Paper · 2023 · Plant Cell & Environment

Beneath the blooms: Unearthing the effect of rhizospheric bacteria on floral signals and pollinator preferences

Diego M. Magalhães; André L. Lourenção; José Maurício S. Bento

4
claims
5
verbatim quotes
8
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

The relationship between plants and pollinators is known to be influenced by ecological interactions with other community members. While most research has focused on aboveground communities affecting plant-pollinator interactions, it is increasingly recognized that soil-dwelling organisms can directly or indirectly impact these interactions. Although studies have examined the effects of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on floral traits, there is a gap in research regarding similar effects associated with plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR), particularly concerning floral scent. Our study aimed to investigate the influence of the PGPR Bacillus amyloliquefaciens on the floral traits of wild (Solanum habrochaites, Solanum pimpinellifolium and Solanum peruvianum) and cultivated tomato (Solanum lycopersicum), as well as the impact of microbially-driven changes in floral scent on the foraging behaviour of the stingless bee Melipona quadrifasciata. Our findings revealed that inoculating tomatoes with PGPR led to an increased number of flowers and enhanced overall floral volatile emission. Additionally, we observed higher flower biomass and pollen levels in all species, except S. peruvianum. Importantly, these changes in volatile emissions influenced the foraging behaviour of M. quadrifasciata significantly. Our results highlight the impact of beneficial soil microbes on plant-pollinator interactions, shedding light on the multiple effects that plant-microbial interactions can have on aboveground organisms.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

PGPR inoculation increased tomato flower number.

Treatment
inoculating tomatoes with PGPRe0
Interactor
PGPRe0symbiont
Outcome
number of flowerse0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

“inoculating tomatoes with PGPR led to an increased number of flowers”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 987–1055 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

PGPR inoculation enhanced floral volatile emission.

Treatment
inoculating tomatoes with PGPRe0
Interactor
PGPRe0symbiont
Outcome
overall floral volatile emissione0
Direction
enhancede0

Not reportedComparator

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

“inoculating tomatoes with PGPR led to an increased number of flowers and enhanced overall floral volatile emission”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 987–1101 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Flower biomass and pollen levels were higher in all studied tomato species except S. peruvianum.

Treatment
inoculating tomatoes with PGPRe0
Interactor
Bacillus amyloliquefaciensBacillus amyloliquefaciense0symbiont
Outcome
flower biomass and pollen levelse0
Direction
highere0
Qualifier
except S. peruvianume0

Not reportedComparator

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 ↗
Bacillus amyloliquefaciens
Bacillus amyloliquefaciens · InteractorAgricultural Research Service (NRRL)Culture Collection · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Our study aimed to investigate the influence of the PGPR Bacillus amyloliquefaciens on the floral traits of wild (Solanum habrochaites, Solanum pimpinellifolium and Solanum peruvianum) and cultivated tomato (Solanum lycopersicum), as well as the impact of microbially-driven changes in floral scent on the foraging behaviour of the stingless bee Melipona quadrifasciata. Our findings revealed that inoculating tomatoes with PGPR led to an increased number of flowers and enhanced overall floral volatile emission. Additionally, we observed higher flower biomass and pollen levels in all species, except S. peruvianum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 589–1205 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Volatile changes significantly influenced bee foraging behavior.

Interactor
M. quadrifasciataMelipona quadrifasciatae0pollinator
Outcome
foraging behaviour of M. quadrifasciatae0

Not reportedDirection

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 ↗
Melipona quadrifasciata
Melipona quadrifasciata · InteractorThiago Mlaker · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“these changes in volatile emissions influenced the foraging behaviour of M. quadrifasciata significantly”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1220–1324 · show in text ↑
e1

“cultivated tomato (Solanum lycopersicum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 778–818 · show in text ↑

inoculation · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

201 papers: 172 positive, 29 negative or no effect

171 papers in the same direction as this paper · 27 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

197 papers more in this group

See all 201 papers →

inoculation · Bacillus amyloliquefaciens · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

inoculation · environment: emissions · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 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.