Paper · 2024 · Microorganisms

Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi and Rhizobium Improve Nutrient Uptake and Microbial Diversity Relative to Dryland Site-Specific Soil Conditions

Rosalie B. Calderon; Sadikshya R. Dangi

4
claims
8
verbatim quotes
17
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) and rhizobium play a significant role in plant symbiosis. However, their influence on the rhizosphere soil microbiome associated with nutrient acquisition and soil health is not well defined in the drylands of Montana (MT), USA. This study investigated the effect of microbial inoculants as seed treatment on pea yield, nutrient uptake, potential microbial functions, and rhizosphere soil microbial communities using high-throughput sequencing of 16S and ITS rRNA genes. The experiment was conducted under two contrasting dryland conditions with four treatments: control, single inoculation with AMF or Rhizobium, and dual inoculations of AMF and Rhizobium (AMF+Rhizobium). Our findings revealed that microbial inoculation efficacy was site-specific. AMF+Rhizobium synergistically increased grain yield at Sidney dryland field site (DFS) 2, while at Froid site, DFS 1, AMF improved plant resilience to acidic soil but contributed a marginal yield under non-nutrient limiting conditions. Across dryland sites, the plants' microbial dependency on AMF+Rhizobium (12%) was higher than single inoculations of AMF (8%) or Rhizobium (4%) alone. Variations in microbial community structure and composition indicate a site-specific response to AMF and AMF+Rhizobium inoculants. Overall, site-specific factors significantly influenced plant nutrient uptake, microbial community dynamics, and functional potential. It underscores the need for tailored management strategies that consider site-specific characteristics to optimize benefits from microbial inoculation.

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 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Dual AMF and Rhizobium inoculation increased grain yield at Sidney DFS 2.

Treatment
AMF+Rhizobiume0
Interactor
AMFe0symbiont
Second interactor
RhizobiumRhizobiume0symbiont
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Setting
Sidney dryland field site (DFS) 2e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lathyrus oleraceus
Lathyrus oleraceus · TaxonRenee Comet (photographer) AV Number: AV-9400-4164 · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Rhizobium
Rhizobium · Second interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)Ninjatacoshell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“AMF+Rhizobium synergistically increased grain yield at Sidney dryland field site (DFS) 2”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 786–874 · show in text ↑
e1

“effect of microbial inoculants as seed treatment on pea yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 292–353 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At Froid, AMF improved pea resilience to acidic soil but yielded only a marginal gain.

Treatment
AMFe0
Interactor
AMFe0symbiont
Outcome
plant resilience to acidic soile0
Direction
improvede0
Setting
Froid site, DFS 1e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lathyrus oleraceus
Lathyrus oleraceus · TaxonRenee Comet (photographer) AV Number: AV-9400-4164 · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“at Froid site, DFS 1, AMF improved plant resilience to acidic soil but contributed a marginal yield under non-nutrient limiting conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 882–1020 · show in text ↑
e1

“effect of microbial inoculants as seed treatment on pea yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 292–353 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pea microbial dependency was 12% under dual inoculation, versus 8% AMF alone and 4% Rhizobium alone.

Treatment
AMF+Rhizobiume0
Interactor
AMFe0symbiont
Second interactor
RhizobiumRhizobiume0symbiont
Outcome
plants' microbial dependencye0
Direction
highere0
Value
12%e0
Comparator
single inoculations of AMFe0

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

Lathyrus oleraceus
Lathyrus oleraceus · TaxonRenee Comet (photographer) AV Number: AV-9400-4164 · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Rhizobium
Rhizobium · Second interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)Ninjatacoshell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the plants' microbial dependency on AMF+Rhizobium (12%) was higher than single inoculations of AMF (8%) or Rhizobium (4%) alone”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1044–1171 · show in text ↑
e1

“effect of microbial inoculants as seed treatment on pea yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 292–353 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Microbial community structure and composition varied by site in response to inoculants.

Interactor
AMFe0symbiont
Outcome
microbial community structure and compositione0

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

Lathyrus oleraceus
Lathyrus oleraceus · TaxonRenee Comet (photographer) AV Number: AV-9400-4164 · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Variations in microbial community structure and composition indicate a site-specific response to AMF and AMF+Rhizobium inoculants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1173–1302 · show in text ↑
e1

“effect of microbial inoculants as seed treatment on pea yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 292–353 · show in text ↑

Rhizobium · yield · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results

53 papers: 52 positive, 1 negative or no effect

51 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

49 papers more in this group

See all 53 papers →

mycorrhiza · yield · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results

18 papers: 15 positive, 3 negative or no effect

14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

14 papers more in this group

See all 18 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.