Next Article in Journal
Effects of Water Stress on Leaf Photosynthesis and Yield of Melon and Tomato Crops Grown under Mediterranean Conditions of the Northeast of Morocco
Previous Article in Journal
Effect of Magnetic Treatment of Irrigation Water on a Greenhouse Tomato Crop under Salinity Conditions
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Proceeding Paper

Enhanced Salinity Tolerance of Medicago sativa, Roots AM Colonization and Soil Enzyme Activities by PGPR †

Laboratory of Microbial Biotechnology and Bioactive Molecules, Faculty of Sciences and Technology, Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah University, Fez 30000, Morocco
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Presented at the 2nd International Laayoune Forum on Biosaline Agriculture, 14–16 June 2022; Available online: https://lafoba2.sciforum.net/.
Environ. Sci. Proc. 2022, 16(1), 14; https://doi.org/10.3390/environsciproc2022016014
Published: 14 June 2022
(This article belongs to the Proceedings of The 2nd International Laayoune Forum on Biosaline Agriculture)

Abstract

:
Abiotic stresses such as salt are typical negative factors that have a considerable impact on agricultural output around the world. The goal of this study was to investigate the effect of halotolerant plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) on plant growth and soil function under salinity stress. The consortium of four PGPR (Pseudomonas putida, Alcaligenes sp., Klebsiella sp., and Pseudomonas cedrina) was tested for its effect on growth, chlorophyll content, oxidative stress, and root arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) colonization of Medicago sativa in pots experiment under salt stress. The bacteria’s impact on soil enzyme activity was also investigated. Overall, in comparison to the non-inoculated control, inoculating M. sativa plants with the bacterial consortium allowed us to overcome the unfavorable effects of NaCl stress and enhanced plant growth, root AM colonization, and leaf chlorophyll content. It also reduced the levels of oxidative damage indicators such as malondialdehyde, hydrogen peroxide, and proline. Furthermore, the consortium had a beneficial effect on the activities of soil phosphatase, β-galactosidase, and arylamidase. The bacterial consortium has the potential to be employed as bio-inoculants for plants growing under salt stress.

1. Introduction

Salinity is a problem altering large land area and damages soils [1]. Salt stress reduces plant nutrient uptake, affect many morphological, physiological, and biochemical parameters in different parts of plants [2].
Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) could be an important technology to enhance plants tolerance against abiotic stresses including salinity [3]. Many studies show that various genera of PGPR can promote plants growth and enhance crops productivity at many plants species [4]. The cooperation between PGPRs and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) in soil and plant tissues can be beneficial for plants through optimizing nutrition and protection against biotic and abiotic stresses [5]. Positive interactions between PGPR and AMF in stimulating plant growth and salinity tolerance are well improved [6]. Otherwise, PGPRs can increase many enzymes activity of soil under saline conditions which promote plants growth [7,8].
Thus, in this study we aimed to analyze the effect of the interaction of a consortium of four potential PGPR with M. sativa to alleviate salt stress on plants growth and oxidative stress, as well as on plant roots mycorrhizal colonization and soil enzyme activities.

2. Material and Methods

The bacteria, Pseudomonas putida, Alcaligenes sp., Klebsiella sp., and Pseudomonas cedrina, used in this study were previously isolated from southern Morocco and characterized for their PGP traits and their resistance to salinity [9]. Pot experiments were designed in order to study the effect of the bacterial consortium on M. sativa (Alfalfa) under salt exposure. Experiments were conducted in plastic pots containing soil amended with 2% NaCl. AMF inoculum was represented by the indigenous population of soil AMF.
The plantlets were inoculated with 2 mL of a suspension of the consortium of bacterial culture (108 CFU mL−1). For uninoculated plants, 2 mL of saline solution were added. Pots were placed in a greenhouse (about 16 h photoperiod, 26–30 °C day and 18–22 °C night) and watered daily. Plants were harvested after 30 days, subdivided in roots and shoots and washed with deionized water.
For plants morphological parameters, root and shoot dry weights were measured, after oven dying at 65 °C for 72 h. Chlorophyll content was quantified according to [10]. The proline content of the leaves was determined according to [11]. Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) content of the leaves was determined according to [12]. The lipid peroxidation (malondialdehyde (MDA) content) in plant leaves tissues was measured according to [13].
Detection of AM colonization of roots was performed according to [14]. Percentage colonization of roots was recorded according to [15].
Determination of soil enzymes phosphatase (PHOS), β-galactosidase (GALA), arylamidase (AMID) and arylsulfatase (SULF) activities in the rhizospheric soils of M. sativa were performed, according to [16,17,18,19], respectively.
Data were submitted to ANOVA analysis for each data to determine significant differences between the means. A multiple range test at the 95% confidence level was performed using Tukey’s method.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Effet of PGPR on Plant Tolerance and AM Colonization under NaCL Stress

Bacterial inoculation of M. sativa plants induced a positive impact on plant growth (Table 1). These results are in line with many studies improving a positive effect of PGPR inoculation in various plants cultures submitted to salt stress [4], and might be primarily linked to the PGP traits of the bacteria.
A significant (p < 0.05) increase of roots mycorrhizal colonization was recorded in plants inoculated with the bacterial consortium (F%, M%, and A%) of salt stressed plants (Table 1). This result suggests that these bacteria might act as mycorrhizal helper bacteria (MHB). The ability of AMF to improve plants growth and support tolerance to biotic and abiotic stresses is well documented in literature [20]. The positive impacts of bacteria on enhancing plants tolerance against salinity could also be due to their effect on mycorrhization.
The results show a significant (p < 0.05) increase of total chlorophyll content and a significant reduction of the indicators of oxidative damage levels (malondialdehyde and hydrogen peroxide), and proline content under salt stress, compared to non-inoculated plants (Table 2). The reduction of MDA and H2O2 contents might be due to the activation of the antioxidant enzyme defensive pathway [21]. On the other hand, proline is linked with various functions (e.g., osmoregulation, scavenging free radicals, activation of detoxification pathways), and many plants accumulate this amino acid under stresses as a kind of adaptation against this condition [2]. The increase of proline content in inoculated plants might be due to high tolerance of inoculated M. sativa plant under salt stress.

3.2. Effet of PGPR on Soil Enzyme Activity

Enzymes activity of soil can be used as criteria to describe soil quality and fertility [22]. Our results showed that in NaCl treatment, the activities of phosphatase, galactosidase, and arylamidase were significantly (p < 0.05) increased in soils inoculated with bacteria (Table 3). This positive effect might be through direct enzymes production by the microbial biomass of PGPRs or result indirectly from their interactions with rhizosphere microorganisms, AMF in particular. Indeed, the ability of AMF to improve soil enzymatic activities is recently documented in the meta-analysis of [23].

4. Conclusions

The use of PGPRs, tolerant under against salt stress, with effective PGP traits, able to cooperate positively with AM fungi, and to improve soil enzymes activities could optimize our ability to cultivate crops in saline environments.

Author Contributions

N.T.: conceptualization, methodology, formal analysis, writing—original draft, and visualization. M.F.: methodology, writing, and formal analysis. A.K.: methodology and formal analysis. G.L.: review and editing. W.B.: methodology. N.E.G.: conceptualization, supervision, review and editing, validation, resources, and funding acquisition. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

  1. Ben Chikha, M.; Hessini, K.; Ourteni, R.N.; Ghorbel, A.; Zoghlami, N. Identification of barley landrace genotypes with contrasting salinity tolerance at vegetative growth stage. Plant Biotechnol. 2016, 33, 287–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  2. Sallam, A.; Alqudah, A.M.; Dawood, M.F.; Baenziger, P.S.; Börner, A. Drought stress tolerance in wheat and barley: Advances in physiology, breeding and genetics research. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 3137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Sharma, S.; Kulkarni, J.; Jha, B. Halotolerant rhizobacteria promote growth and enhance salinity tolerance in peanut. Front. Microbiol. 2016, 7, 1600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Egamberdieva, D.; Wirth, S.; Bellingrath-Kimura, S.D.; Mishra, J.; Arora, N.K. Salt-Tolerant Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria for Enhancing Crop Productivity of Saline Soils. Front. Microbiol. 2019, 10, 2791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Kapoor, R.; Evelin, H.; Devi, T.S.; Gupta, S. Mitigation of salinity stress in plants by arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis: Current understanding and new challenges. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 470. [Google Scholar]
  6. Krishnamoorthy, R.; Shagol, C.; Kim, K.; Lee, S.; Yoon, S.; Sa, T. Isolation of salt tolerant arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) from Saemangeum reclaimed soil and mass production in hairy roots. Kor. S. Fert. Soc. Acad. 2011, 10, 92–93. [Google Scholar]
  7. Ren, H.; Lv, C.; Fernández-García, V.; Huang, B.; Yao, J.; Ding, W. Biochar and PGPR amendments influence soil enzyme activities and nutrient concentrations in a eucalyptus seedling plantation. Biom. Conv. Bioref. 2019, 11, 1865–1874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Pan, J.; Huang, C.; Peng, F.; Zhang, W.; Luo, J.; Ma, S.; Xue, X. Effect of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) and plant growth-promoting bacteria (PGPR) inoculations on ElaeagnusAngustifolia L. in saline soil. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 945. [Google Scholar]
  9. Tirry, N.; Kouchou, A.; Laghmari, G.; Lemjereb, M.; Hnadi, H.; Amrani, K.; Bahafid, W.; El Ghachtouli, N. Improved salinity tolerance of Medicago sativa and soil enzyme activities by PGPR. Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol. 2021, 31, 101914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Moran, R.; Porath, D. Chlorophyll determination in intact tissues using N, N-dimethylformamide. Plant Physiol. 1980, 65, 478–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Bates, L.S.; Waldren, R.P.; Teare, L.D. Determination of proline for water-stress studies. Plant Soil. 1973, 39, 205–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Jana, S.; Choudhuri, M.A. Glycolate metabolism of three submersed aquatic angiosperms: Effect of heavy metals. Aquat. Bot. 1981, 11, 67–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Heath, R.L.; Packer, L. Photoperoxidation in isolated chloroplasts: I. Kinetics and stoichiometry of fatty acid peroxidation. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 2016, 125, 189–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Phillips, J.M.; Hayman, D.S. Improved procedures for clearing roots and staining parasitic and vesicular-arbuscularmycorrhizal fungi for rapid assessment of infection. Trans. Br. Mycol. Soc. 1970, 55, 158-IN18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Trouvelot, A.; Kough, J.L.; Gianinazzi-Pearson, V. Mesure du taux de mycorhization VA d’un système radiculaire. Recherche de méthode d’estimation ayant une signification fonctionnelle. In Proceedings of the 1st European Symposium on Mycorrhizae, Dijon, France, 1–5 July 1985; pp. 217–221. [Google Scholar]
  16. Dick, R.P.; Breakwell, D.P.; Turco, R.F. Soil enzyme activities and biodiversity measurements as integrative microbiological indicators. Methods Assess. Soil Qual. 1997, 49, 247–271. [Google Scholar]
  17. Sinsabaugh, R.L.; Reynolds, H.; Long, T.M. Rapid assay for amidohydrolase (urease) activity in environmental samples. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2000, 32, 2095–2097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Acosta-Martı́nez, V.; Tabatabai, M.A. Inhibition of arylamidase activity in soils by toluene. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2002, 34, 229–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Tabatabai, M.A.; Bremner, J.M. Arylsulfatase activity of soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1970, 34, 225–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Gianinazzi, S.; Schüepp, H.; Barea, J.M.; Haselwandter, K. Mycorrhizal Technology in Agriculture: From Genes to Bioproducts; Birkhäuser: Basel, Switzerland, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  21. Habib, S.H.; Kausar, H.; Saud, H.M. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria enhance salinity stress tolerance in okra through ROS-scavenging enzymes. BioMed Res. Int. 2016, 2016, 6284547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Sipahutar, M.K.; Piapukiew, J.; Vangnai, A.S. Efficiency of the formulated plant-growth promoting Pseudomonas fluorescens MC46 inoculant on triclocarban treatment in soil and its effect on Vigna radiata growth and soil enzyme activities. J. Hazard. Mat. 2018, 344, 883–892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Qin, M.; Zhang, Q.; Pan, J.; Jiang, S.; Liu, Y.; Bahadur, A.; Peng, Z.; Yang, Y.; Feng, H. Effect of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on soil enzyme activity is coupled with increased plant biomass. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 2020, 71, 84–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Effect of bacterial inoculation on plant growth and mycorrhizal colonization (mycorrhizal frequency (F%), mycorrhizal intensity (M%) and richness of arbuscules (A%)) of M. sativa roots under NaCl stress. Values with different letters are significantly different (p = 0.05). Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.
Table 1. Effect of bacterial inoculation on plant growth and mycorrhizal colonization (mycorrhizal frequency (F%), mycorrhizal intensity (M%) and richness of arbuscules (A%)) of M. sativa roots under NaCl stress. Values with different letters are significantly different (p = 0.05). Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.
TreatmentPlant GrowthMycorrhizal Colonization
Shoot Dry Weight (mg)Root Dry Weight (mg)F%M%A%
Control17.315 b15.11 b64.19 b21.45 b13.76 b
Consortium26.611 a18.050 a74.55 a37.06 a21.58 a
Table 2. Effect of bacterial inoculation on chlorophyll, proline, MDA and H2O2 content of M. sativa leaves under NaCl stress. Values with different letters are significantly different (p = 0.05). Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.
Table 2. Effect of bacterial inoculation on chlorophyll, proline, MDA and H2O2 content of M. sativa leaves under NaCl stress. Values with different letters are significantly different (p = 0.05). Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.
TreatmentChlorophyll (mg/g)H2O2 (nmol/g)MDA (µmol/g)Proline (µmol/g)
Control0.95 b695.85 a81.16 a228.26 a
Consortium1.32 a499.60 b61.55 b109.21 b
Table 3. Effect of bacterial inoculation on soil enzymatic activities: galactosidase (GALA), phosphatase (PHOS), arylsulfatase (SULF) and arylamidase (AMID) of the rhizospheric soil of M. sativa plants under NaCl stress. Values with different letters are significantly different (p = 0.05). Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.
Table 3. Effect of bacterial inoculation on soil enzymatic activities: galactosidase (GALA), phosphatase (PHOS), arylsulfatase (SULF) and arylamidase (AMID) of the rhizospheric soil of M. sativa plants under NaCl stress. Values with different letters are significantly different (p = 0.05). Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.
TreatmentSoil Enzyme Activities mU/g Dry Soil
GALAPHOSSULFAMID
Control1.04 b15.19 b74.92 a36.99 b
Consortium1.800 a20.33 a73.43 a47.04 a
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Tirry, N.; Ferioun, M.; Kouchou, A.; Laghmari, G.; Bahafid, W.; El Ghachtouli, N. Enhanced Salinity Tolerance of Medicago sativa, Roots AM Colonization and Soil Enzyme Activities by PGPR. Environ. Sci. Proc. 2022, 16, 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/environsciproc2022016014

AMA Style

Tirry N, Ferioun M, Kouchou A, Laghmari G, Bahafid W, El Ghachtouli N. Enhanced Salinity Tolerance of Medicago sativa, Roots AM Colonization and Soil Enzyme Activities by PGPR. Environmental Sciences Proceedings. 2022; 16(1):14. https://doi.org/10.3390/environsciproc2022016014

Chicago/Turabian Style

Tirry, Nabil, Mohamed Ferioun, Aziza Kouchou, Ghizlane Laghmari, Wifak Bahafid, and Naïma El Ghachtouli. 2022. "Enhanced Salinity Tolerance of Medicago sativa, Roots AM Colonization and Soil Enzyme Activities by PGPR" Environmental Sciences Proceedings 16, no. 1: 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/environsciproc2022016014

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop