Preview

Horticulture and viticulture

Advanced search
Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Taxonomic structure of tissue endophytic bacterial microbiome in clonal apple rootstock grown on sod-podzolic soils with variant properties

https://doi.org/10.31676/0235-2591-2021-6-36-44

Abstract

The taxonomic structure of tissue endophytic bacterial microbiome was comparatively studied in microplants (undifferentiated explant callus tissues, passage 25) and 5-year clonal apple rootstocks 57-490 and 54-118 cultured from corresponding tissues (passage 1) on sod-podzolic soils with variant granulometry, chemical, physical and physicochemical properties. Proteobacteria (91.6 %) predominated in vitro tissues among other endophytic bacterial phyla in rootstock 57-490, while Proteobacteria (52.5 %) and Firmicutes (47.4 %) — in rootstock 54-118. The endophytic Firmicutes ratio vs. in vitro tissues decreases (0.7-2.0 %) in roots and more severely (0-0.2 %) in leaves. Endophytic Actinobacteriota are revealed in 11.7 % in roots of the study rootstock in heavy loam soil, whilst in medium loam their ratio drops to 2.74.1 % in roots and 0.1-0.2 % in leaves. The phylogenetic diversity indices estimation for main endophytic bacterial phyla in apple rootstock tissue recovers their essentially lower diversity and evenness in culture endosphere (Shannon index 0.42-1.00) vs. open soil roots (1.34-2.08). The leaves Shannon index is typically low (0.06-0.13) indicating poor diversity and evenness of the main endophytic bacterial phyla.

About the Authors

V. V. Bobkova
Federal Horticultural Research Center for Breeding, Agrotechnology and Nursery
Russian Federation

Researcher, Department of Agrochemistry and Soil Science

Moscow



S. N. Konovalov
Federal Horticultural Research Center for Breeding, Agrotechnology and Nursery
Russian Federation

Sergey N. Konovalov, PhD (Biol.), Leading Researcher, Head of the Department of Agrochemistry and Soil Science

4, Zagor’evskaya Str., Moscow, 115598



M. T. Upadyshev
Federal Horticultural Research Center for Breeding, Agrotechnology and Nursery
Russian Federation

Dr. Sci. (Agric.), Member Corresponding of Russian Academy of Sciences, Chief Researcher, Head of the Virology Laboratory

Moscow



References

1. Santoyo G., Moreno-Hagelsieb G., Orozco-Mosqueda Mdel C., Glick B. R. Plant growth-promoting bacterial endophytes. Microbiol. Res. 2016;183:92-99. DOI: 10.1016/j.micres.2015.11.008

2. Gupta R., Anand G., Gaur R., Yadav D. Plant-microbiome interactions for sustainable agriculture: a review. Physiol. Mol. Biol. Plants. 2021;27(1):165-179. DOI: 10.1007/s12298-021-00927-1

3. Miliute I., Buzaite O. IAA production and other plant growth promoting traits of endophytic bacteria from apple tree Biologija. 2011;57:2:98-102. DOI: 10.6001/biologija.v57i2.1835

4. Miliute I., Buzaite O., Baniulis D., Stanys V. Bacterial endophytes in agricultural crops and their role in stress tolerance. Zemdirbyste. 2015;102:465-478. DOI:10.13080/z-a.2015.102.060

5. Miliute I., Buzaite O., Gelvonauskiene D., Sasnauskas A., Stanys V., Baniulis D. Plant growth promoting and antagonistic properties of endophytic bacteria isolated from domestic apple. Zemdirbyste. 2016;103:77-82. DOI:10.13080/z-a.2016.103.010

6. Muresan L. E. Cultivable Bacterial and Fungal Endophytes from Apple Tissues and Their Potential for Biological Control of Venturia inaequalis. A Thesis pres. to the Univ. of Guelph. Can. 2017, 164. URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10214/12168

7. Dos Passos J. F. M., Costa P. B. D., Costa M. D., Zaffari G. R. et al. Cultivable bacteria isolated from apple trees cultivated under different crop systems: Diversity and antagonistic activity against Colletotrichum gloeosporioides. Genet. Mol. Biol. 2014;37(3):56072. DOI: 10.1590/S1415-47572014000400013

8. Muthukumar A., Udhayakumar R., Naveenkumar R. Role of Bacterial Endophytes in Plant Disease Control. Crop Product. and Protection. 2017, 133-161. DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-66544-3_7

9. Khare E., Mishra J., Arora N. K. Multifaceted Interactions Between Endophytes and Plant: Developments and Prospects Front. Microbiol. 2018;9:2732. DOI:10.3389/fmicb.2018.02732

10. Quambusch, M., Brummer, J., Haller, K. et al. Dynamics of endophytic bacteria in plant in vitro culture: quantification of three bacterial strains in Prunus avium in different plant organs and in vitro culture phases. Plant Cell Tiss Organ Cult 126, 305–317 (2016). DOI: 10.1007/s11240-016-0999-0

11. Quambusch M., Pirttila A. M., Tejesvi M. V., Winkelmann T., Bartsch M. Endophytic bacteria in plant tissue culture: differences between easyand difficult-to-propagate Prunus avium genotypes. Tree Physiol. 2014;34(5):524-533. DOI: 10.1093/treephys/tpu027

12. Tamosiun I., Stanien G., Haimi P., Stanys V., Rugienius R., Baniulis D. Endophytic Bacillus and Pseudomonas spp. Modulate Apple Shoot Growth, Cellular Redox Balance, and Protein Expression Under in Vitro Conditions. Front. Plant Sci. 2018;9:889. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2018.00889

13. Dunaeva S. E., Osledkin Yu. S. Bacterial microorganisms associated with the plant tissue culture: identification and possible role (review). Agr. Biol. 2015;50(1):3-15. DOI: 10.15389/agrobiology.2015.1.3eng

14. Samarina L. S., Malyarovskaya V. I., Rogozhina E. V., Malyukova L. S. Endophytes, as promotors of in vitro plant growth (review). Agr. Biol. 2017:52(5):917-927.

15. Mohamed H., Peterson A. M., Kozlova A. V. Associative Microorganisms Shoots Apple Tree (Malus P. Mill, 1754) in Saratov Region. Izv. Sarat. Univ. Chem. Biol. Ecol. 2015;15(3):80-84. DOI: 10.18500/1816-9775-2015-15-3-80-84 (In Russ.)

16. Liu J., Abdelfattah A., Norelli J. et al. Apple endophytic microbiota of different rootstock/scion combinations suggests a genotype-specific influence. Microbiome. 2018;6:18. DOI: 10.1186/s40168-018-0403-x

17. Husson O. Redox potential (Eh) and pH as drivers of soil/plant/microorganism systems: a transdisciplinary overview pointing to integrative opportunities for agronomy. Plant Soil. 2013;362:389-417. DOI: 10.1007/s11104-012-1429-7

18. Tokarz E., Urban D. Soil Redox Potential and its Impact on Microorganisms and Plants of Wetlands. J. of Ecol. Engin. 2015;16(3):20-30. DOI: 10.12911/22998993/2801

19. Su-Hyeon K., Heeil D., Gyeongjun C., Da-Ran K., YounSig K. Bacterial Community Structure and the Dominant Species in Imported Pollens for Artificial Pollination. Plant Pathol. J. 2021;37(3):299-306. DOI: 10.5423/PPJ.NT.02.2021.0029

20. Balsanelli E., Pankievicz V. C., Baura V. A., Pedrosa F. de Oliveira, de Souza E. M. A New Strategy for the Selection of Epiphytic and Endophytic Bacteria for Enhanced Plant Performance. Methods Mol. Biol. 2019;1991:247-256. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-9458-8_22

21. Orozco-Mosquedaa Ma del C., Rocha-Granados Ma del C., Glick B. R., Santoyo G. Microbiome engineering to improve biocontrol and plant growth-promoting mechanisms. Microbiol. Res. 2018;208:25-31. DOI: 10.1016/j.micres.2018.01.005

22. Urusevskaya I. S., Alyabina I. O., Shoba S. A. Map of soilecological zoning of the Russian Federation. Scale 1: 8,000,000. Explanatory text and legend for the map. Moscow: MAKS Press, 2020, 100 р. (In Russ.)

23. Budagovsky V. I. The culture of low-growing fruit trees. Moscow: Kolos. 1976, 304 р. (In Russ.)

24. Savin E. Z., Solomatin N. M., Mushinsky A. A., Berezina T. V., Korshikov A. V., Panova M. A., Pogadaeva M. A. The results of a long-term study of vegetatively propagated apple rootstocks in the mother plant of vertical layers in the forest-steppe zone of the Southern Urals. Vestn. KrasGAU. 2020;11:71-80. (In Russ.)

25. Magurran A. E. Measuring biological diversity. John Wiley & Sons. 2013, 264.

26. Zhang Q., Acuna J. J., Inostroza N. G. et al. Endophytic Bacterial Communities Associated with Roots and Leaves of Plants Growing in Chilean Extreme Environments. Sci. Rep. 2019;9:4950. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-41160-x


Review

For citations:


Bobkova V.V., Konovalov S.N., Upadyshev M.T. Taxonomic structure of tissue endophytic bacterial microbiome in clonal apple rootstock grown on sod-podzolic soils with variant properties. Horticulture and viticulture. 2021;(6):36-44. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31676/0235-2591-2021-6-36-44

Views: 422


ISSN 0235-2591 (Print)
ISSN 2618-9003 (Online)