Next Article in Journal
Assessing the Impact of Village Development on the Habitat Quality of Yunnan Snub-Nosed Monkeys Using the INVEST Model
Next Article in Special Issue
Similar Characteristics of siRNAs of Plant Viruses Which Replicate in Plant and Fungal Hosts
Previous Article in Journal
Enhancing the Production of Pinene in Escherichia coli by Using a Combination of Shotgun, Product-Tolerance and I-SceI Cleavage Systems
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Characterization of the Tobacco-Derived Wild Tomato Mosaic Virus by Employing Its Infectious DNA Clone
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Bacillus velezensis Strain GUMT319 Reshapes Soil Microbiome Biodiversity and Increases Grape Yields

1
Department of Plant Pathology, College of Agriculture, Guizhou University, Guiyang 550025, China
2
Sino Green Agri-Biotech Co., Ltd., Beijing 102101, China
3
Tonghe Zhiyuan (Beijing) Environmental Protection Technology Co., Ltd., Beijing 100036, China
4
Liangshan Yi Autonomous Prefecture Bureau of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Xichang 615000, China
5
College of Tobacco Science, Guizhou University, Guiyang 550025, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Biology 2022, 11(10), 1486; https://doi.org/10.3390/biology11101486
Submission received: 9 August 2022 / Revised: 9 October 2022 / Accepted: 10 October 2022 / Published: 11 October 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Recent Advances in Molecular Plant Pathology)

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

This article confirms that Bacillus velezensis strain GUMT319 is a plant growth-promoting rihizobacteria that uses GUMT319 to increase the yield of grape. To reveal the mechanism of GUMT319 in increasing the yield of grape, we analyzed the soil property and soil microbial community composition of GUMT319-treated and untreated soil. Results showed that the physical and chemical properties and the microbial composition of soil were all altered by Bacillus velezensis strain GUMT319.

Abstract

Bacillus velezensis strain GUMT319 is a rhizobacteria biocontrol agent that can control tobacco black shank disease. We took GUMT319 as a biological fertilizer on Vitis vinifera L. The test group was treated with GUMT319 for one year and the control group had a water treatment. Yields of GUMT319-treated grape groups were significantly increased compared to the controls. The average length and width of single grape fruit, weight of 100 grape fruits, the sugar/acid ratio, and the content of vitamin C were all increased in the GUMT319-treated grape group. The pH of the soil was higher and the contents of alkaline hydrolyzable nitrogen and available potassium were significantly lower in the GUMT319-treated groups than the controls. The soil microbial community composition was evaluated by 16S rDNA high-throughput sequencing, and the Shannon index and Simpson index all showed that soil microbes were more abundant in the GUMT319-treated group. These results indicate that GUMT319 is not only a biocontrol agent, but also a plant growth-promoting rihizobacteria. It can increase the yield of grape by altering the physical and chemical properties and the microbial community composition of the soil.

1. Introduction

Rhizosphere bacteria include many beneficial microorganisms. Rhizosphere bacteria that increase the yield and quality of plants have been termed plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) [1]. So far, many PGPR have been identified. For example, Pseudomonas fluorescens strain WCS417r can prevent the invasion of Fusarium. oxysporum by inducing the systemic resistance of carnation plants [2]; P. fluorescens strain G8-4 and P. putida strain 34-13 can inhibit the infection of Colletotrichum orbiculare by inducing the systemic resistance of cucumber [3]; P. fluorescens strains MKB 100 and MKB 249, P. frederiksbergensis strain 202, and Pseudomonas sp. strain MKB 158 can control Fusarium spp. in wheat and barley by secreting antibiotic substances [4]; P. putida strain 06,909 can significantly reduce cadmium phytotoxicity and increase the metal accumulation in sunflower plant roots [5]; nitrogen-fixing rhizobacteria can increase the nitrogen content in legume host plants, for example Rhizobium etli can increase the nitrogen content in beans [6]; after treatment by B. circulans, the total tuber yields and average tuber weight of per treated potato were significantly higher than in the control group [7].
The mechanisms of how PGPR improve the yield and quality of plants are well studied and have been summarized in a recent review paper. PGPR functions generally consist of biocontrol, enhancement of plant tolerance, and plant growth promotion [8]. These aspects can be further divided into components. For example, the PGPR mechanisms used to promote plant growth can vary. P. stutzeri strain A1501 can increase the growth and nitrogen accumulation of maize [9]. At least 50% of all bacteria can solubilize phosphorus. Bacillus, Rhizobium, and Pseudomonas are the most significant phosphorus-solubilizing bacteria [10]. Bacillus mucilaginosus, B. edaphicus, and B. circulans have efficient potassium-solubilizing capability [11]. Some PGPR species promote the iron uptake ability of plant roots and reduce the abundance of pathogenic microbes through the production of siderophores [12,13]. P. aeruginosa strain PF23EPS+ can increase the production of salicylic acid in sunflower and promote plant growth [14]. The colonization of PGPR in the rhizosphere and roots can exclude plant disease pathogens and help plants absorb soil nutrients [15].
Bacilli rhizobacteria is a potential repository for PGPR [16,17]. Many Bacillus spp. are reported to be PGPR. Colonization of B. velezensis strain SQR9 on cucumber roots can increase root secretion of tryptophan to increase colonization of SQR9 and reduce raffinose secretion of cucumber roots. This can inhibit the colonization of F. oxysporum f. sp. cucumerinum [18,19]. B. velezensis strain FZB42 has been considered to be a Gram-positive model strain for studies on plant growth promotion and biocontrol [20,21]. The subclass IId bacteriocin thuricin 17 produced by B. thuringiensis strain NEB17 stimulates plant growth against abiotic stresses [22]. Biological and bioinformatical tests demonstrated that B. velezensis strain SC60 can inhibit the growth of many plant pathogens and promote the growth of Sesbania cannabina [23].
The overuse of fertilizers and pesticides has caused many problems for agricultural production and the environment. Application of PGPR can help maintain sustainable agricultural development [8,24,25,26,27]. B. velezensis strain GUMT319 is a PGPR rhizobacteria isolated from Guizhou province [28]. In this study, we treated vineyard soils with GUMT319 to determine the effects of GUMT319 on grape yield and found that GUMT319 can function like a PGPR.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Experimental Design and Plant Management

The Bacillus velezensis strain GUMT319 rhizobacteria was originally isolated from the rhizosphere of field-grown tobacco plants in Guizhou with a high incidence of tobacco black shank. Previous studies confirmed that GUMT319 is a useful biocontrol agent [28]. We treated the Vitis vinifera L. variety ‘Sweet Sapphire’ with GUMT319 by root irrigation to determine its impact on grape plant growth. We set up three experimental replicates with an area of 0.667 hm2 each for both the GUMT319-treated group and the GUMT319 untreated group. During growth, the grape plants were irrigated with 3 kg of a GUMT319-containing powder (amount of GUMT319 was 3 × 1011 CFU/g) (CFU stands for colony forming units) per 0.0667 hm2 to the rhizosphere of grape plants. The treatment frequency of GUMT319 on grape plants was every four months from 10 October 2019 to 12 October 2020. The land areas of the GUMT319-treated and untreated group are both 0.667 hm2, and two sets of biological replicates were set up in the same garden. All the other agricultural practices were the same between the GUMT319-treated and untreated grape plants.

2.2. Physical and Chemical Properties Evaluation of the Grape

One hundred grape fruits of each treatment were randomly picked and evaluated. After weighing, the grape fruits were measured for length (polar) and width (equatorial) of each fruit (mm) using a Vernier caliper [29]. The firmness of grape fruits were tested as the method described previously [30]. Ten fruits of each treatment were randomly picked and used to analyze flesh firmness with a penetrometer (Model FT327; Effegi). Each grape fruit was analyzed three times from three sites (without peel) along the equator, with approximately 120° apart.
Vitamin C content in grapes was determined by molybdenum blue colorimetry [31]. The sugar and acid content of the grapes were evaluated using headspace solid phase micro-extraction/gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (HS-SPME/GC-MS) analysis method proposed by Song et al., 2019 [32].

2.3. Soil Sampling

In August 2021, 10 months after the last irrigation of GUMT319, soil samples (1 kg each) were randomly collected from locations in the grape orchard at a depth of 0–20 cm near the rhizosphere of GUMT319-treated or untreated grape plants. We collected the soil samples 10 months after the last treatment of GUMT319, because we wanted to eradicate the effects of GUMT319 itself on the 16S rDNA sequencing result. Three samples from the GUMT319-treated area and three samples from the untreated area were collected. The soil samples were taken to a laboratory for measurement of soil chemical properties and for 16S rDNA high-throughput sequencing.

2.4. Determination of Soil Chemical Properties

The soil samples were sent to the Agricultural Resources and Environment Center of Guizhou Academy of Agricultural Sciences (ARECGAAS) where the chemical properties were measured. The soil pH was determined using a method previously reported [33]. Suspensions (1:2.5 soil: CaCl2) were prepared and the pH was measured using a laboratory 870 pH meter (Schott Instruments, Mainz, Germany) [34]. The organic matter (C, N, and S) and elemental composition (wt %) in soil samples were determined following the method established by Anderson [35].

2.5. 16S rDNA Sequencing and Bioinformatics

The 16S rDNA sequencing followed previously described protocols [36,37]. The V3-V4 region of 16S rDNA was cloned and prepared for high-throughput sequencing on an Illumina HiSeq 2500 platform in Novogene Co., Ltd. (Novogene, Beijing, China). The DADA2 method is mainly used for noise reduction. The DADA2 method is more sensitive and specific than the traditional operational taxonomic units (OTU) method and can detect the real biological variation missed by the OTU method while producing fewer false sequences [38]. QIIME2 and QIIME were used separately to obtain the alpha-diversity and beta-diversity of all groups [39,40]. Simpson and Shannon indices were used to identify the richness and diversity of the microbiome of each group [41]. In the Beta diversity research, four indicators, including the weighted unifrac distance, unweighted unifrac distance, jaccard distance, and Bray–Curtis distance, were used to measure the dissimilarity coefficient of the two samples. Then, principal coordinates analysis (PCoA) and principal component analysis (PCA) were conducted to evaluate the differences between the sample groups [42,43]. Differences and changes related to functional genes in the microbial community of different groups of samples in the metabolic pathway were observed through the composition and difference analysis of the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) metabolic pathway using PICRUSt2 software.

2.6. Statistical Analysis

Data in this study were analyzed by SPSS and Origin [44]. One-way analysis of variance was used to compare the data, followed by Duncan’s test at 5% level of significance to determine the significance of differences between treatment means. All analyzed data are presented as arithmetic means ± standard deviation [45].

3. Results

3.1. Effect of B. velezensis Strain GUMT319 on Grape Growth

Results of the field experiment are shown in Figure 1. After one year of constant treatment, the morphology of the GUMT319-inoculated grape plants was significantly different from the control plants. The ear length of the GUMT319-treated grape plants is longer than the controls, and the roots of GUMT319-treated plants had more branches and root hairs than the control plants.

3.2. Fruit Morphological and Architectural Parameters

To evaluate the effect of GUMT319 on grape fruits, we measured physiological indicators of both the GUMT319-treated and control grapes. The lengths and widths of the grapes in the treatment group were significantly larger than those in the control group (Figure 2A,B). The firmness and the weight of a single fruit were also measured. Fruits of GUMT319-treated plants had greater firmness and higher 100-fruit weight than fruit from the control plants (Figure 2C,D). We examined the sugar/acid ratio and the vitamin C content of the fruits and found that the sugar/acid ratio and vitamin C content of grapes in the GUMT319-treated group were significantly higher than those in the control group (Figure 2E,F).

3.3. Changes in Soil Chemical Properties

Because the growth of plants is inseparable from the soil environment in which they are located, we measured the physicochemical properties of control soil and soil treated with GUMT319. The soil pH of the GUMT319 treatment was significantly higher than that of the control group (Figure 3A). The levels of alkaline hydrolyzable nitrogen and available potassium in the treatment group were significantly lower than those in the control group (Figure 3B,C). There were no significant changes in soil organic matter, total potassium, and total phosphorus content (Figure 3D–F).

3.4. Effect of GUMT319 on the Soil Microbial Community Composition

The change of rhizosphere microbial composition also affects the physical and chemical properties of soil and the growth of plants. Therefore, we conducted 16S rDNA high-throughput sequencing on the soil sample of GUMT319-treated and untreated plants to observe the impact of GUMT319 on the rhizosphere microbial composition. The 16S rDNA sequencing results showed differences in the composition of grape rhizosphere microbes between the GUMT319 treated and non-treated plants; there are 37 upregulated microbes and 6 downregulated microbes in GUMT319-treated soil when compared to the untreated soil (Figure 4). Both the Shannon index (Figure 5A) and the Simpson index (Figure 5B) results confirmed that the species richness of rhizosphere microorganisms in the GUMT319-treated soil was higher than that in the untreated soil. We also performed a functionally annotated relative abundance cluster analysis of rhizosphere microbes between the GUMT319-treated and untreated soil. Results showed that genes in the KEGG pathways, such as KO02529, KO05349, KO2552, and KO2454, were expressed differently in GUMT319-treated and untreated soil microorganisms (Figure 6).

4. Discussion

Providing adequate food for the continuously increasing human population is a worldwide problem [46]. Increased use of fertilizers and pesticides provides some benefits, but their use is accompanied by many environmental problems. Therefore, more environmentally friendly and sustainable ways for increasing food production are needed. PGPR microorganisms were proved to have the ability to enhance yield in many crop production systems. For example, P. fluorescens N04, P. koreensis N19, Paenibacillus alvei T19, and Lysinibacillus sphaericus T22 can alter the synthesis of secondary metabolites and aromatic amino acids of tomato plants to increase their defense response to various stresses (either biotic or abiotic) and increase fruit yields [47]. The endophytic strain of Beauveria bassiana can promote the growth of grape (Vitis vinifera), but the mechanism by which B. bassiana functions to promote grape growth is unclear [48].
We found that the B. velezensis strain GUMT319, a newly identified biocontrol agent for controlling tobacco black shank disease, also has a yield-increasing effect on grapes; the fruits on GUMT319-treated grape plants were larger and heavier than fruits on control grape plants. In addition, the sugar/acid ratio and vitamin C content of the GUMT319-treated grapes were higher than the controls. The ideal substrate for plant growth usually has a high water-holding capacity, good rehydration after drying, good aeration, stable structure, optimal pH, high cation exchange capacity, absence of toxic compounds, and low microbial activity and is free of pests and weeds [49]. We tested the chemical properties of the GUMT319-treated soils to determine if the yield-improving action of GUMT319 on grape plants functions in altering the physical and chemical properties of the soils. We found that the soil pH value increased from 4.95 to 5.80 after GUMT319 treatment, and the levels of alkaline hydrolyzable nitrogen and available potassium were reduced in the GUMT319-treated field. The microbial community can increase the storage of C in near-neutral pH soils [50]. The increase of C in the soil may be related to the increased yield of GUMT319-treated grape plants; however, this is only one of our inferences, and further experiments need to be designed to prove whether this view is correct or not. The decrease in alkaline hydrolyzable nitrogen and available potassium in the GUMT319 treatment suggests that the grapes treated with GUMT319 absorbed more alkaline hydrolyzable nitrogen and available potassium from the soil. The alkaline hydrolyzable nitrogen and available potassium were beneficial to the synthesis of organic matter in all organisms, including the grape plants; this might also be the reason why the grape plants treated with GUMT319 could have higher yield.
We further compared the composition of the rhizosphere microbial community of the GUMT319-treated soil and untreated control soil by 16S rDNA high-throughput sequencing. Result showed that the rhizosphere microbial composition of soil treated with GUMT319 was significantly more abundant than the untreated soil. Microbes in GUMT319-treated and untreated soil showed functional differences in KEGG pathway like KO02529, KO05349, KO2552, and KO2454. These differently expressed microbial community and KEGG pathways could also associated with the altered yield of grape plants; for example, KO2552 is a pathway that increased in GUMT319-treated soil. It is a pathway that directs the decomposition of N(alpha)-Benzyloxycarbonyl-L-leucine into Benzyl alcohol, CO2, and L-Leucine (https://www.kegg.jp/entry/R02552, accessed on 1 October 2022). As we know leucine is an important amino acid for plants and is required for plant growth, it is very logical to think about whether the increase of leucine sources in soil would affect the yield of grape, but this hypothesis need further experiments to verify it.

5. Conclusions

In summary, this study demonstrated that the Bacillus velezensis strain GUMT319 is a PGPR. It can significantly increase grape yields, and it can alter the soil microbial community composition. The change of the soil microbial community may connect with the yield increase and the alternation of the physical and chemical properties of the soil, but these hypotheses need to be further studied.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, H.D., L.P. and X.C.; methodology, X.C. and F.Y.; software, X.T.; validation, H.D., F.Y. and X.C.; formal analysis, C.B.; investigation, C.B., Q.S. and F.Y.; resources, H.D. and L.P.; data curation, S.H. and X.T.; writing—original draft preparation, X.C. and Q.S.; writing—review and editing, F.Y. and X.C.; visualization, S.H.; supervision, H.D.; project administration, H.D., F.Y. and X.C.; funding acquisition, H.D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (32160670).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

All data can be available from the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Saeed, Q.; Xiukang, W.; Haider, F.U.; Kučerik, J.; Mumtaz, M.Z.; Holatko, J.; Naseem, M.; Kintl, A.; Ejaz, M.; Naveed, M.; et al. Rhizosphere Bacteria in Plant Growth Promotion, Biocontrol, and Bioremediation of Contaminated Sites: A Comprehensive Review of Effects and Mechanisms. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 10529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Peer, R.V. Induced Resistance and Phytoalexin Accumulation in Biological Control of Fusarium Wilt of Carnation by Pseudomonas sp. Strain WCS417r. Phytopathology 1991, 81, 728–734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Wei, G. Induction of systemic resistance of cucumber to Colletotrichum orbiculare by select strains of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria. Phytopathology 1991, 81, 1508–1512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Khan, M.R.; Fischer, S.; Egan, D.; Doohan, F.M. Biological control of fusarium seedling blight disease of wheat and barley. Phytopathology 2006, 96, 386–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Wu, S.C.; Cheung, K.C.; Luo, Y.M.; Wong, M.H. Effects of inoculation of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria on metal uptake by Brassica juncea. Environ. Pollut. 2006, 140, 124–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Ramírez, M.; Valderrama, B.; Arredondo-Peter, R.; Soberón, M.; Mora, J.; Hernández, G. Rhizobium etli Genetically Engineered for the Heterologous Expression of Vitreoscilla sp. Hemoglobin: Effects on Free-Living and Symbiosis. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact. 1999, 12, 1008–1015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Elkhatib, H.A.; Gabr, S.M.; Mohamed, R.A.; Manaa, A.F. Impact of potassium fertilizer rates and potassium solubilizing bacteria inoculation on the growth, yield and quality of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.). Alex. Sci. Exch. J. 2019, 40, 127–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Sah, S.; Krishnani, S.; Singh, R. Pseudomonas mediated nutritional and growth promotional activities for sustainable food security. Curr. Res. Microb. Sci. 2021, 2, 100084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Ke, X.; Feng, S.; Wang, J.; Lu, W.; Zhang, W.; Chen, M.; Lin, M. Effect of inoculation with nitrogen-fixing bacterium Pseudomonas stutzeri A1501 on maize plant growth and the microbiome indigenous to the rhizosphere. Syst. Appl. Microbiol. 2019, 42, 248–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Kalayu, G. Phosphate Solubilizing Microorganisms: Promising Approach as Biofertilizers. Int. J. Agron. 2019, 2019, 4917256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Sheng, X.F. Growth promotion and increased potassium uptake of cotton and rape by a potassium releasing strain of Bacillus edaphicus. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2005, 37, 1918–1922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Saha, M.; Sarkar, S.; Sarkar, B.; Sharma, B.K.; Bhattacharjee, S.; Tribedi, P. Microbial siderophores and their potential applications: A review. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2016, 23, 3984–3999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Subramanium, N.; Sundaram, L. Siderophore producing Pseudomonas spp. isolated from rhizospheric soil and enhancing iron content in Arachis hypogaea L. Plant. J. Agric. Technol. 2020, 16, 429–442. [Google Scholar]
  14. Tewari, S.; Arora, N.K. Role of salicylic acid from Pseudomonas aeruginosa PF23EPS+ in growth promotion of sunflower in saline soils infested with phytopathogen Macrophomina phaseolina. Environ. Sustain. 2018, 1, 49–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Hakim, S.; Naqqash, T.; Nawaz, M.S.; Laraib, I.; Siddique, M.J.; Zia, R.; Mirza, M.S.; Imran, A. Rhizosphere Engineering with Plant Growth-Promoting Microorganisms for Agriculture and Ecological Sustainability. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2021, 5, 617157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Aloo, B.N.; Makumba, B.A.; Mbega, E.R. The potential of Bacilli rhizobacteria for sustainable crop production and environmental sustainability. Microbiol. Res. 2019, 219, 26–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Saxena, A.K.; Kumar, M.; Chakdar, H.; Anuroopa, N.; Bagyaraj, D.J. Bacillus species in soil as a natural resource for plant health and nutrition. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2020, 128, 1583–1594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  18. Liu, Y.; Chen, L.; Wu, G.; Feng, H.; Zhang, G.; Shen, Q.; Zhang, R. Identification of Root-Secreted Compounds Involved in the Communication Between Cucumber, the Beneficial Bacillus amyloliquefaciens, and the Soil-Borne Pathogen Fusarium oxysporum. Mol. Plant Microbe. Interact. 2017, 30, 53–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Feng, H.; Zhang, N.; Fu, R.; Liu, Y.; Krell, T.; Du, W.; Shao, J.; Shen, Q.; Zhang, R. Recognition of dominant attractants by key chemoreceptors mediates recruitment of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria. Environ. Microbiol. 2019, 21, 402–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  20. Chowdhury, S.P.; Hartmann, A.; Gao, X.; Borriss, R. Biocontrol mechanism by root-associated Bacillus amyloliquefaciens FZB42—A review. Front. Microbiol. 2015, 6, 780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Fan, B.; Wang, C.; Song, X.; Ding, X.; Wu, L.; Wu, H.; Gao, X.; Borriss, R. Bacillus velezensis FZB42 in 2018: The Gram-Positive Model Strain for Plant Growth Promotion and Biocontrol. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 2491, Erratum in Front. Microbiol. 2019, 10, 1279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Nazari, M.; Smith, D.L. A PGPR-Produced Bacteriocin for Sustainable Agriculture: A Review of Thuricin 17 Characteristics and Applications. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Dong, X.; Tu, C.; Xie, Z.; Luo, Y.; Zhang, L.; Li, Z. The genome of Bacillus velezensis SC60 provides evidence for its plant probiotic effects. Microorganisms 2022, 10, 767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Besset-Manzoni, Y.; Rieusset, L.; Joly, P.; Comte, G.; Prigent-Combaret, C. Exploiting rhizosphere microbial cooperation for developing sustainable agriculture strategies. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018, 25, 29953–29970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Gouda, S.; Kerry, R.G.; Das, G.; Paramithiotis, S.; Shin, H.-S.; Patra, J.K. Revitalization of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria for sustainable development in agriculture. Microbiol. Res. 2018, 206, 131–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Behera, S.S.; Ray, R.C. Bioprospecting of cowdung microflora for sustainable agricultural, biotechnological and environmental applications. Curr. Res. Microb. Sci. 2020, 2, 100018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Haskett, T.L.; Tkacz, A.; Poole, P.S. Engineering rhizobacteria for sustainable agriculture. ISME J. 2021, 15, 949–964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Ding, H.; Mo, W.; Yu, S.; Cheng, H.; Peng, L.; Liu, Z. Whole genome sequence of Bacillus velezensis strain GUMT319: A potential biocontrol agent against tobacco black shank disease. Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12, 658113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Van Reeuwijk, L.P. Procedure for Soil Analysis, 4th ed.; International Soil Reference Center Wageningen (ISRIC): Wageningen, The Netherlands, 1993. [Google Scholar]
  30. Li, Y.; Niu, W.; Dyck, M.; Wang, J.; Zou, X. Yields and nutritional of greenhouse tomato in response to different soil aeration volume at two depths of subsurface drip irrigation. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 39307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Lv, J.; Sun, M.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, J.; Ge, Y.; Li, J. Comparative analysis of expression profiles of metacaspase (MC) genes between two apple (Malus domestica) cultivars with distinct ripening behavior. J. Food Biochem. 2022, 00, e14400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Sayed Elnenaey, E.; Soliman, R. A sensitive colorimetric method for estimation of ascorbic acid. Talanta 1979, 26, 1164–1166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Song, J.; Bi, J.; Chen, Q.; Wu, X.; Lyu, Y.; Meng, X. Assessment of sugar content, fatty acids, free amino acids, and volatile profiles in jujube fruits at different ripening stages. Food Chem. 2019, 270, 344–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Wu, Y.; Qi, L.; Wang, B.; Medley, P.; Drake, J.; Vernon, J.; Ibeanusi, V.; Chen, G. Assess long-term As, Pb and Cr contamination and uptake by Eriocaulon decangulare in the Apalachicola National Forest. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 838, 156040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Anderson, J.M.; Ingram, J.S.I. Tropical soil biology and fertility: A handbook of methods C.A.B.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1993; 221p. [Google Scholar]
  36. Hoang, H.T.; Le, D.H.; Le, T.T.H.; Nguyen, T.T.N.; Chu, H.H.; Nguyen, N.T. Metagenomic 16S rDNA amplicon data of microbial diversity of guts in Vietnamese humans with type 2 diabetes and nondiabetic adults. Data Brief 2020, 34, 106690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. An, N.; Wang, C.; Dou, X.; Liu, X.; Wu, J.; Cheng, Y. Comparison of 16S rDNA Amplicon Sequencing With the Culture Method for Diagnosing Causative Pathogens in Bacterial Corneal Infections. Transl. Vis. Sci. Technol. 2022, 11, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Callahan, B.J.; Wong, J.; Heiner, C.; Oh, S.; Theriot, C.M.; Gulati, A.S.; McGill, S.K.; Dougherty, M.K. High-throughput amplicon sequencing of the full-length 16S rRNA gene with single-nucleotide resolution. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019, 47, e103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Bokulich, N.A.; Kaehler, B.D.; Rideout, J.R.; Dillon, M.; Bolyen, E.; Knight, R.; Huttley, G.A.; Gregory Caporaso, J. Optimizing taxonomic classification of marker-gene amplicon sequences with QIIME 2’s q2-feature-classifier plugin. Microbiome 2018, 6, 90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Bolyen, E.; Rideout, J.R.; Dillon, M.R.; Bokulich, N.A.; Abnet, C.C.; Al-Ghalith, G.A.; Alexander, H.; Alm, E.J.; Arumugam, M.; Asnicar, F.; et al. Reproducible, interactive, scalable and extensible microbiome data science using QIIME 2. Nat. Biotechnol. 2019, 37, 852–857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Li, B.; Zhang, X.; Guo, F.; Wu, W.; Zhang, T. Characterization of tetracycline resistant bacterial community in saline activated sludge using batch stress incubation with high-throughput sequencing analysis. Water Res. 2013, 47, 4207–4216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Avershina, E.; Frisli, T.; Rudi, K. De novo Semi-alignment of 16S rRNA Gene Sequences for Deep Phylogenetic Characterization of Next Generation Sequencing Data. Microbes Environ. 2013, 28, 211–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Kruskal, J.B. Nonmetric multidimensional scaling: A numerical method. Psychometrika 1964, 29, 115–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Xu, Z.; Mandic-Mulec, I.; Zhang, H.; Liu, Y.; Sun, X.; Feng, H.; Xun, W.; Zhang, N.; Shen, Q.; Zhang, R. Antibiotic Bacillomycin D Affects Iron Acquisition and Biofilm Formation in Bacillus velezensis through a Btr-Mediated FeuABC-Dependent Pathway. Cell Rep. 2019, 29, 1192–1202.e5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  45. Adeleke, B.S.; Ayangbenro, A.S.; Babalola, O.O. Genomic Analysis of Endophytic Bacillus cereus T4S and Its Plant Growth-Promoting Traits. Plants 2021, 10, 1776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Bharti, N.; Barnawal, D. Amelioration of salinity stress by PGPR: ACC deaminase and ROS scavenging enzymes activity. In PGPR Amelioration in Sustainable Agriculture; Singh, A.K., Kumar, A., Singh, P.K., Eds.; Woodhead Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2019; pp. 85–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Mhlongo, M.I.; Piater, L.A.; Steenkamp, P.A.; Labuschagne, N.; Dubery, I.A. Metabolic Profiling of PGPR-Treated Tomato Plants Reveal Priming-Related Adaptations of Secondary Metabolites and Aromatic Amino Acids. Metabolites 2020, 10, 210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Mantzoukas, S.; Lagogiannis, I.; Mpousia, D.; Ntoukas, A.; Karmakolia, K.; Eliopoulos, P.A.; Poulas, K. Beauveria bassiana Endophytic Strain as Plant Growth Promoter: The Case of the Grape Vine Vitis vinifera. J. Fungi 2021, 7, 142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Freschet, G.T.; Pagès, L.; Iversen, C.M.; Comas, L.H.; Rewald, B.; Roumet, C.; Klimešová, J.; Zadworny, M.; Poorter, H.; Postma, J.A.; et al. A starting guide to root ecology: Strengthening ecological concepts and standardising root classification, sampling, processing and trait measurements. N. Phytol. 2021, 232, 973–1122, Erratum in N. Phytol. 2022, 235, 372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Malik, A.A.; Puissant, J.; Buckeridge, K.M.; Goodall, T.; Jehmlich, N.; Chowdhury, S.; Gweon, H.S.; Peyton, J.M.; Mason, K.E.; van Agtmaal, M.; et al. Land use driven change in soil pH affects microbial carbon cycling processes. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9, 3591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Growth and yield parameters of grape plants treated with and without Bacillus velezensis strain GUMT319.
Figure 1. Growth and yield parameters of grape plants treated with and without Bacillus velezensis strain GUMT319.
Biology 11 01486 g001
Figure 2. Grape fruit parameters. The error bars represent standard deviation (SD). (A) Length of single fruit: GUMT319 untreated 42.94 ± 2.19 b, and GUMT319 treated 51.68 ± 0.83 a (mm). (B) Width of single fruit: GUMT319 untreated 17.06 ± 0.39 b, and GUMT319 treated 19.94 ± 0.59 a (mm). (C) Firmness of grape fruit: GUMT319 untreated 3.39 ± 0.38 b, and GUMT319 treated 4.46 ± 0.60 a (Kg/m2). (D) Weight of 100 grape fruits: GUMT319 untreated 808.03 ± 74.73 b, and GUMT319 treated 1040.87 ± 37.42 a. (E) Sugar/acid ratio: GUMT319 untreated 8.85 ± 4.23 b, and GUMT319 treated 13.64 ± 3.48 a. (F) The content of vitamin C: GUMT319 untreated 1.27 ± 0.40 b, and GUMT319 treated 1.50 ± 0.20 a.
Figure 2. Grape fruit parameters. The error bars represent standard deviation (SD). (A) Length of single fruit: GUMT319 untreated 42.94 ± 2.19 b, and GUMT319 treated 51.68 ± 0.83 a (mm). (B) Width of single fruit: GUMT319 untreated 17.06 ± 0.39 b, and GUMT319 treated 19.94 ± 0.59 a (mm). (C) Firmness of grape fruit: GUMT319 untreated 3.39 ± 0.38 b, and GUMT319 treated 4.46 ± 0.60 a (Kg/m2). (D) Weight of 100 grape fruits: GUMT319 untreated 808.03 ± 74.73 b, and GUMT319 treated 1040.87 ± 37.42 a. (E) Sugar/acid ratio: GUMT319 untreated 8.85 ± 4.23 b, and GUMT319 treated 13.64 ± 3.48 a. (F) The content of vitamin C: GUMT319 untreated 1.27 ± 0.40 b, and GUMT319 treated 1.50 ± 0.20 a.
Biology 11 01486 g002
Figure 3. Properties of the GUMT319-treated and untreated soil. The error bars represent standard deviation (SD). (A) The pH value of the soil: GUMT319 untreated 4.90 ± 0.26 b, and GUMT319 treated 5.85 ± 0.15 a. (B) The content of available potassium: GUMT319 untreated 188.33 ± 0.47 b, and GUMT319 treated 172.33 ± 4.71 b (mg/Kg) (C) The content of alkaline hydrolyzable nitrogen: GUMT319 untreated 236.16 ± 3.00 b, and GUMT319 treated 215.94 ± 1.32 a (mg/Kg). (D) The content of soil organic matter: GUMT319 untreated 47 ± 2.22 a, and GUMT319 treated 47 ± 1.43 a (mg/Kg). (E) The ratio of total potassium: GUMT319 untreated 1.21 ± 0.02 a, and GUMT319 treated 1.17 ± 0.05 a (%). (F) The ratio of total phosphorus: GUMT319 untreated 0.085 ± 0.001 a, and GUMT319 treated 0.091 ± 0.004 a (%).
Figure 3. Properties of the GUMT319-treated and untreated soil. The error bars represent standard deviation (SD). (A) The pH value of the soil: GUMT319 untreated 4.90 ± 0.26 b, and GUMT319 treated 5.85 ± 0.15 a. (B) The content of available potassium: GUMT319 untreated 188.33 ± 0.47 b, and GUMT319 treated 172.33 ± 4.71 b (mg/Kg) (C) The content of alkaline hydrolyzable nitrogen: GUMT319 untreated 236.16 ± 3.00 b, and GUMT319 treated 215.94 ± 1.32 a (mg/Kg). (D) The content of soil organic matter: GUMT319 untreated 47 ± 2.22 a, and GUMT319 treated 47 ± 1.43 a (mg/Kg). (E) The ratio of total potassium: GUMT319 untreated 1.21 ± 0.02 a, and GUMT319 treated 1.17 ± 0.05 a (%). (F) The ratio of total phosphorus: GUMT319 untreated 0.085 ± 0.001 a, and GUMT319 treated 0.091 ± 0.004 a (%).
Biology 11 01486 g003
Figure 4. Volcano map of the species diversity of the microbes in GUMT319-treated and untreated grape plant rhizosphere. Result showed that there are 37 upregulated microbes and 6 downregulated microbes that appeared in GUMT319-treated soil compared to the untreated soil. Species with differences in richness were selected by log2 fold change > 1 and q value < 0.005. NoSignifi represents microbes with no significant difference in species richness.
Figure 4. Volcano map of the species diversity of the microbes in GUMT319-treated and untreated grape plant rhizosphere. Result showed that there are 37 upregulated microbes and 6 downregulated microbes that appeared in GUMT319-treated soil compared to the untreated soil. Species with differences in richness were selected by log2 fold change > 1 and q value < 0.005. NoSignifi represents microbes with no significant difference in species richness.
Biology 11 01486 g004
Figure 5. Species diversity analysis of the microbes in GUMT319-treated and untreated grape plant rhizosphere. Both (A) Shannon index and (B) Simpson index results showed that the species richness of rhizosphere microorganisms in the GUMT319 treatment groups was higher than that in the untreated group.
Figure 5. Species diversity analysis of the microbes in GUMT319-treated and untreated grape plant rhizosphere. Both (A) Shannon index and (B) Simpson index results showed that the species richness of rhizosphere microorganisms in the GUMT319 treatment groups was higher than that in the untreated group.
Biology 11 01486 g005
Figure 6. Differences and changes related to functional genes in the microbial community of GUMT319-treated and untreated samples in the metabolic pathway.
Figure 6. Differences and changes related to functional genes in the microbial community of GUMT319-treated and untreated samples in the metabolic pathway.
Biology 11 01486 g006
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Chen, X.; Yang, F.; Bai, C.; Shi, Q.; Hu, S.; Tang, X.; Peng, L.; Ding, H. Bacillus velezensis Strain GUMT319 Reshapes Soil Microbiome Biodiversity and Increases Grape Yields. Biology 2022, 11, 1486. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology11101486

AMA Style

Chen X, Yang F, Bai C, Shi Q, Hu S, Tang X, Peng L, Ding H. Bacillus velezensis Strain GUMT319 Reshapes Soil Microbiome Biodiversity and Increases Grape Yields. Biology. 2022; 11(10):1486. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology11101486

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chen, Xiangru, Fang Yang, Chunwei Bai, Qianrui Shi, Shan Hu, Xianying Tang, Lijuan Peng, and Haixia Ding. 2022. "Bacillus velezensis Strain GUMT319 Reshapes Soil Microbiome Biodiversity and Increases Grape Yields" Biology 11, no. 10: 1486. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology11101486

APA Style

Chen, X., Yang, F., Bai, C., Shi, Q., Hu, S., Tang, X., Peng, L., & Ding, H. (2022). Bacillus velezensis Strain GUMT319 Reshapes Soil Microbiome Biodiversity and Increases Grape Yields. Biology, 11(10), 1486. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology11101486

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop