Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Sara FAHDE
 -- 3801 2023-08-17 17:09:54 |
2 Reference format revised.
Lindsay Dong
 + 2 word(s) 3803 2023-08-21 03:59:54 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?
Send video materials Upload full video

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Fahde, S.; Boughribil, S.; Sijilmassi, B.; Amri, A. Rhizobia as Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/48181 (accessed on 09 September 2024).
Fahde S, Boughribil S, Sijilmassi B, Amri A. Rhizobia as Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/48181. Accessed September 09, 2024.
Fahde, Sara, Said Boughribil, Badreddine Sijilmassi, Ahmed Amri. "Rhizobia as Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/48181 (accessed September 09, 2024).
Fahde, S., Boughribil, S., Sijilmassi, B., & Amri, A. (2023, August 17). Rhizobia as Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/48181
Fahde, Sara, et al. "Rhizobia as Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria." Encyclopedia. Web. 17 August, 2023.
Rhizobia as Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/agriculture13071279

Rhizobia can associate with non-legume roots, which ultimately leads to the stimulation of growth through diverse direct and indirect mechanisms. For example, rhizobia can enhance growth through phytohormones production, the improvement of plant nutrient uptake, such as the solubilization of precipitated phosphorus, the production of siderophores to address iron needs, and also the reduction of ethylene levels through the aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate (ACC) deaminase enzyme to cope with drought stress. Additionally, rhizobia can improve, indirectly, non-legume growth through biocontrol of pathogens and the induction of systemic resistance in the host plant. It can also increase root adherence to soil by releasing exopolysaccharides, which regulate water and soil nutrient movement.

Rhizobium PGPR

1. Direct Mechanism

1.1. N2 Fixation

Nitrogen is a limiting factor for plant growth and development. It is an essential component of many bio-molecules and constituent of chlorophyll, which plays a crucial role in plant physiological processes [1].
The direct assimilation of nitrogen by plants cannot be possible due to its inert gaseous form [2]. Even if the organic form of nitrogen in soil represents 90%, it cannot be assimilated by plants [3]. This accessibility problem made the use of industrial N fertilizers essential for enhancing plant productivity. However, with all the environmental issues we encounter, using biological methods could be an important alternative to replace the intensive use of chemical fertilizers [2].
Biological Nitrogen Fixation (BNF) is accomplished by diazotrophs, which can be free-living microorganisms, such as Acetobacter spp., Azospirillum spp., Azotobacter spp., Bacillus spp., Citrobacter spp., Clostridium spp., Enterobacter spp., Klebsiella spp., Pseudomonas spp., Serratia spp., or Streptomyces spp., or it can also be accomplished by symbiotic microorganisms interacting with some dicotyedonous species (actinorhizal plants), such as Frankia spp., some cereal grass-associated microorganisms, e.g., Azospirillum spp., Herbaspirillum spp., and Azoarcus spp., or also rhizobia entering in interaction with legumes [4].
Rhizobia have been recognized for their ability to decrease annual nitrogen inputs from various food crops globally, estimated at 53 million tonnes [5].
The nitrogen fixation ability by rhizobia is principally performed by nif (genes encoding for components of the nitrogenase), fix (genes for symbiotic nitrogen fixation), and nod (genes for nodulation) genes through the conversion of atmospheric nitrogen N2 to ammonia by the action of the nitrogenase enzyme [1][3].
This association is initiated by the secretion of root substances, called flavonoids, inducing the expression of rhizobial nodD genes, which control the transcription of additional nodulation genes, e.g., nod, nol, and noe. Eventually, serial gene clusters contribute to N2 fixation as shown in Figure 1, starting with nifHDK, controlling the nitrogenase, nifA, fixA, fixLJ, and fixK as transcriptional regulators, and various other genes involved in nitrogen fixation [2].
Figure 1. Schematic illustration of the symbiotic N2 fixing process in legumes, resulting from the interaction with rhizobia [1].
Rhizobium–legume association can also be beneficial for non-legumes, such as cereals grown in mixed intercropping, or also crops rotated with symbiotic legumes through a direct transfer of N2 fixed by rhizobia [6]. Antoun et al. [7] experimentally inoculated radish with Bradyrhizobium japonicum, generating a 15% increase in the plant dry matter. Furthermore, Vargas et al. [8] studied the nitrogen-fixing activity through the acetylene reduction assay in wild rice (Oryza breviligulata) inoculated with Bradyrhizobia.

1.2. Phosphate Solubilization

After nitrogen, phosphorus is considered as the second limiting macronutrient for plant growth and development [9]. It has the main role in plant’s molecular biology, and it does not just enter in the formation of macromolecules, such as DNA, RNA, ATP, but also in cell division, the formation of new tissue, and energy transfers by plants [10].
Despite its abundant presence in soils, phosphorus accessibility is relatively limited due to the fact that the majority of phosphorus in soils exists in insoluble forms (inorganic bound, fixed or labile, or organic bound) [11].
It has been found by Vargas et al. [8] that only less than 5% of soil phosphorus is available for uptake by plants [8]. The only two chemical forms of (P) that can be absorbed by plants are monobasic (HPO4−) and dibasic (HPO42−) ions [12].
One of the most important PGPR traits is their ability to convert phosphates from insoluble to soluble forms. Microbes that are considered as the most efficient phosphate solubilizers are rhizobia, including R. leguminosarum, R. meliloti, M. mediterraneum, Bradyrhizobium sp., and B. japonicum [2], along with Bacillus, Pseudomonas, and some fungi, such as Aspergillus and Penicillium [13].
Numerous mechanisms of action are involved in the P solubilization activity of PGPR (Figure 2), and these depend on the type of P available on soil, regarding whether it is organic or inorganic P.
Agriculture 13 01279 g002 550
Figure 2. Mechanism of phosphate solubilization by microorganisms.
  • Inorganic P solubilization mechanisms
    • Organic Acid Production
      The production of organic acid is considered as the initial mechanism to be used in order to solubilize inorganic phosphorus [14]. This phenomenon depends mostly on the soil’s pH.
      Phosphate Solubilizing Microbes (PSM) produce, during their growth, some organic acids that have the potential to decrease the soil’s pH. This acidification enables the solubilization of rock phosphate [14].
      It has been established that the acids produced by PSM are mainly glycolic (monocarbocyclic hydroxy acids), 2-keto gluconic (monocarboxylic), acetic acids, malic (dicarboxylic hydroxy acids), oxalic acid, citric acid, and succinic acid (dicarboxylic acid). However, in the midst of all these acids, gluconic acid has been found to be the lead acid to be used in the P solubilization mechanism [14][15].
    • Inorganic Acid Production
      Inorganic acids do not appear to be as effective as organic acids for the solubilization of P. Nitrifying and sulfur-oxidizing bacteria generate inorganic acids during the oxidation of nitrogenous or inorganic sulfur compounds. These inorganic acids then interact with insoluble phosphate compounds, transforming them into soluble variants [14].
    • Chelation
      Fulvic, humic, and 2-keto gluconic acids are some known acids that play the role of chelators of substances, such as aluminum, calcium, and iron cations, which facilitate the inorganic phosphorus solubilization. These acids are liberated all along the processes of plant debris degradation by microorganisms [14].
      Besides the previously mentioned inorganic P solubilization mechanisms, there are other mechanisms, such as mineral P solubilization through proton (H+) extrusion. This process effectively lowers the pH of the environment without requiring the release of acids [13]. Furthermore, microorganisms that produce exopolysaccharides have the ability to form complexes with metals, resulting in the solubilization of metal phosphates [14].
  • Organic P Solubilization Mechanisms
Organic P immobilization can be achieved by multiple microbial enzymes, such as phytase, phosphohydrolase, and phosphonatase. These enzymes provoke the lysis of many organic O compounds present freely in soil. Hence, the release of phosphate ions that are ready for the assimilation occurs [14].

1.3. Phytohormones Production/Regulation (Plant Growth Regulators)

Plant hormones, also known as phytohormones, are natural organic compounds produced by plants, and they play the role of chemical messengers that influence plant growth and its interaction with the environment.
It has been proved by many studies that phytohormone production by several bacteria is one of the most interesting and important mechanisms of plant growth promotion by bacteria [16][17][18].
There are five main groups of hormones: auxins, gibberellins, cytokinins, ethylene, and abscisic acid [19].
  • Auxins
Auxins are powerful molecules that are consistently synthesized by plants [4]. They are known as key regulators of cell division stimulation and elongation [8], as well as abiotic stress control [4].
It is well known that PGPR play major role in the enhancement of the plant physiology, differentiation, expansion, and cell division by their ability to produce auxins and, particularly, Indole Acetic Acid (IAA) [4]. Over 80% of rhizosphere bacteria, such as Azospirillum, Pseudomonas, Klebsiella, Rhizobium, Mesorhizobium, Bradyrhizobium, Paenibacillus, and Bacillus, actively produce and release auxins [8][20].
IAA produced by PGPR is a signaling molecule included in the bacteria’s physiology, with a main role in direct plant growth promotion [10], which is performed by controlling the root initiation and morphogenesis, cell elongation and differentiation, flowering, apical dominance, and many more plant development processes [21].
The IAA produced by rhizobacteria has the biggest effect on the roots. It was observed that the post-inoculation by PGPR improved the plant’s nutrition and soil exchanges [22]. The amount of IAA produced by rhizobia depends on the plant flavonoids and phenolic acids released in the rhizosphere, such as protocatechuic acid, 4-hydroxybenzaldehyde, and p-coumaric acid [23].
Rhizobia producing IAA might include several pathways of IAA biosynthesis [22]. Therefore, the bacterial effect on the plant is mainly influenced according to the pathway chosen [24]. It is known that the main precursor for IAA production is tryptophan. Tryptophan-dependent pathways are identified as five different routes, such as indo-3-pyruvate (IPyA), tryptophan side-chain oxidase (TSO), indole-3-acetamide (IAM), which is related to pathogenic bacteria, tryptamine (TAM), and indole-3-acetonitrile (IAN) [13].
Tryptophan-independent pathways are still less known. However, it has been reported that Azospirillum brasilense is capable of producing 10% of IAA using tryptophan-dependent pathways, while 90% of IAA is produced without including the tryptophan as precursor [22]. Additionally, in spite of the fact that the tryptophan production was blocked, maize mutants showed a high level of IAA produced, which confirmed the tryptophan-independent path [8].
The production of IAA by rhizobia is regulated by specific genes. The biosynthesis of IAA in rhizobia primarily involves the indole-3-pyruvate pathway (IPyA), which has been identified in Bradyrhizobium, Rhizobium, and Azospirillum [18][25].
The genes encoding for the two enzymes are, respectively, iaaM and iaaH, and they were identified in Rhizobium sp. and Bradyrhizobium sp. [18].
  • Cytokinins
Cytokinins stimulate cell division and enlargement, shoot and root elongation, root hair formation, leaf expansion, and chlorophyll accumulation during plant development [26]. Moreover, recent studies have found that, in addition to the plant growth promotion and nutrient optimization by cytokinins, they can also be involved in plant defense responses and in delaying leaf senescence [27].
Cytokinins are purine derivatives, and the most abundant CKs are adenine-type, with a replacement in the N6 position, either with an isoprenoid or with an aromatic side chain [22]. Some of the well-known CKs are trans-zeatin (6-(4-hydroxy-3-methyl-trans-2-butenylamino) purine), i6Ade (6-(3-methyl-2-butenylamino) purine), dihydrozeatin (6-(4-hydroxy-3-methyl-butylamino) purine), and cis-zeatin (6-(4-hydroxy3-methyl-cis-2-butenylamino) purine) [28].
Compared to the auxins, cytokinins are usually present in small amounts, and their production by PGPR was less identified due to the limitations of their quantification methods [29].
In spite of their identification restrictions, it has been found that CKs can be released by almost 90% of the rhizospheric microorganisms cultured in vitro [2]. When tested in-vitro, several plants associated microorganisms, e.g., Rhizobium sp., Azotobacter sp., Pantoea agglomerans, Rhodospirillum rubrum, Pseudomonas fluorescens, Bacillus subtilis, and Paenibacillus polymyxa, showed the production of cytokinin, together with some other growth promoting substances [24].
  • Gibberellins
Gibberellins encompass a vast category of phytohormones, consisting of 136 distinct molecules. Among these, one hundred and twenty-eight are derived from plants, seven are derived from fungi, while a mere four gibberellins (GA1, GA3, GA4, GA20) have been attributed to bacterial sources [22].
Just as with the auxins and cytokinins, gibberellins are a group of phytohormones that is associated with many plant mechanisms, namely, seed germination, flowering, seed dormancy regulation, ripening of fruit, root growth promotion, and abundance of root hair. However, to date, there is no known function for gibberellins in fungi and bacteria [4].
Gibberellins are composed of a complex tetracarbocyclic diterpenes molecules that consist of a skeleton of 19–20 carbon atoms as a common structure [22].
The exact mechanism of gibberellic acid (GA) synthesis within nodules is complex and can vary, depending on the specific host plant and associated symbiotic microorganisms. In general, the synthesis of GA within nodules involves a series of enzymatic reactions (Figure 3).
Agriculture 13 01279 g003 550
Figure 3. GA synthesis mechanism in nodules of Mesorhizobium loti through an enzymatic synthesis pathway [30].
  • Abscisic acid
Abscisic acid is a terpene hormone class that consists of three isoprene units, also called sesquiterpenes. Abscisic acid acts especially as a plant growth inhibitor. For instance, ABA plays an essential role in senescence processes, inducing seed dormancy, stomatal closure, and stimulating proteins storage inside the seeds during dormancy [2]. The importance of ABA in the rhizosphere appeared under abiotic stress, such as drought stress and freezing temperatures. Its production is accentuated under these conditions in order to regulate plant capacity to survive in harsh environment [4].
The production of abscisic acid is carried out in several parts of the plant, primarily in the leaves, stems, seeds and fruits, as well as partially in the chloroplast [4]. However, its production seems to be different from one plant organ to another and during certain specific phases (ABA).
Abscisic acid has been detected using TLC or radio-immunoassay as a product of many PGPRs, mainly Rhizobium sp., B. japonicum, Azospirillum sp., Achromobacter xylosoxidans, Bacillus pumilus, and Lysinibacillus halotolerans [31][32].
  • Ethylene
Just as with all other plant regulators, ethylene is also considered as an essential phytohormone for plant growth and development. Out of all phytohormones, ethylene is the only one in the gaseous state [11].
At low concentrations, ethylene plays a role in plant growth by regulating many physiological responses in plant, including seed germination stimulation, adventitious roots and root hair promotion, as well as breaking seed dormancy [4]. However, high ethylene concentrations provoke the inhibition of the root elongation process, premature senescence, and abscission. Moreover, the nodules’ formation process in leguminous plants, along with symbiotic N2 fixation, are inhibited [21].
Ethylene could be produced by many bacterial species along with the aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate (ACC) deaminase, which is the direct precursor of ethylene biosynthesis in plants, and consequently, plant growth promoting rhizobacteria play a key role in adjusting/lowering the levels of ethylene in plants [29].

1.4. Siderophores Production

Iron is a crucial micronutrient for all life forms and also is abundant in the lithosphere, being the fourth most common element in earth crust by weight [4]. In plants, iron is indispensable for chlorophyll synthesis and biosynthesis, it is involved in DNA synthesis, and it has a key role in electron transport, redox reaction, detoxification of oxygen radicals, and many more biochemical processes [24].
Despite its huge abundance, iron is not accessible to plants due to its presence under insoluble forms of hydroxides [Fe(OH)3] and oxyhydroxides [FeO(OH)] [33], while the plant root tends to absorb iron under its reduced form (ferrous Fe2+) [11].
Siderophores released by several rhizobacteria play key roles in overcoming this situation and increase the iron accessibility for plants. Siderophores are of low molecular weight (400–1000 Da), water soluble, and iron chelating molecules with high affinity for the ferric form Fe3⁺ (Kd = 10−20–10−50) [27]. These siderophores have a high affinity, which facilitates the sequestration and transportation of iron into the cells and, thus, enhances plant growth [2]. Microbial siderophores, which are regulated by a specific sid gene [13], belong mainly to four classes, viz. carboxylates, hydroxamates, phenol catecholates, and pyoverdines, depending on their structure, iron correlating functional groups, and types of ligands [24]. Moreover, there are some siderophores called mixed siderophores, which result from a combination of structures of two main classes, as depicted in Figure 4 [20].
Agriculture 13 01279 g004 550
Figure 4. Classification of siderophores based on their chemical structures. The metal-binding subunits are circled in red. Reprinted with permission from Kircheva, Nikoleta, and Todor Dudev. “Gallium as an antibacterial agent: a DFT/SMD study of the Ga3+/Fe3+ competition for binding bacterial siderophores”. Inorganic Chemistry 59.9 (2020): 6242–6254. Copyright 2023 American Chemical Society [34].
Rhizobial siderophores have been considered mainly as chelators that enhance iron nutrition and plant growth. Siderophore-producing bacteria are identified as efficient biocontrol agents (BCAs), and they have been involved indirectly in the inhibition of pathogen development through their Fe3⁺ ion-binding ability, which limits iron availability to plant pathogens and fungi that are not able to assimilate the iron–siderophore complex, thus preventing their growth [22][35].
Moreover, siderophores can also improve plant growth in contaminated soils. In the iron uptake process, several heavy metals, such as aluminum, cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc, as well as with radionuclides, including uranium, can interfere and cause a toxic effect [36]. Siderophores have binding ability and form a complex siderophore–metal, which increases the concentration of soluble metal. Consequently, bacterial siderophores help to alleviate the stresses imposed on plants by heavy metal-contaminated soils [24].
Roy and Chakrabartty [37] studied the production of siderophores by Rhizobium sp. under high concentration of Al3+. Apart from enhancing iron availability, siderophores produced by rhizobia also have the capability to form complexes with Al3+, thereby mitigating its toxicity. Rogers et al. [38] observed analogous findings that demonstrated the efficacy of vicibactin, a hydroxamate siderophore, produced by R. leguminosarum bv. viciae, in alleviating aluminum toxicity. The complex has the potential to be transported into the bacterial cytoplasm. Nevertheless, it is unlikely to cause toxicity within the intracellular environment, as aluminum cannot be released from the complex through reduction. Furthermore, the complex accumulates as a non-toxic molecule, and, even if it is released, Al3+ will precipitate as Al(OH)3 at the slightly alkaline pH of the cytoplasm [38][39].

2. Indirect Mechanism

2.1. Antibiotics Synthesis

PGPRs play a vital role in plant protection. One of the fundamental methods of PGPR as biocontrol agents is the production of antibiotics. Antibiotics are antagonistic compounds produced by microorganisms against phytopathogens [40].
Antibiotics synthetized by PGPR comprise a diverse group of low-molecular-weight organic substances that negatively impact the growth or metabolic activities of other microorganisms. They are also considered to have antiviral, cytotoxic, insecticidal, anthelmintic, and phytotoxic effects and are produced due to the interaction between microorganisms in order to survive under competition or predation [35].
For biological control, the widely known antibiotics are 2,4 diacetylphologlucinol (DAPG), phenazine, pyoluteorin, pyrrolnitrin, tropolone, tensin, oomycin A, cyclic lipopeptides (all of which are diffusible), and hydrogen cyanide (HCN, which is volatile) [40].
Numerous microorganisms are able to produce different extracellular metabolites with inhibitory actions even at low concentrations, in particular, PGPR (Bacillus sp.) participate in the suppression of phytopathogenic microorganisms by producing several antibiotics, such as mycosubtilin, bacillomycin D surfactin, and fengycin, while antibiotics produced by fluorescent Pseudomonas include pyoluteorin, phenazines, viscosin, and massetolide A [41].
Many studies have proved the role of antibiotics produced by rhizobia in phytopathogen control. R. leguminosarun bv. trifolii T24 has been reported to release the peptide antibiotic trifolitoxin (TFX) [42]. In another study, Chakraborty and Purkayastha [43] showed the effective suppression of M. phaseolina infecting soybean by the direct action of antibiotic rhizobitoxine produced by Bradyrhizobium japonicum. Rhizobium sp. strains ORN 24 and ORN 83 were considered as bacteriocin producers, with antagonistic activities against Pseudomonas savastanoi, which is responsible for olive knot disease [8]. Moreover, the growth and yield of Brassica campestris were observed to be enhanced by the presence of Mesorhizobium loti MP6, a bacterial strain isolated from the root nodules of Mimosa pudica. Moreover, Mesorhizobium loti MP6 isolate demonstrated significant antagonistic properties against Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, a pathogen known for inducing white rot in Brassica campestris. Importantly, a prolonged incubation period resulted in a remarkable 75% inhibition of S. sclerotiorum growth.
Antibiotic production is closely related to the metabolic status of the cell, which is also linked to nutrient availability, as well as environmental stimuli, including minerals, pH, temperature, and trace elements, particularly zinc levels (Zn), which may influence the genetic stability of bacteria, which can impact their capacity to synthetize secondary metabolites [11]. The mechanism of action of bacterial antibiotics is to cause membrane damages by inhibiting the synthesis of pathogen cell walls, which consequently influence the cell membrane structures [24]. For instance, Rhizobium spp., Azospirillum spp., Klebsiella pneumoniae, Yersinia spp., and Frankia spp. were found to possess a pectinolytic ability [4].
In addition to the use of microbial antagonists against phytopathogens in agricultural crops as an alternative to chemical pesticides [22], certain antibiotics that are synthesized by PGPR are now being investigated for their potential applications in experimental pharmaceuticals. This emerging area of research holds promise in discovering new compounds to combat the issues arising from multidrug-resistant pathogenic bacteria [11].

2.2. Induction of Systemic Resistance

Including their plant growth promoting ability, PGPR are also capable of enhancing the defensive system in their host plant against a wide range of phytopathogens—for instance, fungi, pathogenic bacteria, viruses, or, also, in some cases, insects and nematodes, naturally existing in soil [11][35].
Plant-induced resistance is classified into two major phenomena, Systemic Acquired Resistance (SAR) and Induced Systemic Resistance (ISR), which can be distinguished based on the nature of the stimulant, as well as the regulatory mechanism implicated [24].
  • Systemic Acquired Resistance (SAR)
Systemic Acquired Resistance (SAR) is a defense mechanism that can be induced by the presence of a broad range of either pathogenic or non-pathogenic microorganisms or even chemicals accumulated in the rhizosphere, including salicylic acid (SA), 2,6-dichloro-isonicotinic acid (INA), and S-methyl ester (BTH) [10]. Various genes encoding for pathogenic-related proteins (chitinase and glucanase) are involved in salicylic acid signal transduction [24].
  • Induced Systemic Resistance (ISR)
Instead of requiring the pathogenic-related proteins or salicylic acid accumulation, ISR depends on jasmonic acid (JA) and ethylene signaling pathways [24]. Similar to SAR, the ISR defense mechanism is also induced against several types of elicitors. However, it does not generate noticeable symptoms on the PGPR host plant [11].
Many studies have reported the ability to induce systemic resistance in plants by rhizobial species, such as R. etli, R. leguminosarum bv. phaseoli, and R. leguminosarum bv. trifolii [2]. Díaz-Valle et al. [44] studied the inoculation of common bean with Rhizobium etli which as a result stimulated the plant resistance to infection by Pseudomonas syringae pv. phaseolicola through the activation of defense related genes.
Elbadry et al. [45] inoculated Faba bean (Vicia faba L.) with Pseudomonas fluorescens FB11 and Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. viceae FBG05 to study their systemic resistance induction to bean yellow mosaic potyvirus (BYMV). A significant drop in virus concentration, as well as a remarkable decrease in the Percent Disease Incident (PDI), were proved in the inoculated plants. The association of PGPR strains with Rhizobium evaluated by Dutta et al. [46] showed an optimistic result. When inoculated with a mixture of PGPR B. cereus or P. aeruginosa and Rhizobium, pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) showed a high resistance level when exposed to the pathogenic Fusarium udum compared to the individual elicitor and the non-inoculated control.

2.3. Production of Cell Wall-Degrading Enzymes

Among the biocontrol mechanisms most used against soil borne pathogens, there is the production of cell wall-degrading enzymes [22]. The release of lytic enzymes, such as β-1,3-glucanase, proteases, chitinases, lipase, or cellulase, result in the suppression of pathogens’ growth and activities by degrading their cell wall [33].
A variety of PGPR are known for their ability to produce cell wall-degrading enzymes. For instance, Paenibacillus spp. and Streptomyces spp. strains were able to inhibit the development of Fusarium oxysporum through the production of β-1,3-glucanase [4]. Moreover, it is known that the pectinolytic activity is generally related to phytopathogenic bacteria. However, some non-pathogenic Rhizobium species were also found to degrade pectin [6]. Furthermore, Kumar et al. [47] reported that Sinorhizobium fredii KCC5 and Pseudomonas fluorescens LPK2 were able to produce β-1,3-glucanase and chitinase, which caused the growth inhibition of Fusarium udum.

2.4. Production of Hydrogen Cyanide (HCN)

Hydrogen cyanide is a secondary metabolite produced by many microorganisms, and it is a volatile compound that is known for its antimicrobial role and disease inhibition [48]. In association with glycine (main precursor of HCN), HCN synthetase enzyme forms HCN. The latter most likely acts as an inhibitor of electron transport, which eventually causes the suppression of the energy supply chain and consequently affects microorganisms’ growth [49].
Several bacterial genera have shown cyanogenesis ability (cyanide production), for instance, Rhizobium, Bacillus, Alcaligenes, Pseudomonas, and Aeromonas [50]. However, fluorescent Pseudomonas is preponderantly identified as an HCN producer [51].

References

  1. Lindström, K.; Mousavi, S.A. Effectiveness of nitrogen fixation in rhizobia. Microb. Biotechnol. 2020, 13, 1314–1335.
  2. Gopalakrishnan, S.; Sathya, A.; Vijayabharathi, R.; Varshney, R.K.; Gowda, C.L.; Krishnamurthy, L. Plant growth promoting rhizobia: Challenges and opportunities. 3 Biotech 2015, 5, 355–377.
  3. Laslo, É.; Mara, G. Is PGPR an Alternative for NPK Fertilizers in Sustainable Agriculture? In Microbial Interventions in Agriculture and Environment; Singh, D.P., Gupta, V.K., Prabha, R., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2019; pp. 51–62.
  4. Oleńska, E.; Małek, W.; Wójcik, M.; Swiecicka, I.; Thijs, S.; Vangronsveld, J. Beneficial features of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria for improving plant growth and health in challenging conditions: A methodical review. Sci. Total. Environ. 2020, 743, 140682.
  5. Aroca, R.; Ruiz-Lozano, J. Induction of Plant Tolerance to Semi-arid Environments by Beneficial Soil Microorganisms—A Review. In Climate Change, Intercropping, Pest Control and Beneficial Microorganisms; Lichtfouse, E., Ed.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2009; pp. 121–135.
  6. 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.
  7. Antoun, H.; Beauchamp, C.J.; Goussard, N.; Chabot, R.; Lalande, R. Potential of Rhizobium and Bradyrhizobium species as plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on non-legumes: Effect on radishes (Raphanus sativus L.). In Molecular Microbial Ecology of the Soil; Hardarson, G., Broughton, W.J., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1998; pp. 57–67.
  8. Vargas, L.K.; Volpiano, C.G.; Lisboa, B.B.; Giongo, A.; Beneduzi, A.; Passaglia, L.M.P. Potential of Rhizobia as Plant Growth-Promoting Rhizobacteria. In Microbes for Legume Improvement; Zaidi, A., Khan, M.S., Musarrat, J., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Germany, 2017; pp. 153–174.
  9. Tahir, M.; Sarwar, M.A. Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR): A Budding Complement of Synthetic Fertilizers for Improving Crop Production. Group 2013, 19, 79–87.
  10. Sharma, D.; Gahtyari, N.C.; Chhabra, R.; Kumar, D. Role of Microbes in Improving Plant Growth and Soil Health for Sustainable Agriculture. In Advances in Plant Microbiome and Sustainable Agriculture; Yadav, A.N., Rastegari, A.A., Yadav, N., Kour, D., Eds.; Microorganisms for Sustainability; Springer: Singapore, 2020; Volume 19, pp. 207–256.
  11. Tailor, A.J.; Joshi, B.H. Harnessing Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria Beyond Nature: A Review. J. Plant Nutr. 2014, 37, 1534–1571.
  12. Vessey, J.K. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria as biofertilizers. Plant Soil 2023, 255, 571–586.
  13. Swarnalakshmi, K.; Yadav, V.; Tyagi, D.; Dhar, D.W.; Kannepalli, A.; Kumar, S. Significance of Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria in Grain Legumes: Growth Promotion and Crop Production. Plants 2020, 9, 1596.
  14. Prabhu, N.; Borkar, S.; Garg, S. Phosphate solubilization by microorganisms. In Advances in Biological Science Research; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 161–176.
  15. Wang, Q.; Liu, J.; Zhu, H. Genetic and Molecular Mechanisms Underlying Symbiotic Specificity in Legume-Rhizobium Interactions. Front. Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 313.
  16. Sijilmassi, B.; Filali-Maltouf, A.; Fahde, S.; Ennahli, Y.; Boughribil, S.; Kumar, S.; Amri, A. In-Vitro Plant Growth Promotion of Rhizobium Strains Isolated from Lentil Root Nodules under Abiotic Stresses. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1006.
  17. Defez, R.; Andreozzi, A.; Romano, S.; Pocsfalvi, G.; Fiume, I.; Esposito, R.; Angelini, C.; Bianco, C. Bacterial IAA-Delivery into Medicago Root Nodules Triggers a Balanced Stimulation of C and N Metabolism Leading to a Biomass Increase. Microorganisms 2019, 7, 403.
  18. Ghosh, S.; Ghosh, P.; Maiti, T.K. Production and Metabolism of Indole Acetic Acid (IAA) by Root Nodule Bacteria (Rhizobium): A Review. Appl. Microbiol. 2011, 5, 523–540.
  19. Silini, A.R.; Parolini, O.; Huppertz, B.; Lang, I. Soluble Factors of Amnion-Derived Cells in Treatment of Inflammatory and Fibrotic Pathologies. Curr. Stem Cell Res. Ther. 2013, 8, 6–14.
  20. Malik, J.A. (Ed.) Handbook of Research on Microbial Remediation and Microbial Biotechnology for Sustainable Soil. In Advances in Environmental Engineering and Green Technologies; IGI Global: Pennsylvania, PA, USA, 2021.
  21. Hayat, R.; Ahmed, I.; Sheirdil, R.A. An Overview of Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR) for Sustainable Agriculture. In Crop Production for Agricultural Improvement; Ashraf, M., Öztürk, M., Ahmad, M.S.A., Aksoy, A., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2012; pp. 557–579.
  22. Goswami, D.; Thakker, J.N.; Dhandhukia, P.C. Portraying mechanics of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR): A review. Cogent Food Agric. 2016, 2, 1127500.
  23. Jaiswal, S.K.; Mohammed, M.; Ibny, F.Y.I.; Dakora, F.D. Rhizobia as a Source of Plant Growth-Promoting Molecules: Potential Applications and Possible Operational Mechanisms. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2021, 4, 619676.
  24. Jeyanthi, V.; Kanimozhi, S. Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR)-Prospective and Mechanisms: A Review. J. Pure Appl. Microbiol. 2018, 12, 733–749.
  25. Spaepen, S.; Vanderleyden, J.; Remans, R. Indole-3-acetic acid in microbial and microorganism-plant signaling. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 2007, 31, 425–448.
  26. Vejan, P.; Abdullah, R.; Khadiran, T.; Ismail, S.; Nasrulhaq Boyce, A. Role of Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria in Agricultural Sustainability—A Review. Molecules 2016, 21, 573.
  27. Gray, E.J.; Smith, D.L. Intracellular and extracellular PGPR: Commonalities and distinctions in the plant–bacterium signaling processes. Soil. Biol. Biochem. 2005, 37, 395–412.
  28. Pahari, A.; Pradhan, A.; Nayak, S.; Mishra, B. Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (Pgpr): Prospects and Application. In Frontiers in Soil and Environmental Microbiology, 1st ed.; Nayak, S.K., Mishra, B.B., Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2020; Volume 56, pp. 47–56.
  29. Medeot, D.B.; Paulucci, N.S.; Albornoz, A.I.; Fumero, M.V.; Bueno, M.A.; Garcia, M.B.; Woelke, M.R.; Okon, Y.; Dardanelli, M.S. Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria Improving the Legume–Rhizobia Symbiosis. In Microbes for Legume Improvement; Khan, M.S., Musarrat, J., Zaidi, A., Eds.; Springer: Vienna, Austria, 2010; pp. 473–494.
  30. Tatsukami, Y.; Ueda, M. Rhizobial gibberellin negatively regulates host nodule number. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 27998.
  31. Dobbelaere, S.; Vanderleyden, J.; Okon, Y. Plant Growth-Promoting Effects of Diazotrophs in the Rhizosphere. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 2003, 22, 107–149.
  32. Boiero, L.; Perrig, D.; Masciarelli, O.; Penna, C.; Cassán, F.; Luna, V. Phytohormone production by three strains of Bradyrhizobium japonicum and possible physiological and technological implications. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2007, 74, 874–880.
  33. Wani, S.P.; Gopalakrishnan, S. Plant Growth-Promoting Microbes for Sustainable Agriculture. In Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR): Prospects for Sustainable Agriculture; Sayyed, R.Z., Reddy, M.S., Antonius, S., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2019; pp. 19–45.
  34. Kircheva, N.; Dudev, T. Gallium as an Antibacterial Agent: A DFT/SMD Study of the Ga3+/Fe3+ Competition for Binding Bacterial Siderophores. Inorg. Chem. 2020, 59, 6242–6254.
  35. Hamid, B.; Zaman, M.; Farooq, S.; Fatima, S.; Sayyed, R.Z.; Baba, Z.A.; Sheikh, T.A.; Reddy, M.S.; El Enshasy, H.; Gafur, A.; et al. Bacterial Plant Biostimulants: A Sustainable Way towards Improving Growth, Productivity, and Health of Crops. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2856.
  36. Albelda-Berenguer, M.; Monachon, M.; Joseph, E. Siderophores: From Natural Roles to Potential Applications. In Advances in Applied Microbiology; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 193–225.
  37. Roy, N.; Chakrabartty, P.K. Effect of Aluminum on the Production of Siderophore by Rhizobium sp. (Cicer arietinum). Curr. Microbiol. 2000, 41, 5–10.
  38. Rogers, N.J.; Carson, K.C.; Glenn, A.R.; Dilworth, M.J.; Poole, R.K. Alleviation of aluminum toxicity to Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. viciae by the hydroxamate siderophore vicibactin. Biometals 2001, 14, 59–66.
  39. O'Hara, G.W.; Goss, T.J.; Dilworth, M.J.; Glenn, A.R. Maintenance of Intracellular pH and Acid Tolerance in Rhizobium meliloti. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1989, 55, 1870–1876.
  40. Karthika, S.; Varghese, S.; Jisha, M.S. Exploring the efficacy of antagonistic rhizobacteria as native biocontrol agents against tomato plant diseases. 3 Biotech 2020, 10, 320.
  41. Kenawy, A.; Dailin, D.J.; Abo-Zaid, G.A.; Malek, R.A.; Ambehabati, K.K.; Zakaria, K.H.N.; Sayyed, R.Z.; El Enshasy, H.A. Biosynthesis of Antibiotics by PGPR and Their Roles in Biocontrol of Plant Diseases. In Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria for Sustainable Stress Management; Sayyed, R.Z., Ed.; Microorganisms for Sustainability; Springer: Singapore, 2019; Volume 13, pp. 1–35.
  42. Breil, B.; Borneman, J.; Triplett, E.W. A newly discovered gene, tfuA, involved in the production of the ribosomally synthesized peptide antibiotic trifolitoxin. J. Bacteriol. 1996, 178, 4150–4156.
  43. Chakraborty, U.; Purkayastha, R.P. Role of rhizobitoxine in protecting soybean roots from Macrophomina phaseolina infection. Can. J. Microbiol. 1984, 30, 285–289.
  44. Díaz-Valle, A.; López-Calleja, A.C.; Alvarez-Venegas, R. Enhancement of Pathogen Resistance in Common Bean Plants by Inoculation with Rhizobium etli. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 1317.
  45. Elbadry, M.; Taha, R.M.; Eldougdoug, K.A.; Gamal-Eldin, H. Induction of systemic resistance in faba bean (Vicia faba L.) to bean yellow mosaic potyvirus (BYMV) via seed bacterization with plant growth promoting rhizobacteria. J. Plant Dis. Prot. 2006, 113, 247–251.
  46. Dutta, S.; Mishra, A.; Kumar, B.D. Induction of systemic resistance against fusarial wilt in pigeon pea through interaction of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria and rhizobia. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2008, 40, 452–461.
  47. Kumar, H.; Bajpai, V.K.; Dubey, R.; Maheshwari, D.; Kang, S.C. Wilt disease management and enhancement of growth and yield of Cajanus cajan (L) var. Manak by bacterial combinations amended with chemical fertilizer. Crop. Prot. 2010, 29, 591–598.
  48. Deshwal, V.K.; Dubey, R.C.; Maheshwari, D.K. Isolation of plant growth-promoting strains of Bradyrhizobium (Arachis) sp. with biocontrol potential against Macrophomina phaseolina causing charcoal rot of peanut. Curr. Sci. 2023, 84, 3.
  49. Abd El-Rahman, A.F.; Shaheen, H.A.; Abd El-Aziz, R.M.; Ibrahim, D.S.S. Influence of hydrogen cyanide-producing rhizobacteria in controlling the crown gall and root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne incognita. Egypt. J. Biol. Pest Control 2019, 29, 41.
  50. Jan, B.; Sajad, S.; Reshi, Z.A.; Mohiddin, F.A. Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR): Eco-Friendly Approach for Sustainable Agriculture. In Plant-Microbe Dynamics: Recent Advances for Sustainable Agriculture, 1st ed.; Pirzadah, T.B., Malik, B., Hakeem, K.R., Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2021; pp. 185–200.
  51. Mishra, J.; Arora, N.K. Secondary metabolites of fluorescent pseudomonads in biocontrol of phytopathogens for sustainable agriculture. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2018, 125, 35–45.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Biotechnology & Applied Microbiology
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Sara Fahde
,
Said Boughribil
,
Badreddine Sijilmassi
,
Ahmed Amri
View Times: 387
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 21 Aug 2023
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    ScholarVision Creations
    Feedback