Mandal, M.K.; Yu, K.; Sekine, K.; Gao, Q.; Selote, D.; Hu, Y.; Stromberg, A.; Navarre, D.; et al. Glycerol-3-phosphate is a critical mobile inducer of systemic immunity in plants. Nat. Genet. 2011, 43, 421–427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yu, K.; Soares, J.M.; Mandal, M.K.; Wang, C.; Chanda, B.; Gifford, A.N.; Fowler, J.S.; Navarre, D.; Kachroo, A.; Kachroo, P. A Feedback regulatory loop between G3P and lipid transfer proteins DIR1 and AZI1 mediates azelaic-acid-induced systemic immunity. Cell Rep. 2013, 3, 1266–1278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chaturvedi, R.; Venables, B.; Petros, R.A.; Nalam, V.; Li, M.; Wang, X.; Takemoto, L.J.; Shah, J. An abietane diterpenoid is a potent activator of systemic acquired resistance. Plant J. 2012, 71, 161–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carella, P.; Isaacs, M.; Cameron, R.K. Plasmodesmata-located protein overexpression negatively impacts the manifestation of systemic acquired resistance and the long-distance movement of defective in induced resistance in Arabidopsis. Plant Biol. 2015, 17, 395–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hartmann, M.; Kim, D.; Bernsdorff, F.; Ajami-Rashidi, Z.; Scholten, N.; Schreiber, S.; Zeier, T.; Schuck, S.; Reichel-Deland, V.; Zeier, J. Biochemical principles and functional aspects of pipecolic acid biosynthesis in plant immunity. Plant Physiol. 2017, 174, 124–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Návarová, H.; Bernsdorff, F.; Döring, A.-C.; Zeier, J. Pipecolic acid, an endogenous mediator of defense amplification and priming, is a critical regulator of inducible plant immunity. Plant Cell 2013, 24, 5123–5141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Bernsdorff, F.; Döring, A.-C.; Gruner, K.; Schuck, S.; Bräutigam, A.; Zeier, J. Pipecolic acid orchestrates plant systemic acquired resistance and defense priming via salicylic acid-dependent and -independent pathways. Plant Cell 2016, 28, 102–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ádám, A.L.; Nagy, Z.Á.; Kátay, G.; Mergenthaler, E.; Viczián, O. Signals of systemic immunity in plants: Progress and open questions. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018, 19, 1146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Lee, H.-J.; Park, Y.-J.; Seo, P.J.; Kim, J.-H.; Sim, H.-J.; Kim, S.-G.; Park, C.-M. Systemic immunity requires SnRK2.8-mediated nuclear import of NPR1 in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 2016, 27, 3425–3438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Breitenbach, H.H.; Wenig, M.; Wittek, F.; Jordá, L.; Maldonado-Alconada, A.M.; Sarioglu, H.; Colby, T.; Knappe, C.; Bichlmeier, M.; Pabst, E.; et al. Contrasting roles of the apoplastic aspartyl protease apoplastic, enhanced disease susceptibility-dependent and legume lectin-like protein1 in Arabidopsis systemic acquired resistance. Plant Physiol. 2014, 165, 791–809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Expósito, R.G.; de Bruijn, I.; Postma, J.; Raaijmakers, J.M. current insights into the role of rhizosphere bacteria in disease suppressive soils. Front. Microbiol. 2017, 8, 2529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johns, N.; Blazejewski, T.; Gomes, A.L.; Wang, H. Principles for designing synthethic microbial communities. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 2016, 31, 146–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pineda, A.; Kaplan, I.; Bezemer, T.M. Steering soil microbiomes to suppress aboveground insect pests. Trends Plant Sci. 2017, 22, 770–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lee Diaz, A.; Macheda, D.; Saha, H.; Ploll, U.; Orine, D.; Biere, A. Tackling the context-dependency of microbial-induced resistance. Agronomy 2021, 11, 1293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sasse, J.; Martinoia, E.; Northen, T. Feed your friends: Do plant exudates shape the root microbiome? Trends Plant Sci. 2018, 23, 25–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Noman, M.; Ahmed, T.; Ijaz, U.; Shahid, M.; Azizullah; Li, D.; Manzoor, I.; Song, F. Plant–Microbiome crosstalk: Dawning from composition and assembly of microbial community to improvement of disease resilience in plants. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 6852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cheng, Z.; McCann, S.; Faraone, N.; Clarke, J.; Hudson, E.; Cloonan, K.; Hillier, N.; Tahlan, K. Production of plant-associated volatiles by select model and industrially important Streptomyces spp. microorganism. Microorganisms 2020, 8, 1767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wang, Y.H.; Irving, H.R. Developing a model of plant hormone interactions. Plant Signal. Behav. 2011, 6, 494–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Fahad, S.; Hussain, S.; Bano, A.; Saud, S.; Hassan, S.; Shan, D.; Khan, F.A.; Khan, F.; Chen, Y.; Wu, C.; et al. Potential role of phytohormones and plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria in abiotic stresses: Consequences for changing environment. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2014, 22, 4907–4921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nadarajah, K.; Turner, J.G. The role of jasmonate in plant pathogen interactions in Arabidopsis thaliana. J. Teknol. 2003, 39, 9â-16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Imam, J.; Singh, P.K.; Shukla, P. Plant microbe interactions in post genomic era: Perspectives and applications. Front. Microbiol. 2016, 7, 1488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kramer, J.; Özkaya, Ö.; Kümmerli, R. Bacterial siderophores in community and host interactions. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2020, 18, 152–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kesaulya, H.; Hasinu, J.V.; Tuhumury, G.N.C. Potential of Bacillus spp. produces siderophores in suppressing the wilt disease of banana plants Potential of Bacillus spp. produces siderophores in suppressing the wilt disease of banana plants. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Food and Agro-Biodiversity (ISFA) 2017, Semarang, Indonesia, 26–27 September 2017; IOP Publishing: Semarang, Indonesia, 2018; Volume 102, p. 12016. [Google Scholar]
- Ryu, C.; Farag, M.; Hu, C.; Reddy, M.; Kloepper, J.; Paré, W. Bacterial volatiles induce systemic resistance in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol. 2004, 134, 1017–1026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Meldau, D.G.; Meldau, S.; Hoang, L.H.; Underberg, S.; Wünsche, H.; Baldwin, I.T. Dimethyl disulfide produced by the naturally associated bacterium Bacillus sp. B55 promotes Nicotiana attenuata growth by enhancing sulfur nutrition. Plant Cell 2013, 25, 2731–2747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Huang, C.-J.; Tsay, J.-F.; Chang, S.-Y.; Yang, H.-P.; Wu, W.-S.; Chen, C.-Y. Dimethyl disulfide is an induced systemic resistance elicitor produced by Bacillus cereus C1L. Pest Manag. Sci. 2012, 68, 1306–1310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kottb, M.; Gigolashvili, T.; Großkinsky, D.K.; Piechulla, B. Trichoderma volatiles effecting Arabidopsis: From inhibition to protection against phytopathogenic fungi. Front. Microbiol. 2015, 6, 995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Cox, C.E.; Brandl, M.T.; de Moraes, M.H.; Gunasekera, S.; Teplitski, M. Production of the plant hormone auxin by salmonella and its role in the interactions with plants and animals. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 8, 2668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Keswani, C.; Singh, S.P.; Cueto, L.; García-Estrada, C.; Mezaache-Aichour, S.; Glare, T.R.; Borriss, R.; Singh, S.P.; Blázquez, M.A.; Sansinenea, E. Auxins of microbial origin and their use in agriculture. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2020, 104, 8549–8565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shahzad, R.; Latif Khan, A.; Bilal, S.; Waqas, M.; Kang, S.-M.; Lee, I.-J. Inoculation of abscisic acid-producing endophytic bacteria enhances salinity stress tolerance in Oryza sativa. Enviromental Exp. Bot. 2017, 136, 68–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akhtar, S.S.; Mekureyaw, M.F.; Pandey, C.; Roitsch, T. Role of cytokinins for interactions of plants with microbial pathogens and pest insects. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 1777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gusmiaty; Restu, M.; Bachtiar, B.; Larekeng, S.H. Gibberelin and IAA production by rhizobcateria from various private forest. In Proceedings of the 1st Biennial Conference on Tropical Biodiversity, Makassar, Indonesia, 20–21 September 2018; IOP Publishing: Makassar, Indonesia, 2019; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Carvalhais, L.C.; Dennis, P.G.; Badri, D.V.; Tyson, G.W.; Vivanco, J.M.; Schenk, P.M. Activation of the jasmonic acid plant defence pathway alters the composition of rhizosphere bacterial communities. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e56457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ahmad, P.; Jaleel, C.A.; Salem, M.A.; Nabi, G.; Sharma, S. Roles of enzymatic and nonenzymatic antioxidants in plants during abiotic stress. Crit. Rev. Biotechnol. 2010, 30, 161–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Islam, M.N.; Ali, M.S.; Choi, S.-J.; Park, Y.-I.; Baek, K.-H. Salicylic Acid-Producing endophytic bacteria increase nicotine accumulation and resistance against wildfire disease in tobacco plants. Microorg. 2019, 8, 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Digiacomo, F.; Girelli, G.; Aor, B.; Marchioretti, C.; Pedrotti, M.; Perli, T.; Tonon, E.; Valentini, V.; Avi, D.; Ferrentino, G.; et al. Ethylene-Producing bacteria that ripen fruit. ACS Synth. Biol. 2014, 3, 935–938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van der Heijden, M.G.A.; Martin, F.M.; Selosse, M.-A.; Sanders, I.R. Mycorrhizal ecology and evolution: The past, the present, and the future. New Phytol. 2015, 205, 1406–1423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Plett, J.M.; Martin, F. Reconsidering mutualistic plant–fungal interactions through the lens of effector biology. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2015, 26, 45–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Venturi, V.; Fuqua, C. Chemical signaling between plants and plant-pathogenic bacteria. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 2013, 51, 17–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hartmann, A.; Schikora, A. Quorum sensing of bacteria and trans-kingdom interactions of N-acyl homoserine lactones with eukaryotes. J. Chem. Ecol. 2012, 38, 704–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grandclément, C.; Tannières, M.; Moréra, S.; Dessaux, Y.; Faure, D. Quorum quenching: Role in nature and applied developments. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 2016, 40, 86–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Von Rad, U.; Klein, I.; Dobrev, I.; Kottova, J.; Zazimalova, E.; Fekete, A.; Hartmann, A.; Schmitt-Kopplin, P.; Durner, J. Response of Arabidopsis thaliana to N-hexanoyl-DL-homoserine-lactone, a bacterial quorum sensing molecule produced in the rhizosphere. Planta 2008, 229, 73–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sieper, T.; Forczek, S.; Matucha, M.; Krämer, P.; Hartmann, A.; Schröder, P. N-acyl-homoserine lactone uptake and systemic transport in barley rest upon active parts of the plant. New Phytol. 2014, 201, 545–555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Crouzet, J.; Arguelles-Arias, A.; Dhondt-Cordelier, S.; Cordelier, S.; Pršić, J.; Hoff, G.; Mazeyrat-Gourbeyre, F.; Baillieul, F.; Clément, C.; Ongena, M.; et al. Biosurfactants in plant protection against diseases: Rhamnolipids and lipopeptides case study. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2020, 8, 1014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brazelton, J.; Pfeufer, E.; Sweat, T.; Gardener, B.; Coenen, C. 2,4-diacetylphloroglucinol alters plant root development. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact. 2008, 21, 1349–1358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Ortiz-Castro, R.; Pelagio-Flores, R.; Méndez-Bravo, A.; Ruiz-Herrera, L.; Campos-García, J.; López-Bucio, J. Pyocyanin, a virulence factor produced by Pseudomonas aeruginosa, alters root development through reactive oxygen species and ethylene signaling in Arabidopsis. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact. 2014, 27, 364–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Manosalva, P.; Manohar, M.; von Reuss, S.H.; Chen, S.; Koch, A.; Kaplan, F.; Choe, A.; Micikas, R.J.; Wang, X.; Kogel, K.-H.; et al. Conserved nematode signalling molecules elicit plant defenses and pathogen resistance. Nat. Commun. 2015, 6, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hasan, S.; Gupta, G.; Anand, S.; Kaur, H. Lytic enzymes of trichoderma: Their role in plant defense. Int. J. Appl. Res. Stud. 2014, 3, 1–5. [Google Scholar]
- Cabugao, K.G.; Timm, C.M.; Carrell, A.A.; Childs, J.; Lu, T.-Y.S.; Pelletier, D.A.; Weston, D.J.; Norby, R.J. Root and rhizosphere bacterial phosphatase activity varies with tree species and soil phosphorus availability in puerto rico tropical forest. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 1834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Sharma, M.P.; Grover, M.; Chourasiya, D.; Bharti, A.; Agnihotri, R.; Maheshwari, H.S.; Pareek, A.; Buyer, J.S.; Sharma, S.K.; Schütz, L.; et al. Deciphering the role of trehalose in tripartite symbiosis among rhizobia, arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi, and legumes for enhancing abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants. Front. Microbiol. 2020, 11, 2219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Suárez, R.; Wong, A.; Ramírez, M.; Barraza, A.; Del, M.; Orozco, C.; Cevallos, M.A.; Lara, M.; Hernández, G.; Iturriaga, G. Improvement of drought tolerance and grain yield in common bean by overexpressing trehalose-6-phosphate synthase in rhizobia. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact. 2008, 21, 958–966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Sharma, N.; Sharma, K.P.; Gaur, R.K.; Gupta, V.K. Role of chitinase in plant defense. Asian J. Biochem. 2011, 6, 29–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Solgi, T.; Moradyar, M.; Zamani, M.R.; Motallebi, M. Transformation of canola by chit33 gene towards improving resistance to Sclerotinia sclerotiorum. Plant Prot. Sci. 2015, 51, 6–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rais, A.; Jabeen, Z.; Shair, F.; Yusuf Hafeez, F.; Nadeem Hassan, M. Bacillus spp., a bio-control agent enhances the activity of antioxidant defense enzymes in rice against Pyricularia oryzae. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0187412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lin, C.; Sauter, M. Control of root system architecture by phytohormones and environmental signals in rice. Isr. J. Plant Sci. 2020, 67, 98–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Li, H.-B.; Singh, R.K.; Singh, P.; Song, Q.-Q.; Xing, Y.-X.; Yang, L.-T.; Li, Y.-R. Genetic diversity of nitrogen-fixing and plant growth promoting pseudomonas species isolated from sugarcane rhizosphere. Front. Microbiol. 2017, 8, 1268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Oteino, N.; Lally, R.D.; Kiwanuka, S.; Lloyd, A.; Ryan, D.; Germaine, K.J.; Dowling, D.N. Plant growth promotion induced by phosphate solubilizing endophytic Pseudomonas isolates. Front. Microbiol. 2015, 6, 745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Oldroyd, G.E.D.; Murray, J.D.; Poole, P.S.; Downie, J.A. The rules of engagement in the legume-rhizobial symbiosis. Annu. Rev. Genet. 2011, 45, 119–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Li, S.; Peng, M.; Liu, Z.; Shah, S.S. The role of soil microbes in promoting plant growth. Mol. Microbiol. Res. 2017, 7, 30–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kunkel, B.; Harper, C. The roles of auxin during interactions between bacterial plant pathogens and their hosts. J. Exp. Bot. 2018, 69, 245–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Houben, M.; Van de Poel, B. 1-Aminocyclopropane-1-Carboxylic Acid Oxidase (ACO): The enzyme that makes the plant hormone ethylene. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vanderstraeten, L.; Van Der Straeten, D. Accumulation and transport of 1-Aminocyclopropane-1-Carboxylic Acid (ACC) in plants: Current status, considerations for future research and agronomic applications. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Iqbal, N.; Khan, N.A.; Ferrante, A.; Trivellini, A.; Francini, A.; Khan, M.I.R. Ethylene role in plant growth, development and senescence: Interaction with other phytohormones. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ravanbakhsh, M.; Sasidharan, R.; Voesenek, L.A.C.J.; Kowalchuk, G.A.; Jousset, A. Microbial modulation of plant ethylene signaling: Ecological and evolutionary consequences. Microbiome 2018, 6, 52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nascimento, F.X.; Rossi, M.J.; Glick, B.R. Ethylene and 1-Aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate (ACC) in plant–bacterial interactions. Front. Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ruan, J.; Zhou, Y.; Zhou, M.; Yan, J.; Khurshid, M.; Weng, W.; Cheng, J.; Zhang, K. Jasmonic acid signaling pathway in plants. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 2479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Siddiqi, K.S.; Husen, A. Plant response to jasmonates: Current developments and their role in changing environment. Bull. Natl. Res. Cent. 2019, 43, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Habiyaremye, J.d.D.; Goldmann, K.; Reitz, T.; Herrmann, S.; Buscot, F. Tree root zone microbiome: Exploring the magnitude of environmental conditions and host tree impact. Front. Microbiol. 2020, 11, 749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhao, S.; Li, Y. Current understanding of the interplays between host hormones and plant viral infections. PLOS Pathog. 2021, 17, e1009242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Li, L.; Li, J.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, N. Difussible signal factor (DSF)-mediated quorum sensing modulates expression of diverse traits in Xanthomonas citri and response of citrus plants to promotes disease. BMC Genom. 2019, 20, 55. [Google Scholar]
- Lebeis, S.; Paredes, S.; Lundberg, D.; Breakfield, N.; Gehring, J.; McDonald, M.; Malfatti, S.; del Rio, T.; Jones, C.; Tringe, S.; et al. Salicylic acid modulates colonization of the root microbiome by specific bacterial taxa. Science 2015, 349, 860–864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yang, J.; Duan, G.; Li, C.; Liu, L.; Han, G.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, C. The crosstalks between jasmonic acid and other plant hormone signaling highlight the involvement of jasmonic acid as a core component in plant response to biotic and abiotic stresses. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 1349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Takatsuji, H.; Jiang, C.-J. Plant Hormone Crosstalks Under Biotic Stresses. In Phytohormones: A Window to Metabolism, Signaling and Biotechnological Applications; Thran, L., Pal, S., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2014; Volume 9781493904914, pp. 323–350. [Google Scholar]
- Rashid, M.I.; Mujawar, L.H.; Shahzad, T.; Almeelbi, T.; Ismail, I.M.I.; Oves, M. Bacteria and fungi can contribute to nutrients bioavailability and aggregate formation in degraded soils. Microbiol. Res. 2016, 183, 26–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Olanrewaju, O.S.; Glick, B.R.; Babalola, O.O. Mechanisms of action of plant growth promoting bacteria. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2017, 33, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Feng, G.; Xie, T.; Wang, X.; Bai, J.; Tang, L.; Zhao, H.; Wei, W.; Wang, M.; Zhao, Y. Metagenomic analysis of microbial community and function involved in cd-contaminated soil. BMC Microbiol. 2018, 18, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Freitas, M.A.; Medeiros, F.H.V.; Carvalho, S.P.; Guilherme, L.R.G.; Teixeira, W.D.; Zhang, H.; Paré, P.W. Augmenting iron accumulation in cassava by the beneficial soil bacterium Bacillus subtilis (GBO3). Front. Plant Sci. 2015, 6, 596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vishwakarma, K.; Kumar, V.; Tripathi, D.K.; Sharma, S. Characterization of rhizobacterial isolates from Brassica juncea for multitrait plant growth promotion and their viability studies on carriers. Environ. Sustain. 2018, 1, 253–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Velásquez, A.C.; Castroverde, C.D.M.; He, S.Y. Plant–Pathogen warfare under changing climate conditions. Curr. Biol. 2018, 28, R619–R634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pandey, P.; Irulappan, V.; Bagavathiannan, M.V.; Senthil-Kumar, M. Impact of combined abiotic and biotic stresses on plant growth and avenues for crop improvement by exploiting physio-morphological traits. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Berg, M.; Koskella, B. Nutrient-and dose-dependent-microbiome-mediated protection againts a plant pathogen. Curr. Biol. 2018, 28, 2487–2492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ali, H.; Nadarajah, K. Evaluating the efficacy of Trichoderma spp and Bacillus substilis as biocontrol agents against Magnaporthe grisea in rice. Aust. J. Crop Sci. 2014, 8, 1324–1335. [Google Scholar]
- Beneduzi, A.; Ambrosini, A.; Passaglia, L.M.P. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR): Their potential as antagonists and biocontrol agents. Genet. Mol. Biol. 2012, 35, 1044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Rosier, A.; Medeiros, F.; Bais, H. Defining plant growth promoting rhizobacteria molecular and biochemical networks in beneficial plant-microbe interactions. Plant Soil 2018, 428, 35–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Verma, R.K.; Sachan, M.; Vishwakarma, K.; Upadhyay, N.; Mishra, R.K.; Tripathi, D.K.; Sharma, S. Role of PGPR in Sustainable Agriculture: Molecular Approach Toward Disease Suppression and Growth Promotion. In Role of Rhizospheric Microbes in Soil; Meena, V., Ed.; Springer: Singapore, 2018; Volume 2, pp. 259–290. [Google Scholar]
- Vurukonda, S.; Giovanardi, D.; Stefani, E. Plant growth promoting and biocontrol activity of Streptomyces spp. as endophytes. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018, 19, 952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Geudens, N.; Martins, J.C. Cyclic lipodepsipeptides from Pseudomonas spp.—Biological swiss-army knives. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 1867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nihorimbere, V.; Cawoy, H.; Seyer, A.; Brunelle, A.; Thonart, P.; Ongena, M. Impact of rhizosphere factors on cyclic lipopeptide signature from the plant beneficial strain Bacillus amyloliquefaciens S499. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 2012, 79, 176–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thambugala, K.M.; Daranagama, D.A.; Phillips, A.J.L.; Kannangara, S.D.; Promputtha, I. Fungi vs. fungi in biocontrol: An overview of fungal antagonists applied against fungal plant pathogens. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 2020, 10, 718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Durán, P.; Tortella, G.; Viscardi, S.; Barra, P.J.; Carrión, V.J.; Mora, M.d.l.L.; Pozo, M.J. Microbial community composition in take-all suppressive soils. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 2198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trivedi, P.; Delgado-Baquerizo, M.; Trivedi, C.; Hamonts, K.; Anderson, I.C.; Singh, B.K. Keystone microbial taxa regulate the invasion of a fungal pathogen in agro-ecosystems. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2017, 111, 10–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pieterse, C.M.J.; Zamioudis, C.; Berendsen, R.L.; Weller, D.M.; Van Wees, S.C.M.; Bakker, P.A.H.M. Induced systemic resistance by beneficial microbes. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 2014, 52, 347–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fiorilli, V.; Catoni, M.; Lanfranco, L.; Zabet, N.R. Editorial: Interactions of plants with bacteria and fungi: Molecular and epigenetic plasticity of the host. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Masri, L.; Branca, A.; Sheppard, A.; Papkou, A.; Daehnemann, L.; Guenther, P.; Prahl, S.; Saebelfeld, M.; Hollensteiner, J.; Liesegang, H.; et al. Host-Pathogen coevolution: The selective advantage of Bacillus thuringiensis virulence and its cry toxin genes. PLoS Biol. 2015, 13, e1002169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Avila-Quezada, G.D.; Esquivel, J.F.; Silva-Rojas, H.V.; Leyva-Mir, S.G.; Garcia-Avila, C.d.J.; Quezada-Salinas, A.; Noriega-Orozco, L.; Rivas-Valencia, P.; Ojeda-Barrios, D.; Melgoza-Castillo, A. Emerging plant diseases under a changing climate scenario: Threats to our global food supply. Emir. J. Food Agric. 2018, 30, 443–450. [Google Scholar]
- Deberdt, P.; Guyot, J.; Coranson-Beaudu, R.; Launay, J.; Noreskal, M.; Rivière, P.; Vignè, F.; Laplace, D.; Lebreton, L.; Wicker, E. Diversity of Ralstonia solanacearum in French Guiana expands knowldege of the “emerging ecotype”. Phytopathology 2014, 104, 586–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Allen, C.D.; Macalady, A.K.; Chenchouni, H.; Bachelet, D.; McDowell, N.; Vennetier, M.; Kitzberger, T.; Rigling, A.; Breshears, D.D.; Hogg, E.H.T.; et al. A global review of drought and heat-induced tree mortality reveals emerging climate change risks for forests. For. Ecol. Manag. 2010, 259, 660–684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Goss, E. Genome-enabled analysis of plant pathogen migration. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 2015, 53, 121–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thynne, E.; McDonald, M.; Solomon, P. Phytopathogen emergence in the genomics era. Trends Plant Sci. 2015, 20, 246–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Näpflin, K.; Becks, L.; Bensch, S.; Ellis, V.A.; Hafer-Hahmann, N.; Harding, K.C.; Lindén, S.K.; O’Connor, E.A.; Olsen, M.T.; Roved, J.; et al. Genomics of hosts-pathogen interactions: Challenges and opportunities across ecological and spatiotemporal scales. PeerJ 2019, 7, e8013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Razali, N.M.; Hisham, S.N.; Kumar, I.S.; Shukla, R.N.; Lee, M.; Bakar, M.F.A.; Nadarajah, K. Comparative Genomics: Insights on the Pathogenicity and Lifestyle of Rhizoctonia solani. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 2183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Delmont, T.O.; Prestat, E.; Keegan, K.P.; Faubladier, M.; Robe, P.; Clark, I.M.; Pelletier, E.; Hirsch, P.R.; Meyer, F.; Gilbert, J.A.; et al. Structure, fluctuation and magnitude of a natural grassland soil metagenome. ISME J. 2012, 6, 1677–1687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Knief, C. Analysis of plant microbe interactions in the era of next generation sequencing technologies. Front. Plant Sci. 2014, 5, 216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Pérez-de-Castro, A.; Vilanova, S.; Cañizares, J.; Pascual, L.; Blanca, J.; Díez, M.; Prohens, J.; Picó, B. Application of genomic tools in plant breeding. Curr. Genomics 2012, 13, 179–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Bigini, V.; Camerlengo, F.; Botticella, E.; Sestili, F.; Savatin, D. Biotechnological resources to increase disease-resistance by improving plant immunity: A sustainable approach to save cereal crop production. Plants 2021, 10, 1146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jain, P.; Singh, P.K.; Kapoor, R.; Khanna, A.; Solanke, A.U.; Krishnan, S.G.; Singh, A.K.; Sharma, V.; Sharma, T.R. Understanding Host-Pathogen Interactions with Expression Profiling of NILs Carrying Rice-Blast Resistance Pi9 Gene. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Harman, G.; Uphoff, N. Symbiotic root-endophytic soil microbes improve crop productivity and provide environmental benefits. Scientifica 2019, 2019, 9106395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jayaraman, D.; Forshey, K.; Grimsurd, P.; Ane, J. Leveraging proteomics to understand plant-microbe interactions. Front. Plant Sci. 2012, 3, 44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Duan, G.; Christian, N.; Schwachtje, J.; Walther, D.; Ebenhöh, O. The metabolic interplay between plants and phytopathogens. Metabolites 2013, 3, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Seaver, S.M.D.; Henry, C.S.; Hanson, A.D. Frontiers in metabolic reconstruction and modeling of plant genomes. J. Exp. Bot. 2012, 63, 2247–2258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Collakova, E.; Yen, J.; Senger, R. Are we ready for genome-scale modelling in plants. Plant Sci. 2012, 19, 53–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Matsumura, H.; Reich, S.; Ito, A.; Saitoh, H.; Kamoun, S.; Winter, P.; Kahl, G.; Reuter, M.; Krüger, D.H.; Terauchi, R. Gene expression analysis of plant host-pathogen interactions by SuperSAGE. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2003, 100, 15718–15723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- De Torres-Zabala, M.; Truman, W.; Bennett, M.; Guillaume, L.; Mansfield, J.; Egea, P.; Bögre, L.; Grant, M. Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato hijacks the Arabidopsis abscisic acid signalling pathway to cause disease. EMBO J. 2007, 26, 1434–1443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jones, A.; Thomas, V.; Truman, B.; Lilley, K.; Mansfield, J.; Grantt, M. Specific changes in the Arabidopsis proteome in response to bacterial challenge: Differetiating basal and R-gene mediated resistance. Phytochemistry 2004, 65, 1805–1816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oberhardt, M.A.; Palsson, B.Ø.; Papin, J.A. Applications of genome-scale metabolic reconstructions. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2009, 5, 320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Herbold, C.W.; Pelikan, C.; Kuzyk, O.; Hausmann, B.; Angel, R.; Berry, D.; Loy, A. A flexible and economical barcoding approach for highly multiplexed amplicon sequencing of diverse target genes. Front. Microbiol. 2015, 6, 731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Glassing, A.; Dowd, S.E.; Galandiuk, S.; Davis, B.; Chiodini, R.J. Inherent bacterial DNA contamination of extraction and sequencing reagents may affect interpretation of microbiota in low bacterial biomass samples. Gut Pathog. 2016, 8, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lucaciu, R.; Pelikan, C.; Gerner, S.M.; Zioutis, C.; Köstlbacher, S.; Marx, H.; Herbold, C.W.; Schmidt, H.; Rattei, T. A Bioinformatics Guide to Plant Microbiome Analysis. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 1313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- D’Amore, R.; Ijaz, U.Z.; Schirmer, M.; Kenny, J.; Gregory, R.; Darby, A.; Shakya, M.; Podar, M.; Quince, C.; Hall, N. A comprehensive benchmarking study of protocols and sequencing platforms for 16S rRNA community profiling. BMC Genom. 2016, 17, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kittelmann, S.; Seedorf, H.; Walters, W.; Clemente, J.; Knight, R.; Gordon, J.; Janssen, P. Simultaneous amplicon sequencing to explore co-occurrence patterns of bacterial archeal and eukaryotic microorganism in rumen microbial communities. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e47879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hong, S.; Bunge, J.; Leslin, C.; Jeon, S.; Epstein, S.S. Polymerase chain reaction primers miss half of rRNA microbial diversity. ISME J. 2009 312 2009, 3, 1365–1373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Schloss, P.D.; Gevers, D.; Westcott, S.L. Reducing the effects of PCR amplification and sequencing artifacts on 16S rRNA-based studies. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e27310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Mao, D.-P.; Zhou, Q.; Chen, C.-Y.; Quan, Z.-X. Coverage evaluation of universal bacterial primers using the metagenomic datasets. BMC Microbiol. 2012, 12, 66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Salman, V.; Amann, R.; Shub, D.A.; Schulz-Vogt, H.N. Multiple self-splicing introns in the 16S rRNA genes of giant sulfur bacteria. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2012, 109, 4203–4208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Brown, C.T.; Hug, L.A.; Thomas, B.C.; Sharon, I.; Castelle, C.J.; Singh, A.; Wilkins, M.J.; Wrighton, K.C.; Williams, K.H.; Banfield, J.F. Unusual biology across a group comprising more than 15% of domain Bacteria. Nature 2015, 523, 208–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Větrovský, T.; Baldrian, P. The variability of the 16S rRNA gene in bacterial genomes and its consequences for bacterial community analyses. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e57923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Schoch, C.L.; Seifert, K.A.; Huhndorf, S.; Robert, V.; Spouge, J.L.; Levesque, C.A.; Chen, W.; Consortium, F.B. Nuclear ribosomal internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region as a universal DNA barcode marker for Fungi. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2012, 109, 6241–6246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kounosu, A.; Murase, K.; Yoshida, A.; Maruyama, H.; Kikuchi, T. Improved 18S and 28S rDNA primer sets for NGS-based parasite detection. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- De Filippis, F.; Laiola, M.; Blaiotta, G.; Ercolini, D. Different amplicon targets for sequencing-based studies of fungal diversity. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2017, 83, e00905-17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Langille, M.G.I.; Zaneveld, J.; Caporaso, J.G.; McDonald, D.; Knights, D.; Reyes, J.A.; Clemente, J.C.; Burkepile, D.E.; Thurber, R.L.V.; Knight, R.; et al. Predictive functional profiling of microbial communities using 16S rRNA marker gene sequences. Nat. Biotechnol. 2013, 31, 814–821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kunin, V.; Engelbrekston, A.; Ochman, H.; Hugenholtz, P. Wrinkles in the rare biosphere: Pyrosequencing errors can lead to artificial inflation of diversity estimates. Environ. Microbiol. 2010, 12, 118–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Suzuki, M.; Giovannoni, S. Bias caused by template annealing in the amplification of mixtures of 16s rRNA genes by PCR. Environ. Microbiol. 1996, 62, 625–630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Polz, M.; Cavanaugh, C. Bias in template-to-product ratios in multitemplate PCR. Environ. Microbiol. 1998, 64, 3724–3730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Huse, S.; Welch, D.; Morrison, H.; Sogin, M. Ironing out the wrinkles in the rare biosphere through improved OTU clustering. Environ. Microbiol. 2010, 12, 1889–1898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sabale, S.N.; Suryawanshi, P.P.; Krishnaraj, P.U. Soil Metagenomics: Concepts and Applications. In Metagenomics—Basics, Methods and Applications; Hozzein, W.N., Ed.; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Brumfield, K.D.; Huq, A.; Colwell, R.R.; Olds, J.L.; Leddy, M.B. Microbial resolution of whole genome shotgun and 16S amplicon metagenomic sequencing using publicly available NEON data. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0228899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nadarajah, K. Metagenomics for Improving Soil Fertility. In Soil Nitrogen Ecology; Cruz, C., Vishwakarma, K., Choudhary, D.K., Varma, A., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 267–282. [Google Scholar]
- Rastogi, G.; Sani, R.K. Molecular Techniques to Assess Microbial Community Structure, Function, and Dynamics in the Environment. In Microbes and Microbial Technology; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2011; pp. 29–57. [Google Scholar]
- Snipen, L.; Angell, I.-L.; Rognes, T.; Rudi, K. Reduced metagenome sequencing for strain-resolution taxonomic profiles. Microbiome 2021, 9, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lapidus, A.L.; Korobeynikov, A.I. Metagenomic data assembly—The way of decoding unknown microorganisms. Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12, 653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anyansi, C.; Straub, T.J.; Manson, A.L.; Earl, A.M.; Abeel, T. Computational methods for strain-level microbial detection in colony and metagenome sequencing data. Front. Microbiol. 2020, 11, 1925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghurye, J.; Cepeda-Espinoza, V.; Pop, M. Metagenomic assembly: Overview, challenges and applications. Yale J. Biol. Med. 2016, 89, 353–362. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Sharifi, F.; Ye, Y. From gene annotation to function prediction for metagenomics. Methods Mol. Biol. 2017, 1611, 27–34. [Google Scholar]
- Sharpton, T.J. An introduction to the analysis of shotgun metagenomic data. Front. Plant Sci. 2014, 5, 209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bharti, R.; Grimm, D.G. Current challenges and best-practice protocols for microbiome analysis. Brief. Bioinform. 2021, 22, 178–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Giagnoni, L.; Magherini, F.; Landi, L.; Taghavi, S.; Modesti, A.; Bini, L.; Nannipieri, P.; Van Der Lelie, D.; Renella, G. Extraction of microbial proteome from soil: Potential and limitations assessed through a model study. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 2010, 62, 74–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiapello, M.; Zampieri, E.; Mello, A. A small effort for researchers, a big gain for soil metaproteomics. Front. Microbiol. 2020, 11, 88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zampieri, E.; Chiapello, M.; Daghino, S.; Bonfante, P.; Mello, A. Soil metaproteomics reveals an inter-kingdom stress response to the presence of black truffles. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 25773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Martinez-Alonso, E.; Pena-Perez, S.; Serrano, S.; Garcia-Lopez, E.; Alcazar, A.; Cid, C. Taxonomic and functional characterization of a microbial community from a volcanic englacial ecosystem in Deception Island, Antarctica. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 12158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ogunseitan, O.A. Soil Proteomics: Extraction and Analysis of Proteins from Soils. In Nucleic Acid and Protein in Soil; Nannipieri, P., Smalla, K., Eds.; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2006; Volume 8, pp. 95–115. [Google Scholar]
- John, M.A.; Hussain, Z. Multilocus enzyme electrophoresis using ultrathin polyacrylamide gels. J. Microbiol. Methods 1994, 19, 307–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Keiblinger, K.M.; Riedel, K. Sample Preparation for Metaproteome Analyses of Soil and Leaf Litter. In Methods in Molecular Biology; Humana Press: New York, NY, USA, 2018; Volume 1841, pp. 303–318. [Google Scholar]
- Starke, R.; Jehmlich, N.; Bastida, F. Using proteins to study how microbes contribute to soil ecosystem services: The current state and future perspectives of soil metaproteomics. J. Proteom. 2019, 198, 50–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Callister, S.J.; Fillmore, T.L.; Nicora, C.D.; Shaw, J.B.; Purvine, S.O.; Orton, D.J.; White, R.A.; Moore, R.J.; Burnet, M.C.; Nakayasu, E.S.; et al. Addressing the challenge of soil metaproteome complexity by improving metaproteome depth of coverage through two-dimensional liquid chromatography. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2018, 125, 290–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mattarozzi, M.; Manfredi, M.; Montanini, B.; Gosetti, F.; Sanangelantoni, A.M.; Marengo, E.; Careri, M.; Visioli, G. A metaproteomic approach dissecting major bacterial functions in the rhizosphere of plants living in serpentine soil. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2017, 409, 2327–2339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heyer, R.; Schallert, K.; Zoun, R.; Becher, B.; Saake, G.; Benndorf, D. Challenges and perspectives of metaproteomic data analysis. J. Biotechnol. 2017, 261, 24–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liu, D.; Keiblinger, K.M.; Schindlbacher, A.; Wegner, U.; Sun, H.; Fuchs, S.; Lassek, C.; Riedel, K.; Zechmeister-Boltenstern, S. Microbial functionality as affected by experimental warming of a temperate mountain forest soil—A metaproteomics survey. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2017, 117–118, 196–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bastida, F.; Jehmlich, N.; Martínez-Navarro, J.; Bayona, V.; García, C.; Moreno, J.L. The effects of struvite and sewage sludge on plant yield and the microbial community of a semiarid Mediterranean soil. Geoderma 2019, 337, 1051–1057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rashid, M.H.; Kamruzzaman, M.; Haque, A.N.A.; Krehenbrink, M. Soil Microbes for Sustainable Agriculture. In Sustainable Management of Soil and Environment; Meena, R., Kumar, S., Bohra, J., Jat, M., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2019; pp. 339–382. [Google Scholar]
- Ray, P.; Lakshmanan, V.; Labbé, J.L.; Craven, K.D. Microbe to microbiome: A paradigm shift in the application of microorganisms for sustainable agriculture. Front. Microbiol. 2020, 8, 3323. [Google Scholar]
- Glick, B.R. Soil microbes and sustainable agriculture. Pedosphere 2018, 28, 167–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Plant | Producing Microbes | Beneficial Chemicals | Benefit in Plant Mechanism | Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|
Banana | Bacillus spp. | Siderophores |
| [170,171] |
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) | ||||
Arabidopsis | Bacillus subtilis GB03 and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens IN937a | 2,3-Butanediol (2,3-BD) |
| [172] |
Corn and Tobacco | Bacillus cereus C1L | Dimethyl disulfide |
| [173,174] |
Arabidopsis thaliana | Trichoderma asperellum | 6-pentyl-pyrone |
| [175] |
Phytohormones | ||||
Medicago truncatula | Salmonella | Auxins |
| [176,177] |
Oryza sativa | Bacillus amyloliquefaciens | Abscisic acid (ABA) |
| [178] |
Arabidopsis thaliana | Pseudomonas fluorescens | Cytokinin |
| [179] |
Various plant | Azotobacter, Azospirillum, Pseudomonas, Azotobacter, Burkholderia, Bacillus | Gibberellins |
| [180] |
Tomato | Fusarium oxysporum | Jasmonic acid (JA) |
| [125,181] |
Metasequoia glyptostroboides, Ginkgo biloba, Taxus brevifolia, etc. | Pseudomonas tremae Curtobacterium herbarum | Salicylic acid (SA) |
| [182,183] |
Apple | Pseudomonas syringae | Ethylene |
| [184] |
Signaling Molecules | ||||
Piloderma–Pinus, orchids, etc. | Mycorrhizal fungi | Small signaling proteins (SSPs) |
| [185,186] |
Arabidopsis thaliana | PGPR | N-acyl-homoserine lactones (AHL) |
| [187,188,189,190,191] |
Grapevine, lettuce, etc. | Pseudomonas sp., Burkholderia sp., and Bacillus sp. | Rhamnolipids and Lipopeptides |
| [192] |
Tomato | Pseudomonas fluorescens | 2,4-Diacetylphloroglucinol (DAPG) |
| [193] |
Arabidopsis | Pseudomonas aeruginosa | Pyocyanin |
| [194] |
Arabidopsis | Nematodes | Ascaroside pheromones |
| [195] |
Enzymes | ||||
Various plant | Trichoderma harzianum, Trichoderma virens and Trichoderma viride | Lytic enzymes |
| [196] |
Doryanthes excelsa Protea montana | Proteobacteria and Acidobacteria | Phosphatase |
| [197] |
Phaseolus vulgaris | Rhizobium etli | Trehalose |
| [198,199] |
Canola | Trichoderma atroviride | Chitinase |
| [200,201] |
Rice | Bacillus spp. | Proteases |
| [202] |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Nadarajah, K.; Abdul Rahman, N.S.N. Plant–Microbe Interaction: Aboveground to Belowground, from the Good to the Bad. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 10388. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms221910388
Nadarajah K, Abdul Rahman NSN. Plant–Microbe Interaction: Aboveground to Belowground, from the Good to the Bad. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2021; 22(19):10388. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms221910388
Chicago/Turabian StyleNadarajah, Kalaivani, and Nur Sabrina Natasha Abdul Rahman. 2021. "Plant–Microbe Interaction: Aboveground to Belowground, from the Good to the Bad" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 22, no. 19: 10388. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms221910388