Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
HAPPY NEW YEAR
WELCOMWELCOMEE
seminar - iseminar - i
Antagonistic and Synergistic Antagonistic and Synergistic Interaction in Microbial Interaction in Microbial
Consortium and their Influence on Consortium and their Influence on Plant GrowthPlant Growth
Archana, D .S. PAK 8014
IntroductionIntroduction
Microbial communities showed varied Microbial communities showed varied forms of interaction ranges from synergistic and forms of interaction ranges from synergistic and mutualistic to antagonistic and parasitic. mutualistic to antagonistic and parasitic.
Microbial interaction depends on bMicrobial interaction depends on biotic and iotic and abiotic components of the environmenabiotic components of the environment helps in t helps in transformation, mobilization and solubilization transformation, mobilization and solubilization of essential plant nutrients. of essential plant nutrients.
Types of interactions in Types of interactions in rhizosphererhizosphere
1. Interaction between plant roots and microorganisms
2. Interaction between microorganisms
55
Ecological Associations Among Ecological Associations Among MicroorganismsMicroorganisms
Symbiotic – organisms live in close nutritional relationships; required by one or both members Mutualism – obligatory, dependent; both members
benefit Commensalism – commensal member benefits, other
member not harmed Parasitism – parasite is dependent and benefits; host
is harmed
Non-symbioticNon-symbiotic – – organisms are free-living; organisms are free-living; relationships not required for survivalrelationships not required for survival SynergismSynergism – members cooperate and share – members cooperate and share
nutrientsnutrients AntagonismAntagonism – – some member are inhibited or some member are inhibited or
destroyed by othersdestroyed by others
Criteria to be considered while designing Microbial consortium
“Interactions among the microorganisms”
“Negative interaction”
Antibiosis
Competition
Amensalism
Predation
Parasitism
“Positive interaction”
Neutralism
Mutualism
Synergism
Symbiosis
Protocooperation
Commensalisms
Effect of Interaction
Type of InteractionsType of InteractionsPopulation/Population/Species ASpecies A
Population/Population/Species BSpecies B
NeutralismNeutralism 00 00
CommensalismCommensalism 00 ++
MutualismMutualism ++ ++
AmensalismAmensalism 0 0 --
Predation, parasitismPredation, parasitism ++ --
CompetitionCompetition -- --
INTERACTION EFFECTINTERACTION EFFECT
Antagonistic interactionsAntagonistic interactions
““Any inhibitory effect of an organism created by Any inhibitory effect of an organism created by any means to the other organism (S) is any means to the other organism (S) is
antagonistic interaction”antagonistic interaction”
Used in biological control of plant pathogens Antagonist are not pathogen specific Inhibits wide range of microorganisms True parasitic relationship with microbial host Mechanisms are not mutually exclusive
Mechanisms of Mechanisms of AntagonismAntagonism
Amensalism : Inhibition or destruction of one organism by a metabolite produced by another organism.
Eg. Antibiotics, volatile compounds, enzymes etc.Eg. Antibiotics, volatile compounds, enzymes etc.
Antagonistic activity of T.viride on Bortytis cinerea, Cladosporium sp (Bai et al, 2008)
Microorganisms produce different Microorganisms produce different type Antibioticstype Antibiotics
MicroorganismsMicroorganisms AntibioticsAntibiotics Target pathogenTarget pathogen DiseaseDisease
PseudomonasPseudomonas
fluorescens fluorescens F113F113
2, 4-2, 4-diacetylphloroglucinodiacetylphloroglucinoll
Pythium spp.Pythium spp. Damping offDamping off
AgrobacteriumAgrobacterium
radiobacterradiobacter
Agrocin 84Agrocin 84 AgrobacteriumAgrobacterium
tumefacienstumefaciens
Crown gallCrown gall
Trichoderma Trichoderma virensvirens
GliotoxinGliotoxin Rhizoctonia solaniRhizoctonia solani Root rotsRoot rots
Bacillus subtilisBacillus subtilis Bacillomycin DBacillomycin D Aspergillus flavusAspergillus flavus AflatoxinAflatoxin
contaminationcontamination
BurkholderiaBurkholderia
cepaciacepacia
Pyrrolnitrin,pseudanePyrrolnitrin,pseudane R. solani R. solani andand
Pyricularia oryzaePyricularia oryzae
Damping offDamping off
and rice blastand rice blast
P. fluorescensP. fluorescens
2-79 and 30-842-79 and 30-84
PhenazinesPhenazines GaeumannomycsGaeumannomycs
graminis graminis var. var. triticitritici
Take-allTake-all
Competition:Competition: two or more organisms trying to two or more organisms trying to utilize the same nutrients or occupy the same utilize the same nutrients or occupy the same niche or infection site.niche or infection site.
Competition
ParasitismParasitism
Predation or Parasitism : Attack and feed directly on the target organism or the biocontrol agent can produce some sort of toxin that kills the target organism and then the biocontrol agent feeds on the dead target.
Parasitism1. Hyperparasites – are parasites of
parasites
2. Mycoparasites - fungi that parasitizes other fungi T. Harzianum coils around
Rhizoctonia Solani
(Benhamou and Chet, 2003)
Antagonisms leading to biological control of plant Antagonisms leading to biological control of plant pathogenspathogens
Type Mechanism Examples
Direct antagonism Hyperparasitism/predation Lytic/some nonlytic mycoviruses
Ampelomyces quisqualis
Pasteuria penetrans
Trichoderma virens
Mixed-path antagonism
Antibiotics 2,4-diacetylphloroglucinol
Phenazines
Cyclic lipopeptides
Lytic enzymes Chitinases
Glucanases
Proteases
Unregulated waste products Ammonia
Carbon dioxide
Hydrogen cyanide
Physical/chemical interference Blockage of soil pores
Germination signals consumption
Molecular cross-talk confused
Indirect antagonism Competition Exudates/leachates consumption
Siderophore scavenging
Physical niche occupation
Induction of host resistance Contact with fungal cell walls
Detection of pathogen-associated,
molecular patterns
Phytohormone-mediated induction
Synergistic Interaction of Beneficial Synergistic Interaction of Beneficial MicroorganismsMicroorganisms
(PGPR, Rhizobium and Arbuscular (PGPR, Rhizobium and Arbuscular Mycorrhizal fungi)Mycorrhizal fungi)
Microorganisms in combinations interact synergistically
Providing nutrients Removing inhibitory products Stimulating each other Enhance beneficial aspects of their physiology. Soil microbiological equilibrium Favorable environment for plant growth
Mechanisms of interaction in Mechanisms of interaction in beneficial microorganismsbeneficial microorganisms
Direct mechanisms: Direct mechanisms: 1. 1. Phytohormone 2. P-solubilization 3. Nitrogen fixation 4. Induce systemic resistance 5. Decreased heavy metal toxicity
Indirect mechanism:Indirect mechanism: 1. 1. Siderophores 2. Anti-fungal metabolites -antibiotics, 3. Fungal cell wall-lysing enzymes, 4. Hydrogen cyanide, 5. Competition for ‘rhizosphere space’ and nutrients 6. parasitism
Microbe-Microbe interactionMicrobe-Microbe interaction
1. PGPR and 1. PGPR and RhizobiumRhizobium
2. AM fungi and rhizosphere microbes2. AM fungi and rhizosphere microbes
PGPR and PGPR and RhizobiaRhizobia interact synergistically for N interact synergistically for N22
fixationfixationMechanisms of action: Mechanisms of action:
Altering the host secondary metabolism or creating antibiosis
Stimulate formation of additional infection sites- Auxins
Alteration of the plant flavonoid metabolism
Promoted the nod-gene inducers in roots
By stimulate the plant to produce more signal molecules
Phytohormones- Siderophores ,phytoalexins,and flavonoids
Decreased heavy metal toxicity
Increase in soil enzyme activities
Synergistic interactions betweenSynergistic interactions between PGPR and PGPR and RhizobiaRhizobia on plant growth on plant growth
PGPR strainPGPR strain Rhizobium Rhizobium strainstrain Benefit as an Benefit as an increase inincrease in
Pseudomonas Pseudomonas spsp Bradyrhizobium sp Bradyrhizobium sp NN22 and P uptake in and P uptake in
green gramgreen gram
Pseudomonas Pseudomonas spsp Rhizobium Rhizobium leguminosarumleguminosarum biovar biovar viceaeviceae
Shoot height, root Shoot height, root length and dry length and dry weight of peaweight of pea
Pseudomonas striataPseudomonas striata
Azospirillum spAzospirillum sp
Rhizobium sp Rhizobium sp PigeonpeaPigeonpea
Pseudomonas Pseudomonas fluorescensfluorescens
B.japonicumB.japonicum Soyabean Soyabean
AM fungi and rhizosphere AM fungi and rhizosphere microbesmicrobes
AM fungi interact natural and introduced microorganism ‘mycorrhizosphere’
Rhizobacteria acted as ‘Mycorrhiza-Helper-Bacteria’ (MHB) produces biologically active substances
Stimulate mycelial growth and germination Mycorrhizal colonization Spore germination
AM fungiAM fungi Interact synergistically to stimulate plant growth
Improved nutrient acquisition Inhibition of fungal plant pathogen Enhancement of root branching Physical attachment results - carbon uptake by the bacteria from the
fungal hyphal surface by provide them with a competitive advantage.
Direct interactions Supply of energy-rich C compounds derived from host plants Changes of mycorrhizosphere i.e pH induced by the fungus Competition for nutrients Fungal exudation of inhibitory or stimulatory compounds
Indirect interactions Modification of root exudates and soil structure
Groups of bacteria interact with AM Groups of bacteria interact with AM fungifungi
1.1. AMF with symbiotic nitrogen fixersAMF with symbiotic nitrogen fixers
2.2. AMF with Asymbiotic nitrogen fixersAMF with Asymbiotic nitrogen fixers
3.3. AMF with phosphate solubilizing bacteriaAMF with phosphate solubilizing bacteria
4.4. AMF with PGPRAMF with PGPR
AMF AND RHIZOBIAAMF AND RHIZOBIA
Interact synergistically and their effects on plant growth:
AM fungi improve P uptake - energy available for N2 fixation
AMF enhances the functioning of Nitrogenase
Improve nodulation and N2 fixation under low water potential
Uptake micronutrients by the AM fungi –improve plant growth, indirect effects upon the N2-fixing system
AM fungi increased nutrient status -mycorrhizosphere, by decomposing organic N compounds, benefit additional nitrogen provided through N2 fixation
AMF with Asymbiotic nitrogen AMF with Asymbiotic nitrogen fixersfixers
AMF – affects population of other microorganisms in the AMF – affects population of other microorganisms in the rhizosphere both quantitatively and qualitativelyrhizosphere both quantitatively and qualitatively
Ex: A. chroococcum Ex: A. chroococcum andand Glomus fasculatum Glomus fasculatum in tomato rhizoplanein tomato rhizoplane
Increased population of Increased population of A. chroococcum A. chroococcum in rhizosphere for in rhizosphere for
long timelong time Enhanced AM infection and spore productionEnhanced AM infection and spore production Increased NIncreased N22 fixation and P avaliability fixation and P avaliability
Effect of specific AM sp on population of bacteriaEffect of specific AM sp on population of bacteria
Ex: Ex: P. fluroscenceP. fluroscence decreases after infection of cucumber seedling decreases after infection of cucumber seedling with with G. intraradicesG. intraradices not after not after G. etunicatumG. etunicatum
Azospirillum - polysaccharide-degrading bacteria
C source for N2 fixation
Azospirillum – Bacillus Increased N2 fixation
Azospirillum brasilense - Enterobacter cloacae and Arthrobacter giacomelloi -efficient N2 fixation
Azospirillum sp. DN64 - Cellulolytic fungi nitrogenase activity increased
Azospirillum brasilense –Staphylococcus Increased N2 fixation due to release of aspartic acid
AMF with phosphate solubilizerAMF with phosphate solubilizerSynergistic interactions resultsSynergistic interactions results Bacteria promoted Mycorrhizal pre colonization Bacteria promoted Mycorrhizal pre colonization
establishment establishment Survival PSB longer around Survival PSB longer around Mycorrhizal roots Mycorrhizal roots
Effect on plant growthEffect on plant growth PSB solubilizing more PhosphorousPSB solubilizing more Phosphorous Mycorrhiza enhance P uptake Mycorrhiza enhance P uptake Increased plant biomass and dry matter productionIncreased plant biomass and dry matter production N and P content in plant tissues- plant hormones or N and P content in plant tissues- plant hormones or
vitamins than P solubilizationvitamins than P solubilization
AMF with PGPRAMF with PGPRPGPRPGPR1.1. Improved mineral nutritionImproved mineral nutrition2.2. Soil fertility and plant healthSoil fertility and plant health3.3. Disease suppression, Disease suppression, 4.4. Phytohormone productionPhytohormone production
PGPR interact synergistically with AM fungiPGPR interact synergistically with AM fungi
Mycorrhizal establishment and functionMycorrhizal establishment and function Improves mycelial growth of AM fungi Improves mycelial growth of AM fungi Stimulation of root development Stimulation of root development Helps in recognition process between root and fungus. Helps in recognition process between root and fungus. Enhanced AM fungal colonization levels in roots Enhanced AM fungal colonization levels in roots Gram-positive bacteria and γ-proteobacteria interact Gram-positive bacteria and γ-proteobacteria interact
synergistically with AM fungisynergistically with AM fungi
Synergistic interactions between bacteria and AM fungi, to enhanced plant growth.
Bacterial speciesBacterial species AMF speciesAMF species EffectEffect
Gram+, low G+CGram+, low G+C
Bacillus pabuliBacillus pabuli
Bacillus subtilis Bacillus subtilis
Paenibacillus validusPaenibacillus validus
Paenibacillus Paenibacillus sp.sp.
Glomus clarumGlomus clarum
G. intraradicesG. intraradices
G. intraradicesG. intraradices
G. mosseaeG. mosseae
↑↑f.g.,↑s.g.,↑r.c.f.g.,↑s.g.,↑r.c.
↑↑p.s.,↑r.c.p.s.,↑r.c.
↑ ↑f.g.,f.g.,
↑↑f.g.,↑s.g.,↑r.c.+i.p.p.ff.g.,↑s.g.,↑r.c.+i.p.p.f
Gram+, high G+CGram+, high G+C
Corynebacterium Corynebacterium sp.sp.
Streptomyces orientalisStreptomyces orientalis
G. versiformeG. versiforme
Gigaspora margaritaGigaspora margarita
↑↑s.g. ↑ s.g.s.g. ↑ s.g.
Y-Y-ProteobacteriaProteobacteria
Enterobacter Enterobacter sp.sp.
Pseudomonas Pseudomonas spsp
Pseudomonas aeruginosaPseudomonas aeruginosa
Pseudomonas putidaPseudomonas putida
Rhizobium melilotiRhizobium meliloti
G. IntraradicesG. Intraradices
G. versiformeG. versiforme
Endogone Endogone sp. sp.
G. IntraradicesG. Intraradices
G. IntraradicesG. Intraradices
G. mosseaeG. mosseae
↑↑p.s.,↑r.c.p.s.,↑r.c.
↑↑s.g. s.g.
↑↑f.g.,↑r.c. f.g.,↑r.c.
↑↑p.s.p.s.
↑↑r.c. r.c.
↑↑Nitrogen fixation Nitrogen fixation ratesrates
Antagonistic Antagonistic interactions between bacteria interactions between bacteria and AM fungiand AM fungi
Inoculation ofInoculation of G. fasciculatum G. fasciculatum and and Streptomyces Streptomyces cinnamomonicuscinnamomonicus with finger millet inoculation had with finger millet inoculation had antagonistic effect-antagonistic effect-
Suppressed the growth and multiplication of the other Suppressed the growth and multiplication of the other
Microbial competition and suppressed colonization-result Microbial competition and suppressed colonization-result failure establishment of AMFfailure establishment of AMF
Krishna et al., 1982
“Group of different species of microorganisms that act together as a community”.
Microbial consortium
Organisms work together in a complex system where all benefit from the activities of others in the community.
Microbial consortia are much more efficient than single strains of organisms with a diversity of metabolic capabilities.
Fast acting and high rhizosphere competence Synergistic to each other Able grow with or without air Produces natural enzymes - Wide degrading ability Easy to handle and mass multiplication Broad spectrum of action Long shelf life and good stability Should tolerate desiccation, heat, oxidizing
and UV radiations Non-toxic, non-pathogenic and non-corrosive Economical and safe to environment
Ideal Characteristics of microbial consortium
Single strains of microorganisms are not capable of degrading all of the compounds, therefore microbial consortia are essential in the complete mineralization of any compounds.
A microbial consortium is more resistant to environmental shock.
Compete and survive in the environment than single microorganisms.
Microbial consortia are capable of handling a wide variety of complex wastes.
Advantages
“ Two-species microbial consortium for growth promotion of Cajanus cajan”
(Pandey and Maheshwari, 2006)
Studied the interactions and the importance of plant growth promoting consortium
Burkholderia sp. MSSP and Sinorhizobium meliloti PP3.Indole-3-acetic acid (IAA) Solubilize inorganic phosphate.Nitrogen fixer
The organisms were grown as monospecies or mixed-species culture/ consortium
Studied for growth profile, IAA production and phosphate solubilization.
Fig 1: Effect of mixed-species consortium (U) on phosphate solubilization compared to monospecies culture of Burkholderia sp. MSSP and S. meliloti PP3.
(Pandey and Maheshwari, 2006)
Fig 2: Effect of mixed-species consortium (U) on IAA production compared to monospecies culture of Burkholderia sp. MSSPG and S. meliloti PP3.
(Pandey and Maheshwari, 2006)
Table 1: Effect of Burkholderia sp. MSSP and Sinorhizobium meliloti PP3 on seed germination and vegetative growth of Cajanus cajana after 40 days of seed germination
Growth measurementGrowth measurement
Sl Sl NoNo
StrainStrain Seed Seed germination germination
(%)(%)
Total Plant Total Plant length length (mm)(mm)
Shoot Shoot length (mm)length (mm)
Fresh root Fresh root weight (mg)weight (mg)
Fresh shoot Fresh shoot weight weight (mg)(mg)
11 ControlControl 7070 125 125 dd 101 101 cc 401 401 dd 2.15 2.15 cc
22 MSSPMSSP 100100 188 188 bb 150 150 bb 835 835 aa 3.18 3.18 bb
33 PP3PP3 9090 142 142 cc 111 111 cc 560 560 cc 3.47 3.47 bb
44 MSSP+ MSSP+ PP3PP3
100100 312 312 aa 242 242 aa 750750 b b 6.06 6.06 aa
(Pandey and Maheshwari, 2006)
“Dual inoculation of Azotobacter chroococcum and Glomus fasciculatum improves growth and yield of sunflower under field condition”
(Sreeramulu et al., 2000)
Field experiment
Consisted nine treatments
Sunflower (KBSH-1)
Seeds are treated with the consortium containing Azotobacter chroococcum and Glomus fasciculatum
Table 2: Effect of dual inoculation of Azotobacter chroococcum and Glomus fasciculatum on growth and yield of sunflower at different levels of fertilizersSl. Sl.
No.No.TreatmentsTreatments Plant Plant
Height Height (cm)(cm)
No. of No. of leavesleaves
Head Head diametediamete
rr(cm)(cm)
YieldYield(q/ha)(q/ha)
11 NPK (50 %) NPK (50 %) 143143 1818 11.811.8 10.0010.00
22 NPK (75 %)NPK (75 %) 140140 2020 13.013.0 11.0011.00
33 NPK (100 %)NPK (100 %) 145145 2020 15.015.0 15.5015.50
44 NPK 50 % + NPK 50 % + AzotobacterAzotobacter 144144 2020 12.512.5 12.0012.00
55 NPK 75 % + NPK 75 % + AzotobacterAzotobacter 145145 1919 13.513.5 13.2013.20
66 NPK 50 % + NPK 50 % + Glomus Glomus fasciculatumfasciculatum
146146 2020 14.614.6 14.5014.50
77 NPK 75 % + NPK 75 % + Glomus Glomus fasciculatumfasciculatum
148148 2020 15.215.2 15.8015.80
88 NPK 50 % + NPK 50 % + Azotobacter + Azotobacter + Glomus fasciculatumGlomus fasciculatum
150150 2121 17.617.6 16.2016.20
99 NPK 75 % + NPK 75 % + Azotobacter+ Azotobacter+ Glomus fasciculatumGlomus fasciculatum
154154 2222 19.419.4 18.5018.50
SEm ±SEm ± 2.192.19 NSNS 0.900.90 1.201.20
CD (0.05)CD (0.05) 6.586.58 2.702.70 3.593.59
CV (%)CV (%) 2.602.60 10.5910.59 14.7214.72(Sreeramulu, et al.,2000)
“ Studies on synergism between Rhizobium, plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) and phosphate solubilizing bacteria in blackgram”
(Gunasekaran et al., 2000) Field trial (National Pulse Research Center,
Vamban)
Test crop: Balckgram
1. Uninoculated control
1. Rhizobium (COC. 10)
1. PSB (Bacillus megaterium)
2. PGPR (Pseudomonas KB 133)
3. Rhizobium + PSB
4. Rhizobium + PGPR
5. PGPR + PSB
6. Rhizobium + PSB + PGPR
RBD
Table 3: Synergisms between Rhizobium, PGPR and PSB
Sl. Sl. NoNo
TreatmentsTreatments Plant Plant height height (cm/pl)(cm/pl)
No. ofNo. ofnodules nodules /plant/plant
Plant Plant biomassbiomass
(g/pl)(g/pl)
Grain Grain yieldyield
(kg/ha)(kg/ha)
% increase % increase over over
controlcontrol
11 UICUIC 32.432.4 1010 13.313.3 472472 --
22 Rhizobium Rhizobium (COC 10)(COC 10) 29.529.5 1414 19.319.3 655655 38.738.7
33 PSB (PSB (B. megateriumB. megaterium)) 31.931.9 1313 18.318.3 483483 2.32.3
44 PGPR PGPR ((PseudomonasPseudomonas KB 133) KB 133)
29.329.3 1414 28.328.3 616616 30.530.5
55 Rhizobium + Rhizobium + PSBPSB 29.829.8 1313 25.025.0 612612 29.629.6
66 Rhizobium + Rhizobium + PGPRPGPR 30.930.9 1414 15.015.0 702702 48.748.7
77 PGPR + PSBPGPR + PSB 31.831.8 1212 25.025.0 483483 2.32.3
88 Rhizobium + Rhizobium + PSBPSB + + PGPR PGPR
37.337.3 1919 28.328.3 760760 61.061.0
CD (P=0.05)CD (P=0.05) 2.32.3 1414 2.32.3 36.636.6
(Gunasekaran, et al., 2007)
“Developing ‘ Microbial Consortia’ for better growth and nutrition of Dalbergia sissoo” (Raghu et al.,
2005) D. sissoo – Avenue tree and legume
Interaction between Glomus fasiculatum, PGPRs viz., Azotobacter chroococcum, Bacillus coagulans and Trichoderma harzianum
Preparation of Microbial Consortium
Azotobacter chroococcum, Trichoderma harzianum and Bacillus coagulans
Grown in separate medium. Mycelia mat of Trichoderma harzianum and bacterial cultures was macerated and centrifuged at 5000 rpm for 7 minutes and the pellet was suspended with 0.1 M MgSO4
10 ml of culture was added to the pots
Sl. Sl. No.No.
TreatmentsTreatments Plant height Plant height (cm)(cm)
Total Total biomass (g)biomass (g)
Plant P Plant P content content (mg/pl)(mg/pl)
Plant N Plant N content content (mg/pl)(mg/pl)
11 ControlControl 62.1 62.1 cc 10.6 10.6 cc 19.7 19.7 abcabc 4.7 4.7 ee
22 Glomus Glomus fasciculatum(Gf)fasciculatum(Gf)
66.0 66.0 bcbc 11.3 11.3 bcbc 19.7 19.7 abcabc 8.1 8.1 bb
33 AzotobacterAzotobacter chroococcumchroococcum(Ac)(Ac)
69.7 69.7 abcabc 12.0 12.0 bcbc 29.6 29.6 cc 5.2 5.2 dede
44 Bacillus coagulans(Bc) Bacillus coagulans(Bc) 65.9 65.9 bcbc 10.710.7 c c 23.2 23.2 abcabc 5.3 5.3 dede
55 Trichoderma harzianum Trichoderma harzianum (Th)(Th)
68.9 68.9 abcabc 10.7 10.7 cc 21.1 21.1 cdcd 6.4 6.4 cdcd
66 Gf+AcGf+Ac 68.2 68.2 abcabc 11.7 11.7 bcbc 15.8 15.8 cdcd 5.5 5.5 dd
77 Gf+BcGf+Bc 64.6 64.6 bcbc 11.9 11.9 bcbc 26.6 26.6 abcabc 6.6 6.6 cc
88 Gf+ThGf+Th 67.0 67.0 bcbc 12.6 12.6 bcbc 27.3 27.3 cc 6.4 6.4 cdcd
99 Gf+Ac+BcGf+Ac+Bc 81.2 81.2 aa 14.8 14.8 aa 59.9 59.9 aa 9.1 9.1 aa
1010 Gf+Ac+ThGf+Ac+Th 62.2 62.2 cc 11.7 11.7 bcbc 18.418.4 bcd bcd 7.6 7.6 bcdbcd
1111 Gf+Ac+Bc+ThGf+Ac+Bc+Th 61.8 61.8 cc 12.7 12.7 bcbc 42.2 42.2 bb 8.2 8.2 bb
Table 4: Influence of Glomus fasiculatum and PGPRs on the plant parameters of Dalbergia sissoo
(Raghu et al., 2005)
Synergistic effects of plant-growth promotingSynergistic effects of plant-growth promotingrhizobacteria and Rhizobiumon nodulation and nitrogenrhizobacteria and Rhizobiumon nodulation and nitrogen
fixation by pigeonpea (fixation by pigeonpea (Cajanus cajanCajanus cajan))
TILAK et al., 2006
Table 5: Table 5: Effect of PGPRs and Rhizobium on plant biomass and Effect of PGPRs and Rhizobium on plant biomass and grain yield of pigeon pea cv.p-921grain yield of pigeon pea cv.p-921
TreatmentsTreatments Dry plant biomass/g plantDry plant biomass/g plant Grain yield/g plantGrain yield/g plant
Uninoculated controlUninoculated control 3.53.5 1.051.05
RhizobiumRhizobium alone alone 4.24.2 1.251.25
Rhizobium+ Rhizobium+ Azotobacter Azotobacter chroococcumchroococcum
4.04.0 1.301.30
Rhizobium+ Rhizobium+ Azospirillum Azospirillum brasilensebrasilense
4.04.0 1.351.35
Rhizobium + Rhizobium + Pseudomonas Pseudomonas fluorescensfluorescens
4.24.2 1.751.75
Rhizobium+ Rhizobium+ Pseudomonas Pseudomonas putidaputida
4.84.8 1.751.75
Rhizobium + Rhizobium + Bacillus Bacillus cereuscereus
4.04.0 1.621.62
Standard errorStandard error 0.470.47 0.360.36
TILAK et al., 2006
Table 6 :Nodulation ,nitrogen fixation and total nitrogen(N) content in Table 6 :Nodulation ,nitrogen fixation and total nitrogen(N) content in
shoot of pigeonpea after inoculation with rhizobium and five PGPRsshoot of pigeonpea after inoculation with rhizobium and five PGPRs
TreatmentsTreatments Nodule Nodule density/nodule/ density/nodule/ plantplant
Nodule dry Nodule dry weight weight /g/plant /g/plant
Nitrogen Nitrogen fixation/mmfixation/mmol Col C22HH44
Shoot N %Shoot N %
Uninoculated control 4.504.50 15.2015.20 5.505.50 1.751.75
Rhizobium alone 12.5012.50 30.5030.50 8.908.90 1.781.78
Rhizobium+ Azotobacter chroococcum
15.7015.70 30.5030.50 10.6010.60 1.651.65
Rhizobium+ Azospirillum brasilense
15.2015.20 38.5038.50 11.2011.20 1.781.78
Rhizobium + Pseudomonas fluorescens
22.0022.00 55.8055.80 12.9012.90 1.901.90
Rhizobium+ Pseudomonas putida
27.5027.50 57.0057.00 13.8013.80 2.052.05
Rhizobium + Bacillus cereus 21.7021.70 45.0045.00 11.9011.90 2.002.00
Standard error 3.193.19 4.194.19 0.550.55 0.050.05
Impact of bio inoculants consortium on rice root Impact of bio inoculants consortium on rice root exudates biological nitrogen fixation and plant growthexudates biological nitrogen fixation and plant growth
(Raja (Raja et alet al 2006) 2006)
Table 7: Biochemical analysis of root exudates
(Raja (Raja et alet al 2006) 2006)
Table 8: Estimation of plant growth promoting substances in root exudates
(Raja (Raja et alet al 2006) 2006)
Table 8: Plant biometric observationsTreatmentsTreatments Root Root
length(clength(cm)m)
Shoot Shoot length(cm)length(cm)
Dry weight Dry weight (mg/plant)(mg/plant)
Chlorophyll Chlorophyll content content (mg)(mg)
T1-A.lipoferum 12.2512.25 15.5015.50 630630 2.092.09
T2-P.fluorescens 8.208.20 15.3015.30 580580 2.032.03
T3-B.megaterium 4.304.30 6.106.10 227227 0.630.63
T4-Microbialconsortium(T1
+T2+T3)
20.3020.30 16.3016.30 720720 2.302.30
T5-Un inoculated control 3.703.70 4.604.60 185185 0.450.45
SED 2.282.28 2.962.96 127.66127.66 0.24920.2492
CD (0.05) 5.255.25 6.836.83 294.40294.40 0.57480.5748
(Raja (Raja et alet al ., 2006) ., 2006)
Response of Chilli(Response of Chilli(CapsicumCapsicum annum)annum) to inoculation to inoculation with with Glomus mosseaeGlomus mosseae,,Pseudomonas fluorescencesPseudomonas fluorescences
and and Azospirillum brasilenseAzospirillum brasilense
Muthuraju and Jayasheela (2005)
Table 9: Effect of AM fungi and PGPR on growth and yield of Capsicum Table 9: Effect of AM fungi and PGPR on growth and yield of Capsicum annumannum
Treatments Plant height (cm)
Mean root length (cm)
Dry weight (g/plant) Fresh fruit weight (g/plant)
shoot root Total biomass
Uninoculated control 65.6e 7.6e 0.94f 0.36f 1.3f 276.7e
Azospirillum brasilense 87.3c 9.5d 1.3e 0.47e 1.7e 357.1d
Pseudomonas fluorescens 77.3d 9.8d 1.4e 0.47e 1.9e 375.8c
Glomus mosseae 90.0b 11.0c 1.7bc 0.47c 2.2c 405.3ab
Azospirillum brasilense+P.fluorescens
91.0ab 12.8ab 1.5d 0.52d 2.0d 399.7b
Glomus mosseae+A.brasilense 90.0b 12.5ab 1.7bc 0.58c 2.3c 405.4ab
Glomus mosseae+P.fluorescens 91.5ab 12.0b 1.8b 0.62b 2.5b 416.3ab
Glomus mosseae+P.fluorescens+ A. brasilense
92.5a 13.0a 2.1a 0.72a 2.8a 419.8a
Means with the same superscript do not differ significantly at p=0.05
Table 10: Effect of AM fungi and PGPRs on nitrogen, phosphorus content and mycorrizal Colonization and spore count in root zone soil of Capsicum annum
TreatmentsTreatments Nitrogen (mg/plant)Nitrogen (mg/plant) phosphorusphosphorus ColonizationColonization
(%)(%)
Spore Spore No./25g No./25g
soilsoilshootshoot rootroot ShootShoot RootRoot
Uninoculated controlUninoculated control 17.617.6ee 4.04.0ff 1.21.2ee 0.310.31hh 40.340.3ff 138.0138.0ff
Azospirillum brasilenseAzospirillum brasilense 22.422.4dd 5.35.3cc 1.71.7dd 0.380.38gg 50.050.0ee 162.3162.3ff
Pseudomonas fluorescensPseudomonas fluorescens 23.323.3dd 5.75.7ee 1.91.9bcbc 0.420.42ff 47.347.3ee 169.0169.0ee
Glomus mosseaeGlomus mosseae 27.227.2cc 7.27.2cc 2.22.2aa 0.460.46dd 71.671.6bb 172.3172.3dd
Azospirillum brasilense+P.fluorescensAzospirillum brasilense+P.fluorescens 23.423.4cc 6.76.7dd 2.12.1 0.480.48dede 55.655.6dd 165.0165.0ff
Glomus mosseae+A.brasilenseGlomus mosseae+A.brasilense 27.427.4cc 7.47.4cc 1.91.9bcbc 0.510.51cdcd 67.367.3cc 182.3182.3bb
Glomus mosseae+P.fluorescensGlomus mosseae+P.fluorescens 30.430.4bb 8.28.2bb 2.22.2aa 0.600.60bb 72.072.0bb 176.0176.0cc
Glomus mosseae+P.fluorescens+ A. Glomus mosseae+P.fluorescens+ A. brasilensebrasilense
38.538.5aa 9.69.6aa 2.22.2aa 0.640.64aa 79.379.3aa 190.3190.3aa
Means with the same superscript do not differ significantly at p=0.05
With increasing concerns regarding the impact of conventional fertilizers and pesticides, use of microbial consortium appear praised for a greater role in future because these open up a world opportunity and create living spaces which ultimately bring about harmony in nature without affecting the ecosystem.
Development and Evaluation of Development and Evaluation of Microbial Consortium for Plant Microbial Consortium for Plant
Growth PromotionGrowth Promotion
Title of research
Objectives of investigationObjectives of investigation
1.1. Development of alginate based consortium of Development of alginate based consortium of microorganisms (microorganisms (Azotobacter, Pseudomonas spAzotobacter, Pseudomonas sp and and Acinetobacter).Acinetobacter).
2.2. To test the survival of microbial consortium in alginate To test the survival of microbial consortium in alginate formulation.formulation.
3.3. To study the release of microorganisms from alginate beads.To study the release of microorganisms from alginate beads.
4.4. To determine effectiveness of selected formulation under To determine effectiveness of selected formulation under pot culture study.pot culture study.
THANK YOU
