Paper · 2023 · Plants

Performance of Plant-Growth-Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR) Isolated from Sandy Soil on Growth of Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.)

Medhat Rehan; Ahmad Al-Turki; Adil H. A. Abdelmageed; et al.

5
claims
9
verbatim quotes
45
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

The plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) in the rhizosphere affect plant growth, health, and productivity, as well as soil-nutrient contents. They are considered a green and eco-friendly technology that will reduce chemical-fertilizer usage, thereby reducing production costs and protecting the environment. Out of 58 bacterial strains isolated in Qassim, Saudi Arabia, four strains were identified by the 16S rRNA as the Streptomyces cinereoruber strain P6-4, Priestia megaterium strain P12, Rossellomorea aquimaris strain P22-2, and Pseudomonas plecoglossicida strain P24. The plant-growth-promoting (PGP) features of the identified bacteria involving inorganic phosphate (P) solubilization, the production of indole acetic acid (IAA), and siderophore secretion were assessed in vitro. Regarding the P solubilization, the previous strains’ efficacy reached 37.71%, 52.84%, 94.31%, and 64.20%, respectively. The strains produced considerable amounts of IAA (69.82, 251.70, 236.57, and 101.94 µg/mL) after 4 days of incubation at 30 °C. Furthermore, the rates of siderophore production reached 35.51, 26.37, 26.37, and 23.84 psu, respectively, in the same strains. The application of the selected strains in the presence of rock phosphate (RP) with tomato plants under greenhouse conditions was evaluated. The plant growth and P-uptake traits positively and significantly increased in response to all the bacterial treatments, except for some traits, such as plant height, number of leaves, and leaf DM at 21 DAT, compared to the negative control (rock phosphate, T2). Notably, the P. megaterium strain P12 (T4), followed by R. aquimaris strain P22-2 (T5), revealed the best values related to plant height (at 45 DAT), number of leaves per plant (at 45 DAT), root length, leaf area, leaf-P uptake, stem P uptake, and total plant P uptake compared to the rock phosphate. The first two components of the PCA (principal component analysis) represented 71.99% (PCA1 = 50.81% and PCA2 = 21.18%) of the variation at 45 DAT. Finally, the PGPR improved the vegetative-growth traits of the tomato plants through P solubilization, IAA, and siderophore production, and ameliorated the availability of nutrients. Thus, applying in PGPR in sustainable agriculture will potentially reduce production costs and protect the environment from contamination by chemical fertilizers and pesticides.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 5

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Selected bacterial treatments significantly increased tomato growth and phosphorus uptake traits relative to rock phosphate alone, with specified early exceptions.

Treatment
all the bacterial treatmentse0
Outcome
plant growth and P-uptake traitse0
Direction
increasede0
Qualifier
except for some traits, such as plant height, number of leaves, and leaf DM at 21 DATe0
Comparator
negative control (rock phosphate, T2)e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The plant growth and P-uptake traits positively and significantly increased in response to all the bacterial treatments, except for some traits, such as plant height, number of leaves, and leaf DM at 21 DAT, compared to the negative control (rock phosphate, T2).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1313–1575 · show in text ↑
t0

“Tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 97–103 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Priestia megaterium strain P12 gave the best tomato growth and uptake values relative to rock phosphate.

Treatment
P. megaterium strain P12 (T4)e0
Interactor
P. megaterium strain P12Priestia megateriume0symbiont
Outcome
best values related to plant heighte0
Direction
beste0
Comparator
rock phosphatee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Priestia megaterium
Priestia megaterium · InteractorOsmoregulator / Osmoregulator at English Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Notably, the P. megaterium strain P12 (T4), followed by R. aquimaris strain P22-2 (T5), revealed the best values related to plant height (at 45 DAT), number of leaves per plant (at 45 DAT), root length, leaf area, leaf-P uptake, stem P uptake, and total plant P uptake compared to the rock phosphate.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1576–1876 · show in text ↑
t0

“Tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 97–103 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Rossellomorea aquimaris strain P22-2 ranked second for tomato growth and uptake values.

Treatment
R. aquimaris strain P22-2 (T5)e0
Interactor
R. aquimaris strain P22-2Rossellomorea aquimarise0symbiont
Outcome
best values related to plant heighte0
Direction
beste0
Comparator
rock phosphatee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Notably, the P. megaterium strain P12 (T4), followed by R. aquimaris strain P22-2 (T5), revealed the best values related to plant height (at 45 DAT), number of leaves per plant (at 45 DAT), root length, leaf area, leaf-P uptake, stem P uptake, and total plant P uptake compared to the rock phosphate.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1576–1876 · show in text ↑
t0

“Tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 97–103 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The first two PCA components accounted for 71.99% of trait variation at 45 DAT.

Outcome
variation at 45 DATe0
Value
71.99%e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The first two components of the PCA (principal component analysis) represented 71.99% (PCA1 = 50.81% and PCA2 = 21.18%) of the variation at 45 DAT.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1877–2024 · show in text ↑
t0

“Tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 97–103 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The authors attributed improved tomato growth to bacterial P solubilization, IAA and siderophore production.

Interactor
PGPRe0symbiont
Outcome
vegetative-growth traitse0
Qualifier
P solubilization, IAA, and siderophore productione0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Finally, the PGPR improved the vegetative-growth traits of the tomato plants through P solubilization, IAA, and siderophore production, and ameliorated the availability of nutrients.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2025–2207 · show in text ↑

Priestia megaterium · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results agree

5 papers: 5 positive, 0 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.