Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Role of Microorganisms in Alleviating the Abiotic Stress Conditions Affecting Plant Growth

Written By

Talaat El Sebai and Maha Abdallah

Submitted: 23 January 2022 Reviewed: 20 June 2022 Published: 03 August 2022

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.105943

From the Edited Volume

Advances in Plant Defense Mechanisms

Edited by Josphert Ngui Kimatu

Chapter metrics overview

185 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

Abstract

Agriculture is one of the main sectors that participate in building up world economy, and offers the main source of food, income, and employment to their rural populations. Despite the necessity of doubling agricultural production, quantitatively and qualitatively, to cope with the worsening increase in the global population and to meet the increasing humanitarian needs, the agricultural sector faces many abiotic stress conditions. Additionally, the great climate changes lead to an increase in the negative impact of these stressors. There are many conventional and nonconventional ways that could directly or indirectly mitigate the adverse effects of these stressors, each of them has its advantages and disadvantages. The biological tool is one of the promising methods; it depends on the effective use of beneficial microorganisms to alleviate stress conditions that affect plant growth, development, and therefore productivity. This method is economically inexpensive and eco-friendly toward the environment. Beneficial soil microorganisms such as PGPRs and AMF colonize the root zone of many plant species and help to enhance plant growth and development. Thus, this chapter is aiming to highlight the role of microorganisms in alleviating the abiotic stress conditions affecting in plant growth.

Keywords

  • environmental stress
  • mitigating
  • plant productivity
  • PGPR
  • sustainable agriculture
  • climatic changes

1. Introduction

Agriculture is the backbone of developed and particularly developing countries, with more than 60% of the population of the developing countries depending on it for their livelihood. Increasing food production to fulfill the needs of increasing world population becomes a major concern. By the year 2050, it is expected that the human population will rise up to 10 billion. Hence, it is necessary to produce 70% more food for meeting the need of additional population. Furthermore, fighting poverty and hunger, consuming limited natural resources with more efficiencies, and acclimatizing to global warming must be taken into account to attain sustainable development [1]. Therefore, to make sure nourishment security, crop production will have to be doubled, and produced in more environmentally sustainable means [2]. However, improvements in the agriculture production process, land and water use are essential to realizing food security, poverty reduction, and total sustainable development. This can be realized by increasing cultivable land area and/or by increasing efficiently the productivity of land and water units. Really, several other factors cause a further reduction in crop productivity resulting in a lack of food security, particularly in developing countries. Of them, the availability of agricultural land, freshwater resources, ever-increasing abiotic and biotic stresses, and low economic activity in agricultural sector are the main factors. Moreover, Agriculture sector is categorized as one of the most exposed sectors to climate change. Plant productivity, principally in arid and semi-arid zones is fronting growing stresses triggered by natural and human’s activities issues. Augmented occurrence of both abiotic and biotic stresses has become the principal cause for declining productivity in main crops. There is evidence of yield drops in several crops in many parts of the world due to increasing drought, salinity stress, reduction in precipitation rate and elevated air temperature. Abiotic stresses can directly or indirectly disturb the physiological status of an organism by changing its metabolism, growth, and development. It is generally thought that abiotic stresses are considered to be the main source of yield reduction [3].

Abiotic stresses affect plants in various ways and are causes of reducing crop productivity (Figure 1). To enhance plant production, it necessities to apply cost-effective technologies to control stress conditions. Soil microorganisms, living in the soil under normal and harsh conditions, have shown great properties, which, if exploited can help agriculture for improving and sustaining crop productivity. Whereas it is well recognized that beneficial microbes can stimulate growth and increase productivity through mechanisms like increasing nutrient availability, hormone production and disease controlling, it is also becoming increasingly clear that their effects may be more far-reaching.

Figure 1.

Adverse effects of abiotic stress on plants and the role of PGPRs in alleviation of these stresses. This figure illustrates an overview of mechanisms in microbial phytohormone-mediated plant stress tolerance. Several root associated microbes produce cytokinin (CK), gibberellin (GB), indole-3-acetic acid (IAA), salicylic acid (SA), and abscisic acid (ABA), which help plants to cope with stress by improving its antioxidant potential, by up-regulation of the antioxidant system and by accumulation of compatible osmolytes therefore reducing oxidative stress-induced damage; improving photosynthetic capacity and membrane stability; promoting cell division and stomatal regulation; stimulating growth of root system, and acquisition of water and nutrients. (Adapted from [4]).

Soil microorganisms (SMs) are very important in naturally occurring populations that play a significant role in soil fertility, plant growth, and maintaining healthier environment. This microbial population may comprise number of microorganisms like bacteria, actinomycetes, cyanobacteria, and fungi. Some of these are considered efficient owing to their growth enhancing abilities. Among these naturally occurring populations, plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) have been investigated widely due to their positive effect on plant growth and protecting the environment from various hazards. PGPR are free living bacteria that enhance plant growth by root colonization [5]. These are also noted as plant health promoting bacteria (PHPB) or nodule promoting bacteria (NPB) [6] and can be characterized as intracellular PGPR (iPGPR) and extracellular PGPR (ePGPR) on the basis of their proximity in related to the host plant [7]. Figure 2 shows the degree of nearness and influence of the plant-microbe interactions.

Figure 2.

The extent of proximity and influence of the plant-microbes interactions, small colored shapes (blue, green, red, purple and yellow) represent soil microbes. Diversity and density of microbes are variable according to soil organic contents and types, distance from plant roots, plant species, and plant tissue. (Adapted from [8]).

In the present chapter, we attempt an overview of current knowledge on how plant-PGPMs (Rhizobacteria, fungi, Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi (AMF), Blue Green Algae or CyanoBacteria (BGA, CB), Actinomycetes or Actinobacteria, etc.) interactions help in alleviating abiotic stress conditions in different crop systems, which can be used for sustainable agriculture.

Advertisement

2. Stress definition and types

Stress conditions are a set of either abiotic or biotic factors that are unsuitable for plant growth of which the plant may be exposed during its various growth stages (one or more) from germination to fruiting, which may not only negatively affect its growth and productivity but may lead to entirety stopping its growth and thus its productivity. To which the plant may respond by making physiological and/or molecular and/or morphological changes or all of the previously. The plant stresses are defined as responses describing a suite of molecular and cellular processes prompted by the detection by a plant of some form of stress. These processes may be accompanied by the plant’s induces for a reduction or an increase in some plant metabolites leading to an increase in plant resistance or tolerance. These stresses can be abiotic stress such as nutrient deficit, drought (water deficit or salinity), water-logging or flooding, extreme cold, frost, heat, sodicity, and metal and metalloid toxicity or biotic stress which are responsible for the damage done to an organism by other living organisms like herbivores or pathogens, bacteria, viruses, fungi, parasites, beneficial and harmful insects, weeds, and cultivated or native plants.

Advertisement

3. Adverse effects of abiotic stress conditions on plant growth and productivity

Various abiotic stress conditions such as salinity, drought, flooding, temperature (heat, cold), nutrient elements deficiency, alkalinity, organic and inorganic pollutants and heavy metals adversely affect crop plants growth, development and productivity [9] as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Diverse abiotic stresses and the strategic defense mechanisms adopted by the plants. This figure shows diverse abiotic stresses and the strategic defense mechanisms adopted by the plants. although the consequences of salinity, heat, drought, and chilling are different, the biochemical responses seem more or less similar. High light intensity and heavy metal toxicity also generate similar impact, but submergence/flood situation leads to degenerative responses in plants where aerenchyma are developed to cope with anaerobiosis. It is, therefore, clear that adaptive strategies of plants against variety of abiotic stresses are analogous in nature. It may provide an important key for mounting strategic tolerance to combined abiotic stresses in crop plants. (Adapted from [10]).

3.1 Adverse effects of salinity stress conditions

Excessive salinity is one of the most important abiotic factors influencing the world’s agricultural lands [11]. Also, it is one of the principle reasons that limit agricultural productivity [12]. It delays plant development by shifting numerous physiological, biochemical, and metabolic processes. Excessive accumulation of sodium chloride (NaCl) and other salts persuades water-deficient conditions owing to uncontainable stomata closure causing osmotic stress to plant roots. It results in ionic inequity which causes reduction in shoot and leaf growth, untimely leaf death, and necrosis [13, 14]. Reduced water absorption and augmented salts accumulation like Na+, K+, Mg+2, Ca+2, and Cl inside the cell and as a result increased ion toxicity. The reduced growth of the plants under salinity is due to nutrient disturbances, affecting the availability, mobilization, and distribution of nutrients. This may be attributed to the competition of sodium (Na+) and chloride (Cl) with nutrients such as potassium (K+), calcium (Ca+2) and nitrate (NO3) [15]. Under higher accumulation of salts, the activity of nitrogenase enzyme encompassed in biological nitrogen fixation (BNF) is reduced then the nodulation process highly diminished [16, 17]. Currently, 50% of all irrigation patterns are impacted by salinity.

3.2 Adverse effects of drought stress conditions

Drought stress is one the greatest stressors for plants which can occur when the availability of water to the roots is insufficient or when the transpiration rate is too high. These two conditions regularly coincide with tropical (arid) and sub-tropical (semi–arid) climates. Water deficit restricted photosynthesis activity due to imbalance between light capture and its utilization as a consequence oxidative stress occurred [18]. Drought stress prompted a remarkable decreasing in photosynthesis, which is reliant on photosynthesizing tissue and photosynthetic pigments [19, 20]. Through stresses, active solute buildup (i.e., TSS, proteins, and FAAs) is claimed to be an effective stress tolerance mechanism [21]. Drought stress conditions lead to a decrease in the metabolic and physiological performance of plants and consequently the plant growth and productivity negatively affects. Additionally, drought stressor limits biological nitrogen fixation, and pigment content [13] as well as it reduces nutrients accessibility and their passage. Likewise, it greatly increases reactive oxygen species (ROS) concentration leading to an increase in oxidative stress, which take place because of an inequity created between the rate of electron transport and reducing power activity for metabolic consumption [22, 23]. Reactive oxygen species further prompt modifications in tissue construction and performance, enzyme stability, and lipid peroxidation [24].

3.3 Adverse effects of temperature stress conditions

Climatic changing conditions result in an increase of the intensity of heat and cold stress. The temperature stress causes alterations in membrane, water potential, and photosynthetic activity in plants. The optimum temperature for third carbon plants’ (C3 plants’) growth is stated 15–25°C by a number of scientists [25, 26, 27]. Up and down the optimum temperature, the plant performance was limited. Heat stress restricts cool-season plant development in summer in many positions of the world. Throughout the warm season, heat stress limited photosynthesis and carbohydrate buildup, augmented cell membrane damages triggered protein folding and even cell death in C3 plants [27]. The same damages have been recorded in warm-season plants, fourth carbon plants’ (C4 plant species), in the winter. Also, the C4 species uptake less water and needed to alter themselves to be able to absorb mineral elements with low solubility [28].

3.4 Adverse effects of nutrient element deficiency stress conditions

Nutrient elements are considered fundamental for plant growth, development, and survival. 17 essential elements are necessary to maintain plant growth and development. Three of them (C, H and O) are derived from the air and water whereas the rest (N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S, Fe, Mn, Cu, Zn, Cl, B, Mo, and Co) are supplied either from soil or by adding fertilizers. Each of them plays a special role in plant life cycle and their necessity varies with the plant species and growth phases. Both the shortage and surplus of these nutrients lead to negative impacts on plant growth and development (Figure 4). Further, to make sure the efficient utilization of the nutrients, the environmental factors should be satisfactory. The plants absorb these elements in ionic form and its ability to absorb them is related to their quantities and distribution in the soil.

Figure 4.

The signs of essential nutrient elements deficiency in plants.

3.5 Adverse effects of alkalinity stress conditions

Alkalinity achieves its specific negative effect characteristics on crop plants in alkaline soils and disturbs plants at biological and physiological level. In addition to sodium chloride (NaCl) stress, there are other salts like sodium carbonate (NaCO3) and sodium hydrogen carbonate (NaHCO3) which are harmful to crops at excessive accumulations. High pH (more than eight) in alkaline soils diminishes the nutrient availability of crucial macro- and micro-nutrients, such as phosphorus (P), manganese (Mn), zinc (Zn), copper (Cu), and iron (Fe) causing nutrient deficiency and osmotic stress [29].

3.6 Adverse effects of contaminants stress conditions

Organic and inorganic pollutants are repeatedly being used in our environment via human interfering comprising industrial effluent discharge and agricultural practices, e.g., unreasonable and undue application of mineral elements and plant protective materials (pesticides) to soil. These chemical pollutants are causing major dangers to human health and their environment and may be directly or indirectly affecting on crop growth, development and productivity

Advertisement

4. Plant behavior under stress conditions

A deficit of one or more of the vital nutrient elements caused several alterations that may be occurred at morphological, physiological, and also molecular levels of crop plants. The data presented in Table 1 summaries these changes and in addition the symptoms that result from the deficiency of these essential nutrient elements on plants.

NDPlant responses atSymptomsReferences
Physiological levelMorphological level
NA decrease in the activity of nitrate reductase and RO scavenger enzymes like SOD and POD,
Decrease in chlorophyll content, and photosynthesis rate induces the chloroplast disintegration and loss of chlorophyll. An increase in production of phenolic compounds as secondary metabolites.
An elevated root shoot ratio with shortened lateral branches leaf area, High decreased in biomass productionEarly, the older leaves show chlorosis comparing to the newer, Necrosis occurs. At later phases stunted growth and plant death if nitrogen deficiency continues.[30, 31]
PAn increase in production of phenolic compounds as secondary metabolites and more organic acid was released.A reduction in plant growth rate and remobilization of phosphorus happenOptical disorders like red or purple color leaves occur because of anthocyanin accumulation.[30, 32]
KAn increase in production of phenolic compounds as secondary metabolites.A reduction in plant growth rateShortens inter nodes followed by bushy appearance, chlorosis and necrosis.[30]
CaA significant decrease in chlorophyll content up to 50%, and protein, photosynthesis,
Limited in translocation of photosynthesis compounds from source to sink
significant increase in soluble nitrogen content of the plant.
Great reduction in growth rate,
Less protein–N, RNA and DNA,
A significant increase in soluble nitrogen content of the plant
A reduced amount of root and shoot branches.[33, 34, 35]
MgAccumulation of sugar in source leaves was detected before reduction of photosynthesis and chlorophyll biosynthesis.Leaf vines chlorosis.[36, 37]
SHabitually no visual symptoms,
Reduction in total crop yield. Leaves begin to develop chlorosis. The chlorosis started from the leaf’s edge and spread over intercostal area, but the zones beside the veins permanently remain green. Chlorosis happens, but it never turns into necrosis.
[38, 39]
FeReduction in plant growth and even may stop some plant function
An efficient decrease in photosynthesis.
Chlorosis of young leaves
Reduction in crop production.
ZnA decrease in biomass productionInitial early senescence of the old leaves or slight yellowing of the newer leaves to the formation of the yellow chlorotic or even necrotic areas on the leaves.
MnNecrotic spots or marginal necrosis may also develop. In dicotyledons the chlorosis develops first on the distal portions of the affected leaf blades, whereas in cereals, the leaf bases are first affected.Diffuse interveinal chlorosis on the young, expanded leaf bladesWheat leaves became mottled,
Decrease in chlorophyll content, plant appearance turned yellow.
[40, 41, 42]
CuA decrease in activity of the cytochrome oxidase. This enzyme has a role in plant root nodule cells recovery under low oxygen stress for nitrogen fixation.New leaves margin necrosis, lateral shoot death, unformed leaf margin, bleeding in main node stem and low lignification value in vessels.[43]
MoA decrease in nitrogen fixation,
Shoot and nodule dry weights.
BAccumulation of the phenolic compound
A reduction in lignin biosynthesis.
Limitation of lateral bud growth in some plantsThe inhibition or cessation of the roots and shoots elongations.[44, 45, 46, 47, 48]
ClLess cluster formation and fewer yieldsReduction in leaf area and plant biomass. Leaves wilting, chlorotic mottling, bronzing, and tissue necrosis.[49, 50]

Table 1.

Summaries the plant response at physiological and morphological levels and some symptoms under nutrient deficiency stress.

Advertisement

5. Role of microorganisms in mitigating abiotic stress conditions

The rhizosphere contains the tiny parts of soil inherent to roots of plants. The average count of microorganisms at the plant root region is very high as compared with the rest of the soil. So, it is clear that plant roots have an assortment of mineral, nutrient, and metabolite components, which are considered the principle factor for captivating microorganisms to assemble and link together. Root exudate of plants is a critical factor for microbial settlement in the rhizosphere. Shifting of microorganisms regarding the root exudates has an important role in pulling force of the microbial population to colonize the plant roots.

The interactions between microbial community and crop plants are vital to the modification and endurance of both in any abiotic environment. Induced Systemic Tolerance (IST) is the expression exploited for microbe-negotiated triggers of abiotic stress reactions. The duty of microorganisms in altering abiotic stresses in plants attracted the attention of several researchers [51, 52, 53]. The intrinsic metabolic of microbes and genetic aptitudes, participate to reduce abiotic environmental stresses in the plants [54]. The function of numerous rhizospheric microbes inhabitants with the genera Azospirillum [55], Azotobacter [56, 57], Bacillus [58, 59, 60], Bradyrhizobium [61], Burkholderia [62], Enterobacter [60], Methylobacterium [63], Rhizobium [60, 64], Pantoea [60, 65], Pseudomonas [60, 66], Trichoderma [67], and cyanobacteria [68] in elevation and control of growth in plant grown under different kinds of abiotic stresses has been reported.

In this regard, [69] reported that Streptomyces sp. strain PGPA39 alleviates salinity stress and stimulates the growth of “Micro-Tom” tomato plants and Arabidopsis [70]. Burkholderia phytofirmans strain PsJN overcome drought stress in maize [71] and wheat [72]. The data presented in Tables 2 and 3 outline some examples of beneficial microorganisms that play a pivotal role in alleviation the adverse effects of abiotic stresses.

Stress TypePGPRsPlantReferences
SaltAzospirillum brasilenseHordeum vulgare, Lactuca sativa,Pisum sativum. Cicer arietinum[55, 73, 74, 75]
SaltBacillus amylolequifaciens, B. insolitus Microbacterium sp. Pseudomonas syringaeTriticum aestivum[76]
SaltP. fluorescensArachis hypogea[77]
SaltB. subtilisArabidopsis thaliana[78]
Salt, droughtAchromobacter piechaudiiLycopersicon esculentum[79, 80]
DroughtAzospirillum brasilense Pseudomonas spp.Zea mays[81, 82]
DroughtRhizobium sp., P. putida P5Helianthus annus[83, 84]
DroughtBacillus, P. mendocinaLactuca sativa[85, 86]
DroughtB. megateriumTrifolium[87]
DroughtPseudomonas sp., Variovorax paradoxusPisum sativum[88, 89]
DroughtPaenibacillus polymyxa, Rhizobium tropiciVigna radiata[90]
DroughtPseudomonas spp.Asparagus[91]
DroughtAzospirillum sp., B. safensis, Ochrobactrum pseudogregnonenseTriticum aestivum[92, 93]
FloodingEnterobacter cloacae, P. putidaLycopersicon esculentum[94]
HeatPseudomonas sp. AMK-P6Sorghum bicolor[66]
ColdP. putidaBrassica napus[95]
Cold and heatBurkholderia phytofirmansVitis vinifera[96]
Heavy metalsSanguibacter sp., Pseudomonas sp.Nicotiana tabacum[97]
Heavy metalsB. subtilis, Pantoea agglomeransAvena sativa[98]
Heavy metalsP. fluorescens, Microbacterium sp.Brassica napus[99]
Ni and CdMethylobacterium oryzae, Burkholderia sp.Lycopersicon esculentum[100]
Iron toxicityB. subtilis, Bacillus sp., B. megateriumOryza sativa)[101]

Table 2.

Soil microorganisms (endophyte or rhizobacteria acting as PGPR and conferring the plants’ abiotic stress tolerance.

Stress typeArbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF)PlantReferences
DroughtG. mosseaePoncirus trifoliata[102]
DroughtG. deserticolaPepper[103]
DroughtG. intraradicesRosa hybrida L., Lactuca sativa, Cicer arietinum[104, 105, 106]
DroughtG. etunicatum, G. versiformCicer arietinum[106]
SaltGlomus etunicatumCarthamus tinctorius[107]
SaltG. intraradicesZea mays,Trigonella foenum-graecum,
Fragaria ananassa
[108, 109, 110]
SaltG. viscosumMedicago sativa L.[111]
SaltG. etunicatumBrachiaria humidicola[112]
Nutrient deficiency, HeatG. mosseaeDalbergia sissoo, Acacia nilotica,
Poncirus trifoliata
[113, 114, 115]
Heat and coldG. mosseae, G. sp. R10
G. aggregatum, G. fasciculatum
Gigaspora margarita
Fragaria ananassa[116]
Heavy metalsG. mosseaePiper nigrum[117]
Heavy metalsG. mosseae, Aculaospora laevisZea mays[118]
Heavy metalsG. intraradicesThlaspi sp.[119]
Heavy metalsG. etunicatum, G. intraradices[120]
Heavy metalsG. macrocarpumZea mays[121]

Table 3.

Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi (AMF) that act as PGP and conferring the plants abiotic stress tolerance.

5.1 Role of microorganisms in mitigating salinity stress conditions

Endophytes and rhizobacteria as PGPB have potent in mitigating salinity stress. Their direct actions involve stimulation of phytohormones production, improvement of nutrient uptake, promotion of siderophore production, and nitrogen fixation. Some other indirect roles have resembled to actions in water-deficit stress as osmotic stability, which is pivotal in both conditions, such as accumulation of osmolytes (glycine betaine, proline, trehalose, EPS, and volatile organic compounds accumulation). These compounds elevate plant growth via perpetuate ion homeostasis. PGPR improves plant tolerance to salinity stress via induced systemic tolerance (IST) [16, 122]. In this connection, [123] proved that the application of plant growth-promoting bacteria, PGPB, producing ACC deaminase enzyme or transgenic plants revealed the corresponding acdS gene, growth evolution, seeds productivity, and enhancement of Camelina sativa quality on plants grown in marginal land which not suitable for cultivation due to high salinity.

5.2 Role of microorganisms in mitigating drought stress conditions

Plant Growth Promoting Bacteria (PGPB) supports the antioxidant apparatus of plants via managing antioxidant enzyme level, consequently, increasing the plant resistance to abiotic stresses [124]. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria mitigate the water deficit condition by altering several physiological and biochemical processes in plants via a rhizobacterial-induced drought endurance and resilience (RIDER). This procedure includes secretion of exo-polysaccharides (EPS), management of endogenous phytohormones and antioxidants, and coordinated organic solutes, e.g., sugars, amino acids, and polyamines, and/or fabricating of volatile organic constituents, dehydrins, and heat shock protein [125]. These techniques help plants to sustain water deficit by preserving plant growth, membrane stability, and enzyme constancy and effectively controlling the water and mineral uptake by increasing the surface area of root [16, 126].

5.3 Role of microorganisms in mitigating temperature stress conditions

Adapted microbes to high or low temperatures could alleviate their harmful effects. Microbes have explicit enzymatic structures that manage their metabolism to overcome the changing temperature and preserve their membrane and enzyme stability. Under these conditions, heat and cold shock proteins are established. These molecular chaperones contribute resistance to adjacent high-temperature stress [16, 127]. These severe conditions caused protein denaturation, which is handled with trehalose through formation of a gel-like web to save plants from dehydration [128]. Cold-adapted microbes found at high-altitude agro-ecosystem, have a vast prospect to assist plants in alleviating unfavorable climatic conditions. In cold desert of the Himalayas, India psychrophilic and psychro-tolerant bacteria exhibited plant growth-stimulating characteristics, including Arthrobacter, Aeromicrobium, Aeromonas, Bacillus, Bosea, Burkholderia, Brevundimonas, Citricoccus, Exiguobacter-ium, Janibacter, Janthinobacterium, Jeotgalicoccus, Kocuria, Methylobacterium, Pseudomonas, Providencia, Psychrobacter, Pantoea, Plantibacter, Rhodococcus, Sanguibacter, Sporosarcina, Staphylococcus, Sphingobacterium, and Variovorax [129]. Correspondingly, the isolation of bacteria associated with heat-tolerant plants from wheat exhibited improvement in traits of plant growth and development under heat stress. They encompassed bacterial genera like Alcaligenes, Arthrobacter, Bacillus, Delftia, Methylobacterium, and a number of pseudomonads [130].

5.4 Role of microorganisms in mitigating alkalinity stress conditions

Application of encouraging phytoremediation technology depends on the integrated effect of plants and associated microbes. It has a valuable strategy to clean up the biodegradation of organic pollutants and heavy metal-polluted soils.

5.5 Role of microorganisms in mitigating contaminants stress conditions

Application of encouraging phytoremediation technology depends on the integrated effect of plants and associated microbes. It has a valuable strategy to clean up biodegradable organic pollutants and heavy metal-polluted soils [131]. PGPB responds to heavy metal stress via different mechanisms involving bioaccumulation, enzymatic detoxification, metal mobilization, immobilization, volatilization, and EPS complexation as well as accumulation of phytohormone, solubilization of phosphate, siderophore, ACC-deaminase, and NF [132, 133]. Metal solubility and accessibility in the soil were influenced by microbes. Any metal pollutants cannot be easily degraded, so they must be either stabilized or extracted from the soil. Metal-chelating siderophores and enzyme mechanisms involved in phosphate solubilization expedite heavy metal uptake under stress conditions [134]. Growth-promoting microbes build up chelating compounds such as siderophores which may decrease soil pH and promote metal solubility via complex formation. Also, the production of organic acids, such as citric, gluconic, and oxalic, may promote metal mobilization, and uptake consequently, accumulation in plant shoots, by phytoextraction. Redox processes promote bioavailability of metals as reduction of Mn (IV) to Mn (III) and Fe (III) to Fe (II) so, become less toxic. Moreover, the bioavailability could increase using bio-surfactants and phyto-chelatins via formation of the complex with heavy metals [134, 135, 136, 137, 138]. Phyto-stablization through growth-enhancing bacteria and plant development may reduce metal availability in highly metal-polluted soils. This may occur via the formation of new specific metals, altered metal adsorption on plant cell walls, or ejection through downfall. Phyto-management is a combination of several phyto-technologies, a sustainable application and cost valid can contribute enormous assistance in repair of metal-polluted soils [139].

Advertisement

6. Mechanisms of microorganisms for alleviating abiotic stress conditions

The bio-fertilizers, bio-stimulators, and bio-control effects of PGPRs (Table 4) are contingent on their natural ability, as well as the interaction manner and militant endurance circumstances. GPB promotes plant proliferation with direct and/or indirect techniques [6, 145]. Concerning direct mechanisms, it involved the synthesis of compounds that expedite the uptake of crucial nutrients and micronutrients from the soil and accumulation of plant growth regulators, such as phosphorus and potassium solubilization, iron and zinc sequestration, siderophore and plant hormone accumulation, and atmospheric nitrogen fixation. Regarding the indirect techniques, it occurs through the accumulation of HCN and antifungal components, hostile activity regarding pathogenic organisms, and resistance to unfavorable stress conditions. Moreover, the bacteria can promote systemic resistance in plants via the accumulation of certain metabolites that provide extracellular signals and stimulate a series of internal processes. Ultimately, these signals are recognized by different plant cells responsible on the promotion of the defense system.

PGPR formsDefinitionMechanism of actionReferences
Bio-fertilizerAn ingredient that has microbes (bacteria, fungi, AMF,BGA AB etc.) which, when applied on the seed, plant surface or soil, colonizes the environmental of roots and stimulate plant growth by various ways like, increased supply of primary nutrients for the host plantBiological nitrogen fixation (BNF)
Phosphate solubilizing microbes
[140, 141]
Bio-stimulatorMicroorganisms that characterized by their ability to produce or synthesis phytohormones or other secondary metabolites that stimulate plant growthLike indole acetic acid (IAA), gibberellic acid (GA), cytokinins and ethylene[141, 142]
Bio-control agentsMicroorganisms that protect plant against diseases by controlling phytopathogenic using different mechanismsSynthesis of antibiotics, siderophores, HCN, hydrolytic enzymes,Acquired and Induced systemic resistance[140, 141, 143]

Table 4.

Some mechanism of action of PGPRs that enhance the plant growth*.

*Adapted from [144].

In addition to bacteria, fungi especially mycorrhizae are considered pivotal plant growth stimulators. Mycorrhizae are mainly divided into mycorrhizal fungi (MF) and vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal (VAM) fungi. These types of fungi are either still connected externally with the host plant (ectomycorrhizae) or they may organize endosymbiotic associations (VAM). They form extended networking of fungal mycelium, so, maximize nutrient uptake via roots. In this connection, [146] concluded that the endophyte root fungal of Piriformos poraindica promoted salt and drought tolerance in Chinese cabbage and barley, respectively. These stimulatory effects were achieved by promoting the concentration and activity of antioxidants and stimulating many other processes [147]. The possibility of microbial connections with the plants has several aspects. It starts with the induction of local or systemic stress mitigation techniques in plants to resist unfavorable stress conditions. Then, they assist plants to protect their growth, proliferation, and development via fixation, mobilization and/or accumulation of nutrients, hormones and organic phytostimulant components. These multipronged roles of microorganisms or their populations demonstrate their strength, achievable and critical options for different alleviation techniques for abiotic stress in plant crops.

Various suggested techniques explain the effect of microbes in mitigation of abiotic stress. Soil-dwelling microbes can be classified into genera Achromobacter, Aeromonas, Azospirillum, Azotobacter, Bacillus, Enterobacter, Klebsiella, Pseudomonas, and Variovora which exhibited enhancement of plant growth under different stress conditions [60, 75, 89, 122, 125, 148]. Several publications concerned with the role of microbes for alleviating abiotic stresses indicate the importance of microbes in this field (Tables 59). All soil-inhabiting bacteria are organized as plant growth promoters (PGP) if they are able to promote plant growth even under different unfavorable physicochemical conditions. There are several tools by which microbes promote plant growth as indole acetic acid (IAA), which is synthesized in the shoot apical meristem and gathered in the active root apical meristems. The auxins have growth-promoting roles in plant-involved cell elongation, consequently root growth induction and lateral root formation. In contrast, the high auxins concentrations, promote retardant effects on root growth [60, 186]. The same result was recorded as a result of high ethylene synthesis [186]. Results also concluded that the rhizosphere colonizing bacteria promote plant growth via phytohormones production [187]. Generally, agricultural practices observed that the PGPRs not only assist in alleviation of environmental stresses, but also increase the yield of several crop plants including barley, maize, rice, and soybean [174, 188, 189]. In this regard, Pseudomonas sp. PMDzncd2003 enforces salt tolerance on rice germinates under salt stress. It also has a high ability to root colonizing parallel to the ability to accumulate exo-polysaccharides (EPS) that promote salinity tolerant [190]. Also, inoculation of rice with Bacillus pumilus mitigates salinity and high boron stresses [191]. The reported technique for cell protection under stress conditions was high antioxidant enzyme activity accompanied by the presence of bacterial inoculant. More studies are needed to investigate the communication between plant and bacterial colonizers at the molecular level.

Crop plantsMicroorganismsEffect/MechanismReferences
Maize (Zea mays)Azospirillum lipoferumIncrease accumulation of TSS, FAAs, and proline
Enhance the growth parameters
[149]
Bacillus Spp.Increased accumulation of proline, TSS, FAAs,
Decrease electrolyte leakage, reduce the activity of antioxidants enzyme (CAL, GPX peroxidase)
[59]
SoybeanPseudomonas putida H-2–3Decrease the level of AB and SA, Increase the accumulation of JA. Modulated antioxidants by declining SOD, flavonoids, and RSA[150]
Wheat (Triticum aestivum)Bacillus amyloliquefaciens 5113 Azospirillum brasilense NO40Bacterial-mediated plant attenuated transcript level and improves homeostasis.[23]
A. brasilense NO40,
R. leguminosarum (LR-30),
R. phaseoli (MR-2) Mesorhizobium ciceri (CR-30,39),
Improved the growth, biomass, and drought tolerance index throughout the production of CAL, EPS, and IAA[151]
Lavandula dentateBacillus thuringiensisIAA induced higher proline and K-content improved nutritional, physiological, and metabolic activities, Decreased the activity of: GR and APX[152]
Cicer arietinum L.Pseudomonas putida MTCC5279 (RA)Increase: osmolyte accumulation, ROS scavenging ability, and stress-responsive gene expressions[24]
LettuceAzospirillum sp.Increased chlorophyll and ascorbic acid content, Promote air-part biomass, better overall visual quality, hue, chroma and antioxidant capacity, and a lower browning intensity[153]
ArabidopsisAzospirilum brasilense sp 245Improved plants seed yield, plants survival, proline levels, and relative leaf water content; Decreased stomatal conductance, malondialdehyde, and relative soil water content[154]
Phyllobacterium brassicacearum strain STM196Enhanced ABA content resulted in: Decreased leaf transpiration, Delay in reproductive development, Increased biomass and water use efficiency[155]
Brassica oxyrrhinaPseudomonas libanensis TR1 and Pseudomonas reactans Ph3R3Enhanced plant growth, leaf relative water, and pigment content Decreased concentrations of proline and malondialdehyde in leaves[133, 156]
Rice (Oryza sativa L.)Trichoderma harzianumStimulate root growth independent of water status,
Delay drought response
[12]
Medicago truncatulaSinorhizobium medicaeImprove root nodulation and nutrient acquisition during drought stress[157]
WheatBacillus spp., Enterobacter spp., Moraxella spp., Pseudomonas spp.Auxin synthesis[158]
Vigna mungo L. Pisum sativum LConsortium (Ochrobactrum pseudogrignonense, Pseudomonas sp., Bacillus subtilis)Enhance the production of ACC deaminase, RO scavenging enzymes, and osmolytes[159]
WheatPantoea agglomeransImproving soil aggregation through (EPS)[160]
ArabiodopsisPaenibacillus polymyxaInduction of stress-resistant gene ERD 15[161]
SunflowerRhizobium sp.Enhancing Soil aggregation through EPS[83]
WheatAzospirillum sp.Improved Water relations[92]
PeaVariovorax paradoxusproduction of ACC-deaminase[162]
ArabiodopsisParaphaeosphaeria quadriseptata )Induction of HSP[163]
RiceBrome mosaic virus-[164]
Common beanP. polymyxa and Rhizobium tropiciChange in hormone balance and stomatal conductance[90]
PeaPseudomonas sp.Decreased ethylene production[88]
LettucePseudomonas mendocina, Glomus intraradicesImproved antioxidant status[86]
SunflowerPseudomonas putida P45Improved soil aggregation due to EPS production[84, 165]
TrifoliumBacillus megaterium, Glomus sp.IAA and proline production[87]
TomatoAchromobacter piechaudiiSynthesis of ACC-deaminase[79]
SorghumAM FungiImproved Water relation[166]

Table 5.

List of some microorganisms that have the ability for mitigating drought stress condition through different mechanisms.

Crop plantsMicroorganismsEffect/MechanismReferences
Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.)Brachybacterium saurashtrense (JG-06), Brevibacterium casei (JG-08), Haererohalobacter (JG-11)Higher of K+/Na+ ratio, Ca2+, P, and N content.
Shoot and root contain a higher concentration of auxin
[12, 167]
Mung bean (Vigna radiate)Rhizobium and PseudomonasImproving growth, nodulation and yield of mung bean under natural and salt-affected conditions throughout ACC-deaminase production[168]
Barley and oatsAcinetobacter spp. , Pseudomonas sp.Production of enzyme ACC deaminase,
lower ethylene and IAA promote plant growth
[169]
WheatAzospirillum sp.Increased shoot dry weight and grain yield.
Plants accumulate some organic solutes as. Proline, TSS and inorganic ions to maintain osmotic adjustment
Pseudomonas sp. Serratia sp.Have ACC deaminase activity, Reduce ethylene level and enhance plant growth and yield[170]
Maize (Zeya Mays)Pseudomonas and EnterobacterEnhance N, P, and K uptake and increase K+/Na+ ratios, Decrease triple response[171]
Rice GJ-17Pseudomonas pseudoalcaligenes
Bacillus pumilus
Reduced: the toxicity of ROS, the activity of lipid peroxidation, and SOD activity[172]
RiceBacillus amyloliquefaciens NBRISN13 (SN13)Modulating differential transcription in a set of at least 14 genes[173]
Barley (Hordeum vulgare L.)Hartmannibacter diazotrophicus E19Increased: root and shoot dry weight. Enhance ACC-deaminase activity lower ethylene content[174]
lettuce seedsAzospirillumStimulated ascorbic acid content, antioxidant capacity, higher biomass, and a lower browning intensity[153]
Brassica napus (canola) and MaizePseudomonas putida UW4Modulation of plant protein differential expression and ACC deaminase activity[175]
Oryza sativaL.Arabidopsis thalianaCurtobacterium albidumModulation of osmolytes and antioxidative enzymes, and induction of systemic tolerance[176]
AlfafaEnterobacter sp.Synthesis of 2-keto-4- methylthiobutyric acid (KMBA)[177]
BarleyPiriformaspora indicaIncreased antioxidative capacity[178]
WheatB. amylolequifaciens
B. insolitus, Microbacterium sp. P. syringae
Restricted Na+ influx[76]
GroundnutPseudomonas fluorescensproduction of ACC-deaminase[77]
RiceScytonemaProduction of GA and extracellular products[179]
TomatoAchromobacter piechaudiiProduction of ACC-deaminase[79]
SorghumAM FungiAmended Water relation[166]

Table 6.

List of some microorganisms that have the ability for mitigating salinity stress condition through different mechanisms.

TemperatureCrop plantsMicroorganismsMechanismsReference
HeatWheatPseudomonas putidaPhytohormone, HCN, ammonia, siderophore and P-solubilization, and accumulation of metabolites like proline, sugars, starch, amino acids, and proteins[180]
HeatSorghumPseudomonas sp. AMK-P6Induction of heat shock proteins and improved plant biochemical status[66]
LowGrapevineBurkholderia phytofirmans PsJNSynthesis of ACC-deaminase[96]
LowCanolaP. putidaSynthesis of ACC-deaminase[95]

Table 7.

Some microorganisms that have the ability for mitigating temperature stress conditions through different mechanisms.

Water stressplantsMicrobesMechanismsReferences
FloodingDragonblood (Pterocarpus officinalis)AM fungi & BradyrhizobiumDevelopment of adv. roots, aerenchyma, and hyper trophied lenticels[181]
FloodingTomatoPseudomonas putida, Enterobacter cloacaeSynthesis of ACC-deaminase[94]

Table 8.

List of some microorganisms that have the ability for mitigating flooding stress conditions through different mechanisms.

Heavy metal SCrop plantsMicroorganismsMechanismsReferences
Cadmium and Iron toxicityHibiscus cannabinusEnterobacter sp.Metal immobilization Production:, IAA siderophore)[182]
Lead toxicitySunflowerPseudomonas gessardii, Pseudomonas fluorescensLead uptake (increase in APX, CAL, SOD, GR, and proline contents)[183]
Arsenic toxicityRiceAchromobacter sp.ACCD (Arsenic uptake)[184]
Ni & Cd ToxicityTomatoMethylobacterium oryzae, Burkholderia spReduced uptake and translocation[100]
Metal toxicityChickpeaPGPRSequestration of metal ions[185]

Table 9.

List of some microorganisms that have the ability for mitigating heavy metal stress conditions through different mechanisms

Finally, [192] have proved the duty of Trichoderma harzianum on alleviation of stress in different rice genotypes through adjustment of dehydrin, malonialdehyde and aquaporin, and genes parallel to several physiological traits. Rhizobacteria-promoted resistance to water deficit and resilience (RIDER) by altering the phytohormone levels, enzyme activities, defense-related proteins incorporation, antioxidant levels, and epoxypolysaccharide accumulation for plants. These strategies help plants to mitigate unfavorable conditions [122, 125]. Using stress tolerant microorganisms is a promising tool in improving the productivity of crop plants grown in stress-susceptible areas. Application of Trichoderma harzianum improved oil content in NaCl affected Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) via increasing the uptake of essential nutrients, promoting the accumulation of antioxidants and osmolytes, and decreasing NaCl uptake [67]. In addition to, up-regulation of monodehydroascorbate reductase in treated plants. It also alleviates salinity stress via accumulation of ACC-deaminase [193]. Moreover, inoculation of barley and oats, with Acinetobacter sp. and Pseudomonas sp. enhance the accumulation of IAA and ACC deaminase under saline soil [169].

Advertisement

7. Conclusion

Agriculture is the backbone of developed and particularly developing countries, with more than 60% of the population of the developing countries depending on it for their livelihood. Increasing food production to fulfill the needs of an increasing world population becomes of a major concern. Despite the necessity of doubling agricultural production, in terms of quantity and quality, to cope with the worsening increase in the global population and to meet the increasing humanitarian needs, the agricultural sector faces many abiotic and biotic stress conditions. Additionally, the great climate changes resulting from global warming lead to an increase in the negative impact of these stressors. Throughout this literature study, it is well established that the abiotic stress conditions (salinity, drought, high and low temperature, alkalinity, and organic and inorganic pollution have great side effects on plants (decreasing in plant growth and productivity, physiological changes, alteration in osmotic balance and ion cytotoxicity). Moreover, the side effects of abiotic stress conditions have been expected to be increased because of the bad or nonsustainable agricultural practices, water scarcity and reduced arable land, soil degradation, human activity, and the climate change (global warming of the planet). Hence, it has become a necessity to reduce the different causes behind the increasing abiotic stress conditions. On one hand, these can be achieved through good and sustainable agricultural practices such as agricultural rotation system, integrated crop management, integrated nutrient management, and integrated pest management re-mapping of agricultural map in the light of climate change, soil fertility, etc. On the other hand, in order to increase crop productivity, it becomes necessary to develop low-cost technologies for abiotic stress management. Soil microorganisms, surviving in the soil under extreme conditions, have shown high properties, which, if exploited can serve agriculture by increasing and maintaining crop productivity. Our literature study has indicated the paramount importance of these beneficial microorganisms in the mitigation of the negative consequences resulting from different abiotic stress conditions. Where, it is well established that beneficial soil microorganisms can promote growth and increase productivity through different mechanisms such as increasing the availability of essential nutrient elements and enhancement of their uptake, phyto-hormones production, ACC-deaminase production, biological control agents’ production, etc. Even though, more efforts should be given in this field like that, isolation and characterization worldwide benefit microbes from different biological niches and under various harsh conditions. Further researches will be required concerning the optimization of the mass production of these microorganisms, the best carrier that allow increasing the shelf life of beneficial microorganisms and par consequence increasing its storage ability, also, the better ways for its field application. The application of these beneficial microorganisms is still limited and how to increase their application rate should be taken into account.

References

  1. 1. FAO. High Level Expert Forum - How to Feed the World in 2050. Rome: Economic and Social Development Department; 2009
  2. 2. Borlaug N, Dowswell CR. Feeding a world of ten billion people: A 21st century challenge. In: Tuberosa T, Phillips RL, Gale M, editors. Proceedings of in the Wake of the Double Helix: From the Green Revolution to the Gene Revolution. Bologna, Italy; 2005. pp. 3-24
  3. 3. Reynolds M, Tuberosa R. Translational research impacting on crop productivity in drought-prone environments. Current Opinion in Plant Biology. 2008;11:171-179
  4. 4. Egamberdieva D, Wirth SJ, Alqarawi AA, Allah EF, Hashem A. Phytohormones and beneficial microbes: Essential components for plants to balance stress and fitness. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2017;8:2104. DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2017.02104
  5. 5. Kloepper JW, Lifshitz R, Zablotowicz RM. Free living bacterial inocula for enhancing crop productivity. Trends in Biotechnology. 1989;7:39-44
  6. 6. Hayat R, Ali S, Amara U, Khalid R, Ahmed I. Soil beneficial bacteria and their role in plant growth promotion: A review. Annals of Microbiology. 2010;60:579-598
  7. 7. Gray EJ, Smith DL. Intracellular and extracellular PGPR: Commonalities and distinctions in the plant bacterium signaling processes. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 2005;37:395-412
  8. 8. Backer R, Rokem JS, Ilangumaran G, Lamont J, Praslickova D, Ricci E, et al. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria: Context, mechanisms of action, and roadmap to commercialization of biostimulants for sustainable agriculture. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2018;9:1473-1490
  9. 9. Gontia-Mishra I, Sasidharan S, Tiwari S. Recent developments in use of 1- aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate (ACC) deaminase for conferring tolerance to biotic and abiotic stress. Biotechnology Letters. 2014;36:889-898
  10. 10. Meena KK, Sorty AM, Bitla UM, Choudhary K, Gupta P, Pareek A, et al. Abiotic stress responses and microbe-mediated mitigation in plants: The omics strategies. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2017;8:172. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2017.00172
  11. 11. Masood S, Seiji Y, Shinwari ZK, Anwar R. Mapping quantitative trait loci (QTLs) for salt tolerance in rice (Oryza sativa) using RFLPs. Pakistan Journal of Botany. 2005;36(4):825-834
  12. 12. Shukla N, Awasthi RP, Rawat L, Kumar J. Biochemical and physiological responses of rice (Oryza sativa L.) as influenced by Trichoderma harzianum under drought stress. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 2012a;54:78-88
  13. 13. Enebe MC, Babalola OO. The influence of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria in plant tolerance to abiotic stress: A survival strategy. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 2018;102(18):7821-7835
  14. 14. Julkowska MM, Testerink C. Tuning plant signaling and growth to survive salt. Trends in Plant Science. 2015;20:586-594
  15. 15. Hu Y, Schmidhalter U. Drought and salinity: A comparison of their effects on mineral nutrition of plants. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science. 2005;168:541-549
  16. 16. Kumar A, Verma JP. Does plant—Microbe interaction confer stress tolerance in plants: A review? Microbiological Research. 2018;207:41-52
  17. 17. Suzuki N, Bassil E, Hamilton JS, Inupakutika MA, Zandalinas SI, Tripathy D, et al. ABA is required for plant acclimation to a combination of salt and heat stress. PLoS One. 2016;11(1):e0147625
  18. 18. Foyer CH, Noctor G. Oxygen processing in photosynthesis:Regulation and signaling. New Phytology. 2000;146:359-388
  19. 19. Dubey RS. Photosynthesis in plants under stressful conditions. In: Pessarakli M et al., editors. Handbook of Photosynthesis. CRC Press; 2005. pp. 717-718
  20. 20. Raza SH, Athar HR, Ashraf M. Influence of exogenously applied glycinebetaine on photosynthetic capacity of differently adapted wheat cultivars under salt stress. Pakistan Journal of Botany. 2006;38:341-351
  21. 21. Jaleel CA, Kishore kumar P, Manivannan A (2008) Salt stress mitigation by calcium chloride in Phyllanthusamarus. Acta Botanica Croatica. 67:53-62
  22. 22. Beck EH, Fettig S, Knake C, Hartig K, Bhattarai T. Specific and unspecific responses of plants to cold and drought stress. Journal of Biosciences. 2007;32(3):501-510
  23. 23. Kasim WA, Osman ME, Omar MN, Abd El-Daim IA, Bejai S, Meijer J. Control of drought stress in wheat using plant-growth-promoting bacteria. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation. 2013;32:122-130
  24. 24. Tiwari S, Lata C, Chauhan PS, Nautiyal CS. Pseudomonas putida attunes morphophysiological: Biochemical and molecular responses in Cicer arietinum L. during drought stress and recovery. Plant Physiology. 2016;99:108-117
  25. 25. Beard JB. Turfgrass: Science and Culture. In: Pessarakli M, editor. Handbook of Plant and Crop Physiology. 3rd ed. USA: Taylor & Francis Publishing Group; 1973. pp. 453-485
  26. 26. DiPaola JM. Syringing effects on the canopy temperatures of bentgrass greens. Agronomy Journal. 1984;76:951-953
  27. 27. Fry JD, Huang B. Applied Turfgrass Science and Physiology. New Jersey, USA: John Wiley & Sons Hoboken; 2004. p. 2004
  28. 28. Calatayud A, Gorbe E, Roca D, Martinez PF. Effect of two nutrient solution temperatures on nitrate uptake, nitrate reductase activity, NH4+ concentration and chlorophyll a fluorescence in rose plants. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 2008;64:65-74
  29. 29. Chen L, Yin H, Xu J, Liu X. Enhanced antioxidative responses of a salt-resistant wheat cultivar facilitate its adaptation to salt stress. African Journal of Biotechnology. 2011;10(74):16887-16896
  30. 30. Hewitt EJ. The essential nutrient element:Requirement and interaction in plants. Plant Physiology. 1963;3:137-360
  31. 31. Forde BG. Nitrate transporters in plants:Structure, function and regulation. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta. 2000;1465:219-235
  32. 32. Uhde-Stone C, Gilbert G, Jhonson J, et al. Acclimation of white lupin to phosphate deficiency involves enhanced expression of gens related to organic acid metabolism. Plant and Soil. 2003;248:99-116
  33. 33. Rangnekar P. Effect of calcium deficiency in the carbon metabolisms in photosynthesis and respiration in tomato leaf. Plant and Soil. 1975;42:565-583
  34. 34. Singh OS, Sharma VK. Alternation in growth and metabolism of potato plants by calcium deficiency. Plant and Soil. 1972;36:363-369
  35. 35. Rangnekar P. Effect of calcium deficiency on the translocation and utilization of C14–photosynthate in tomato plants. Plant and Soil. 1974;41:589-600
  36. 36. Hermans CGN, Johnson RJ, Strasser N, Verbruggen N. Physiological characterization of magnesium deficiency in sugar beet: Acclimation to low magnesium differentially affects photosystems I and II. Planta. 2004;220:344-355
  37. 37. Hermans C, Verbruggen N. Physiological characterization of Mg deficiency in Arabidopsis thaliana. Journal of Experimental Botany. 2005;56:2153-2161
  38. 38. Lobb WR, Reynolds DG. Further investigations in the use of Sulphur in North Otago. New Zealand Journal of Agriculture. 1956;92:17-25
  39. 39. Horiguchi T. Effects of nitrogen, phosphorus and manganese deficiencies on the formation of anthocyanin and other phenolic compounds in plants. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition. 1989;60:226-232
  40. 40. Ferrari J, Sluijsmans CMJ. Mottling and magnesium deficiency in oats and their dependence on various factors. Plant and Soil. 1955;6:262-299
  41. 41. Wallace T. In the Diagnosis of Mineral Deficiencies in Plants by Visual Symptoms. London: lIM Stationery Office; 1961
  42. 42. Robson AD, Snowball K. Nutrient deficiency and toxicity symptoms. In: Reuter DJ, editor. Plant Analysis. An Interpretation Manual. Australia: Inkata Press; 1986. pp. 13-19
  43. 43. Cartwright B, Hallsworth EG. Effect of copper deficiency on root nodules of subterranean clover. Plant and Soil. 1970;33:685-698
  44. 44. Bohnsack C, Wand Albel LS. Early effects of boron deficiency on indoleacetic acid oxidase levels of squash root tips. Plant Physiology. 1977;59:1047-1050
  45. 45. Kouchi H. Rapid cessation of mitosis and elongation of root tip cells of Vida faha as affected by boron deficiency. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition. 1977;23:113-119
  46. 46. Kramer U, Cotter-Howells JD, Charnock JM, Baker AJM, Smith JA. Free histidine as a metal chelator in plants that accumulate nickel. Nature. 1996;379:635-638
  47. 47. Troitskaya EA, Maevskaya AN. Temp GA (1975) hydroxyproline content in cell walls of plants with different boron requirements. Soviet Plant Physiology. 1975;22:854-857
  48. 48. Skok J. The role of boron in the plant cell. In: Lamb CA et al., editors. Trace Elements. New York, USA: Academic Press; 1958. pp. 227-243
  49. 49. Johanson CM, Stout PR, Broyer TC, Carlton AB. Comparative chlorine requirements of different plant species. Plant and Soil. 1957;8:337-353
  50. 50. Terry N. Photosynthesis, growth and the role of chloride. Plant Physiology. 1977;60:69-75
  51. 51. de Zelicourt A, Al-Yousif M, Hirt H. Rhizosphere microbes as essential partners for plant stress tolerance. Molecular Plant. 2013;6:242-245
  52. 52. Nadeem SM, Ahmad M, Zahir ZA, Javaid A, Ashraf M. The role of mycorrhizae and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) in improving crop productivity under stressful environments. Biotechnology Advances. 2014;32:429-448. DOI: 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2013.12.005
  53. 53. Souza RD, Ambrosini A, Passaglia LMP. Plant growth-promoting bacteria as inoculants in agricultural soils. Genetics and Molecular Biology. 2015;38:401-419. DOI: 10.1590/S1415-475738420150053
  54. 54. Gopalakrishnan S, Sathya A, Vijayabharathi R, Varshney RK, Gowda CL, Krishnamurthy L. Plant growth promoting rhizobia: Challenges and opportunities. Biotech. 2015;5:355-377
  55. 55. Omar MNA, Osman MEH, Kasim WA, Abd El-Daim IA. Improvement of salt tolerance mechanisms of barley cultivated under salt stress using Azospirillum brasiliense. Tasks Vegetation Science. 2009;44:133-147. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4020-9065-3_15
  56. 56. Sahoo RK, Ansari MW, Dangar TK, Mohanty S, Tuteja N. Phenotypic and molecular characterisation of efficient nitrogen-fixing Azotobacter strains from rice fields for crop improvement. Protoplasma. 2014a;251:511-523. DOI: 10.1007/s00709-013-0547-2
  57. 57. Sahoo RK, Ansari MW, Pradhan M, Dangar TK, Mohanty S, Tuteja N. A novel Azotobacter vinellandii (SRIAz3) functions in salinity stress tolerance in rice. Plant Signal Behaviour. 2014b;9:e29377. DOI: 10.4161/psb.29377
  58. 58. Tiwari S, Singh P, Tiwari R, Meena KK, Yandigeri M, Singh DP, et al. Salt-tolerant rhizobacteria-mediated induced tolerance in wheat (Triticum aestivum) and chemical diversity in rhizosphere enhance plant growth. Biology and Fertility of Soils. 2011;47:907-916. DOI: 10.1007/s00374-011-0598-5
  59. 59. Vardharajula S, Ali SZ, Grover M, Reddy G, Bandi V. Drought tolerant plant growth promoting Bacillus spp.: Effect on growth, osmolytes, and antioxidant status of maize under drought stress. Journal of Plant International. 2011;6:1-14
  60. 60. Sorty AM, Meena KK, Choudhary K, Bitla UM, Minhas PS, Krishnani KK. Effect of plant growth promoting bacteria associated with halophytic weed (Psoralea corylifolia L.) on germination and seedling growth of wheat under saline conditions. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology. 2016;180:872-882. DOI: 10.1007/s12010-016-2139-z
  61. 61. Panlada T, Pongdet P, Aphakorn L, Rujirek N-N, Nantakorn B, Neung T. Alleviation of the effect of environmental stresses using co-inoculation of mungbean by Bradyrhizobium and rhizobacteria containing stress-induced ACC deaminase enzyme. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition. 2013;59:559-571. DOI: 10.1080/00380768.2013.804391
  62. 62. Oliveira CA, Alves VMC, Marriel IE, Gomes EA, Scotti MR, Carneiro NP, Guimaraes CT, Schaffert RE Sa, NMH. Phosphate solubilizing microorganisms isolated from rhizosphere of maize cultivated in an oxisol of the Brazilian Cerrado biome. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 2009;41:1782-1787. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2008. 01.012
  63. 63. Meena KK, Kumar M, Kalyuzhnaya MG, Yandigeri MS, Singh DP, Saxena AK, et al. Epiphytic pink-pigmented methylotrophic bacteria enhance germination and seedling growth of wheat (Triticum aestivum) by producing phytohormone. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek. 2012;101:777-786. DOI: 10.1007/s10482-011-9692-9
  64. 64. Remans R, Ramaekers L, Shelkens S, Hernandez G, Garcia A, Reyes JL, et al. Effect of Rhizobium, Azospirillum co-inoculation on nitrogen fixation and yield of two contrasting Phaseolus vulgaris L. genotypes cultivated across different environments in Cuba. Plant and Soil. 2008;312:25-37. DOI: 10.1007/s11104-008-9606-4
  65. 65. Egamberdiyeva D, Höflich G. Influence of growth-promoting on the growth of wheat in different soils and temperatures. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 2003;35:973-978. DOI: 10.1016/S0038-0717(03)00158-5
  66. 66. Ali SZ, Sandhya V, Grover M, Kishore N, Rao LV, Venkateswarlu B. Pseudomonas sp. strain AKM-P6 enhances tolerance of sorghum seedlings to elevated temperatures. Biological Fertility Soil. 2009;46:45-55
  67. 67. Ahmad P, Hashem A, Abd-Allah EF, Alqarawi AA, John R, Egamberdieva D, et al. Role of Trichoderma harzianum in mitigating NaCl stress in Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L) through antioxidative defense system. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2015;6:868. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2015.00868
  68. 68. Singh DP, Prabha R, Yandigeri MS, Arora DK. Cyanobacteria mediated phenyl propanoids and phytohormones in rice (Oryza sativa) enhance plant growth and stress tolerance. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek. 2011;100:557-568. DOI: 10.1007/s10482-011-9611-0
  69. 69. Palaniyandi SA, Damodharan K, Yang SH, Suh JW. Streptomyces sp. strain PGPA39 alleviates salt stress and promotes growth of ‘Micro tom’ tomato plants. Journal of Applied Microbiology. 2014;117:766-773. DOI: 10.1111/jam. 12563
  70. 70. Pinedo I, Ledger T, Greve M, Poupin MJ. Burkholderia phytofirmans PsJN induces long-term metabolic and transcriptional changes involved in Arabidopsis thaliana salt tolerance. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2015;6:466. DOI: 10.3389/flps.2015.00466
  71. 71. Naveed M, Mitter B, Reichenauer TG, Wieczorek K, Sessitsch A. Increased drought stress resilience of maize through endophytic colonization by Burkholderia phytofirmans PsJN and Enterobacter sp FD17. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 2014a;97:30-39. DOI: 10.1016/j.envexpbot.2013.09.014
  72. 72. Naveed M, Hussain MB, Zahir ZA, Mitter B, Sessitsch A. Drought stress amelioration in wheat through inoculation with Burkholderia phytofirmans strain PsJN. Plant Growth Regulation. 2014b;73:121-131. DOI: 10.1007/s10725-013-9874-8
  73. 73. Hamaoui B, Abbadi JM, Burdman S, Rashid A, Sarig S, Okon Y. Effects of inoculation with Azospirillum brasilense on chickpeas (Cicer arietinum) and faba beans (Vicia faba) under different growth conditions. Agronomie. 2001;21:553-560
  74. 74. Barassi CA, Ayrault G, Creus CM, Sueldo RJ, Sobrero MT. Seed inoculation with Azospirillum mitigates NaCl effects on lettuce. Scientia Horticulturae. 2006;109:8-14
  75. 75. Dardanelli MS, Fernández de Córdoba FJ, Rosario Espuny M, Rodríguez Carvajal MA, Soria Díaz ME, Gil Serrano AM, et al. Effect of Azospirillum brasilense coinoculated with Rhizobium on Phaseolus vulgaris flavonoids and nod factor production under salt stress. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 2008;40:2713-2721. DOI: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2008.06.016
  76. 76. Ashraf M, Berge SH, Mahmood OT. Inoculating wheat seedling with exopolysaccharide-producing bacteria restricts sodium uptake and stimulates plant growth under salt stress. Biology Fertility Soils. 2004;40:157-162
  77. 77. Saravanakumar D, Samiyappan R. Effects of 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylic acid (ACC) deaminase from Pseudomonas fluorescence against saline stress under in vitro and field conditions in groundnut (Arachis hypogeal) plants. Journal of Applied Microbiology. 2007;102:1283-1292
  78. 78. Zhang H, Kim MS, Sun Y, Dowd SE, Shi H, Pare PW. Soil bacteria confer plant salt tolerance by tissue-specific regulation of the sodium transporter HKT1. Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions. 2008;21:737-744
  79. 79. Mayak S, Tirosh T, Glick BR. Plant growth-promoting bacteria confer resistance in tomato plants to salt stress. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 2004a;42:565-572
  80. 80. Mayak S, Tirosh T, Glick BR. Plant growth promoting bacteria that confer resistance to water stress in tomato and pepper. Plant Science. 2004b;166:525-530
  81. 81. Casanovas EM, Barassi CA, Sueldo RJ. Azospirillum inoculation mitigates water stress effects in maize seedlings. Cereal Research Communications. 2002;30:343-350
  82. 82. Sandhya V, Ali SZ, Grover M, Reddy G, Venkateswarlu B. Effect of plant growth promoting Pseudomonas spp. on compatible solutes, antioxidant status and plant growth of maize under drought stress. Plant Growth Regulation. 2010;62:21-30
  83. 83. Alami Y, Achouak W, Marol C, Heulin T. Rhizosphere soil aggregation and plant growth promotion of sunflowers by exopolysaccharide producing Rhizobium sp. strain isolated from sunflower roots. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2000;66:3393-3398
  84. 84. Sandhya V, Ali SZ, Grover M, Kishore N, Venkateswarlu B. Pseudomonas sp. strain P45 protects sunflowers seedlings from drought stress through improved soil structure. Journal of Oilseed Research. 2009a;26:600-601
  85. 85. Arkhipova TN, Prinsen E, Veselov SU, Martinenko EV, Melentiev AI, Kudoyarova GR. Cytokinin producing bacteria enhance plant growth in drying soil. Plant and Soil. 2007;292:305-315. DOI: 10.1007/s11104-007-9233-5
  86. 86. Kohler J, Hernández JA, Caravaca F, Roldán A. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi modify alleviation biochemical mechanisms in water stressed plants. Functional Plant Biology. 2008;35:141-151
  87. 87. Marulanda A, Porcel R, Barea JM, Azcon R. Drought tolerance and antioxidant activities in lavender plants colonized by native drought tolerant or drought sensitive Glomus species. Microbial Ecology. 2007;54(3):543-552
  88. 88. Arshad M, Sharoona B, Mahmood T. Inoculation with Pseudomonas spp. containing ACC deaminase partially eliminate the effects of drought stress on growth, yield and ripening of pea (Pisum sativum L.). Pedosphere. 2008;18:611-620
  89. 89. Belimov AA, Dodd IC, Hontzeas N, Theobald JC, Safronova VI, Davies WJ. Rhizosphere bacteria containing 1-aminocyclopropane- 1-carboxylate deaminase increase yield of plants grown in drying soil via both local and systemic hormone signalling. The New Phytologist. 2009;181:413-423
  90. 90. Figueiredo MVB, Burity HA, Martinez CR, Chanway CP. Alleviation of drought stress in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) by co-inoculation with Paenibacillus polymyxa and Rhizobium tropici. Applied Soil Ecology. 2008;40:182-188
  91. 91. Liddycoat SM, Greenberg BM, Wolyn DJ. The effect of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria on asparagus seedling and germinating seeds subjected to water stress under greenhouse conditions. Canadian Journal of Microbiology. 2009;55:388-394
  92. 92. Creus CM, Sueldo RJ, Barassi CA. Water relations and yield in Azospirillum-inoculated wheat exposed to drought in the field. Canadian Journal of Botany. 2004;82(2):273-281
  93. 93. Chakraborty U, Chakraborty BN, Chakraborty AP, Dey PL. Water stress amelioration and plant growth promotion in wheat plants by osmotic stress tolerant bacteria. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology. 2013;29:789-803
  94. 94. Grichko VP, Glick BR. Amelioration of flooding stress by ACC deaminase containing plant growth promoting bacteria. Canadian Journal of Microbiology. 2001;47:77-80
  95. 95. Chang WS, van de Mortel M, Nielsen L, de Guzman GN, Li X, Halverson LJ. Alginate production by Pseudomonas putida creates a hydrated microenvironment and contributes to biofilm architecture and stress tolerance under water-limiting conditions. Journal of Bacteriology. 2007;189:8290-8299
  96. 96. Ait Bakra E, Nowak J, Clement C. Enhancement of chilling resistance of inoculated grapevine plantlets with a plant growth promoting rhizobacterium, Burkholderia phytofirmans strain PsJN. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2006;72(11):7246-7252
  97. 97. Mastretta C, Taghavi S, van der Lelie D, Mengoni A, Galardi F, Gonnelli C, et al. Endophytic bacteria from seeds of Nicotiana tabacum can reduce cadmium phytotoxicity. International Journal of Phytoremediation. 2009;11:251-267
  98. 98. Pishchik VN, Provorov NA, Vorobyov NI, Chizevskaya EP, Safronova VI, Tuev AN, et al. Interactions between plants and associated bacteria in soils contaminated with heavy metals. Microbiology. 2009;78:785-793
  99. 99. Sheng M, Tang M, Chan H, Yang B, Zhang F, Huang Y. Influence of arbuscular mycorrhizae on photosynthesis and water status of maize plants under salt stress. Mycorrhiza. 2008;18:287-296
  100. 100. Madhaiyan M, Poonguzhali S, Sa T. Metal tolerating methylotrophic bacteria reduces nickel and cadmium toxicity and promotes plant growth of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum L.). Chemosphere. 2007;69:220-228
  101. 101. Terré S, Asch F, Padham J, Sikora RA, Becker M. Influence of root zone bacteria on root iron plaque formation in rice subjected to iron toxicity. In: Tielkes E, editor. Utilisation of Diversity in Land Use Systems: Sustainable and Organic Approaches to Meet Human Needs. Witzenhausen, Germany: Tropentag; 2007. p. 446
  102. 102. Fan QJ, Liu JH. Colonization with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus affects growth, drought tolerance and expression of stress-responsive genes in Poncirus trifoliata. Acta Physiologiae Plantarum. 2011;33:1533-1542
  103. 103. Garmendia I, Goicoechea N, Aguirreolea J. Moderate drought influences the effect of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi as biocontrol agents against verticillium-induced wilt in pepper. Mycorrhiza. 2005;15:345-356
  104. 104. Pinior A, Grunewaldt-Stöcker G, von Alten H, Strasser RJ. Mycorrhizal impact on drought stress tolerance of rose plants probed by chlorophyll a fluorescence, proline content and visual scoring. Mycorrhiza. 2005;15:596-605
  105. 105. Alguacil MM, Kohler J, Caravaca F, Roldán A. Differential effects of Pseudomonas mendocina and Glomus intraradices on lettuce plants physiological response and aquaporin PIP2 gene expression under elevated atmospheric CO2 and drought. Microbial Ecology. 2009;58:942-951
  106. 106. Sohrabi Y, Heidari G, Weisany W, Golezani KG, Mohammadi K. Changes of antioxidative enzymes, lipid peroxidation and chlorophyll content in chickpea types colonized by different Glomus species under drought stress. Symbiosis. 2012;56:5-18
  107. 107. Abbaspour H. Investigation of the effects of vesicular arbuscular mycorrhiza on mineral nutrition and growth of Carthamus tinctorius under salt stress conditions. Russian Journal of Plant Physiology. 2010;57:526-531
  108. 108. Estrada BE, Aroca R, Barea JM, Ruiz-Lozano JM. Native arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi isolated from a saline habitat improved maize antioxidant systems and plant tolerance to salinity. Plant Science. 2013;201:43-51
  109. 109. Evelin H, Giri B, Kapoor R. Ultrastructural evidence for AMF mediated salt stress mitigation in Trigonella foenum-graecum. Mycorrhiza. 2013;23:71-86
  110. 110. Fan L, Dalpé Y, Fang C, Dubé C, Khanizadeh S. influence of arbuscular mycorrhizae on biomass and root morphology of selected strawberry cultivars under salt stress. Botany. 2011;89:397-403. DOI: 10.1139/B11-028
  111. 111. Campanelli A, Ruta C, Mastro GD, Morone-Fortunato I. The role of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in alleviating salt stress in Medicago sativa L. var. icon. Symbiosis. 2013;59:65-76
  112. 112. Mergulhão ACES, Burity HA, Tabosa JN, Figueiredo MVB, Maia LC. Influence of NaCl on Brachiaria humidicola inoculated or not with Glomus etunicatum. Investigacion Agraria, Produccion y Proteccion Vegetales. 2002;17:220-227
  113. 113. Kaushik JC, Mandal BS. The role of mycorrhiza in stress management for seedling growth of Dalbergia sissoo and Acacia nilotica. Bulletin of the NIE. 2005;15:133-137
  114. 114. Wu QS, Li GH, Zou YN. Roles of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on growth and nutrient acquisition of peach (Prunus persica L. Batsch) seedlings. Journal of Animal &; Plant Sciences. 2011;21:746-750
  115. 115. Wu QS. Mycorrhizal efficacy of trifoliate orange seedlings on alleviating temperature stress. Plant, Soil and Environment. 2011;57:459-464
  116. 116. Matsubara Y, Hirano I, Sassa D, Koshikawa K. Alleviation of high temperature stress in strawberry (Fragaria ananassa) plants infected with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Environment Control in Biology. 2004;42:105-111
  117. 117. Abdel Latef AA. Influence of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and copper on growth, accumulation of osmolyte, mineral nutrition and antioxidant enzyme activity of pepper (Capsicum annuum L.). Mycorrhiza. 2011;21:495-503
  118. 118. Abdelmoneim TS, Almagrabi OA. Improved tolerance of maize plants to heavy metals stress by inoculation with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Archives des Sciences. 2013;66:155-167
  119. 119. Hildebrandt U, Regvar M, Bothe H. Arbuscular mycorrhiza and heavy metal tolerance. Phytochemistry. 2007;68:139-146
  120. 120. Pawlowska TE, Charvat I. Heavy metal stress and developmental patterns in arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2004;70:6643-6649
  121. 121. de Andrade SAL, da Silveira APD. Mycorrhiza influence on maize development under Cd stress and P supply. Brazilian Journal of Plant Physiology. 2008;20:39-50
  122. 122. Kaushal M, Wani SP. Rhizobacterial plant interactions: Strategies ensuring plant growth promotion under drought and salinity stress. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 2016a;231:68-78
  123. 123. Heydarian Z, Yu M, Gruber M, Glick BR, Zhou R, Hegedus DD. Inoculation of soil with plant growth promoting bacteria producing 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate deaminase or expression of the corresponding acdS gene in transgenic plants increases salinity tolerance in Camelina sativa. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2016;7:1966
  124. 124. Ghosh D, Sen S, Mohapatra S. Drought-mitigating Pseudomonas putida GAP-P45 modulates proline turnover and oxidative status in Arabidopsis thaliana under water stress. Annales de Microbiologie. 2018;68:1-16
  125. 125. Kaushal M, Wani SP. Plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria: Drought stress alleviators to ameliorate crop production in drylands. Annales de Microbiologie. 2016b;66(1):35-42
  126. 126. Vacheron J, Desbrosses G, Bouffaud ML, Touraine B, Moënne-Loccoz Y, Muller D, et al. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria and root system functioning. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2013;4:356
  127. 127. Alam MA, Kaliyamoorthy S, Zaidi PH, Dinesh A, Vinayan MT, Nath UK. Dissecting heat stress tolerance in tropical maize (Zea mays L.). Food Crops Research. 2017;204:110-119
  128. 128. Shameer S, Prasad TNVKV. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria for sustainable agricultural practices with special reference to biotic and abiotic stresses. Plant Growth Regulation. 2018;84(3):603-615
  129. 129. Yadav AN, Sachan SG, Verma P, Saxena AK. Prospecting cold deserts of north western Himalayas for microbial diversity and plant growth promoting attributes. Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering. 2015;119(6):683-693
  130. 130. Verma P, Yadav AN, Khannam KS, Mishra S, Kumar S, Saxena AK, et al. Appraisal of diversity and functional attributes of thermotolerant wheat associated bacteria from the peninsular zone of India. Saudi. Journal of Biological Science. 2019;26(7):1882-1895
  131. 131. Feng NX, Yu J, Zhao HM, Cheng YT, Mo CH, Cai QY, et al. Efficient phytoremediation of organic contaminants in soils using plant–endophyte partnerships. Science Total Environment. 2017;583:352-368
  132. 132. Glick BR. Using soil bacteria to facilitate phytoremediation. Biotechnology Advances. 2010;28(3):367-374
  133. 133. Ma Y, Rajkumar M, Zhang C, Freitas H. Inoculation of Brassica oxyrrhina with plant growth promoting bacteria for the improvement of heavy metal phytoremediation under drought conditions. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 2016a;320:36-44
  134. 134. Ullah A, Heng S, Munis MFH, Fahad S, Yang X. Phytoremediation of heavy metals assisted by plant growth promoting (PGP) bacteria: A review. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 2015;117:28-40
  135. 135. Gadd GM. Metals, minerals and microbes: Geomicrobiology and bioremediation. Microbiology. 2010;156(3):609-643
  136. 136. Yong X, Chen Y, Liu W, Xu L, Zhou J, Wang S, et al. Enhanced cadmium resistance and accumulation in Pseudomonas putida KT 2440 expressing the phytochelatin synthase gene of S chizosaccharomyces pombe. Letters in Applied Microbiology. 2014;58(3):255-261
  137. 137. Złoch M, Thiem D, Gadzała-Kopciuch R, Hrynkiewicz K. Synthesis of siderophores by plant-associated metallotolerant bacteria under exposure to Cd2+. Chemosphere. 2016;156:312-325
  138. 138. Abou-Shanab RA, El-Sheekh MM, Sadowsky MJ. Role of rhizobacteria in phytoremediation of metal-impacted sites. In: Emerging and Eco-Friendly Approaches for Waste Management. Singapore: Springer; 2019. pp. 299-328
  139. 139. Burges A, Alkorta I, Epelde L, Garbisu C. From phytoremediation of soil contaminants to phytomanagement of ecosystem services in metal contaminated sites. International Journal of Phytoremedicine. 2018;20(4):384-397
  140. 140. Vessey JK. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria as biofertilizers. Plant and Soil. 2003;255:571-586
  141. 141. Somers E, Vanderleyden J, Srinivasan M. Rhizosphere bacterial signalling: A love parade beneath our feet. Critical Review Microbiology. 2004;30:205-240
  142. 142. Lugtenberg BJ, Chin-A-Woeng TF, Bloemberg GV. Microbe–plant interactions: Principles and mechanisms. Antonie Leeuwenhoek. 2002;81:373-383
  143. 143. Chandler D, Davidson G, Grant WP, Greaves J, Tatchell GM. Microbial biopesticides for integrated crop management: An assessment of environmental and regulatory sustainability. Trends Food Science Technology. 2008;19:275-283
  144. 144. Bhattacharyya PN, Jha DK. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR): Emergence in agriculture world. Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology. 2012;28:1327-1350
  145. 145. Braud A, Jezequel K, Bazot S, Lebeau T. Enhanced phytoextraction of an agricultural Cr-, Hg- and Pb-contaminated soil by bioaugmentation with siderophore producing bacteria. Chemosphere. 2009;74:280-286
  146. 146. Baltruschat H, Fodor J, Harrach BD, Niemczyk E, Barna B, Gullner G, et al. Salt tolerance of barley induced by the root endophyte Piriformospora indica is associated with a strong increase in anti-oxidants. The New Phytologist. 2008;180:501-510. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2008.02583.x
  147. 147. Franken P. The plant strengthening root endophyte Piriformospora indica: Potential application and the biology behind. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 2012;96:1455-1464. DOI: 10.1007/s00253-012-4506-1
  148. 148. Ortiz N, Armadaa E, Duqu E, Roldánc A, Azcóna R. Contribution of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and/or bacteria to enhancing plant drought tolerance under natural soil conditions: Effectiveness of autochthonous or allochthonous strains. Journal of Plant Physiology. 2015;174:87-96
  149. 149. Bano QUDSIA et al. Effect of Azospirillum inoculation on maize (Zea mays L.) under drought stress. Pakistan Journal of Botany. 2013;45:13-20
  150. 150. Kang SM, Kang SM, Radhakrishnan R, Khan A, Kim MJ, Park JM, et al. Gibberellin secreting rhizobacterium, Pseudomonas putida H-2-3 modulates the hormonal and stress physiology of soybean to improve the plant growth under saline and drought conditions. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 2014;84:115-124
  151. 151. Hussain MB et al. Can catalase and exopolysaccharides producing rhizobia ameliorate drought stress in wheat? International Journal of Agriculture and Biology. 2014;16:3-13
  152. 152. Armada E, Roldán A, Azcon R. Differential activity of autochthonous bacteria in controlling drought stress in native Lavandula and Salvia plants species under drought conditions in the natural arid soil. Microbial Ecology. 2014;67:410-420
  153. 153. Fasciglione G, Casanovas EM, Quillehauquy V, Yommi AK, Goni MG, Roura SI, et al. Azospirillum inoculation effects on growth, product quality and storage life of lettuce plants grown under salt stress. Scientia Horticulturae. 2015;195:154-162
  154. 154. Cohen AC, Bottinia R, Pontina M, Berlia FJ, Moreno D, Boccanlandro H, et al. Azospirillum brasilense ameliorates the response of Arabidopsis thaliana to drought mainly via enhancement of ABA levels. Physiologia Plantarum. 2015;153:79-90
  155. 155. Bresson J, Varoquaux F, Bontpart T, Touraine B, Vile D. The PGPR strain Phyllobacterium brassicacearum STM196 induces a reproductive delay and physiological changes that result in improved drought tolerance in Arabidopsis. The New Phytologist. 2013;200:558-569
  156. 156. Ma Y, Rajkumar M, ZhangC FH. The beneficial role of bacterial endophytes in heavy metal phytoremediation. Journal of Environmental Management. 2016b;174:14-25
  157. 157. Staudinger C, Mehmeti-Tershani V, Gil-Quintana E, Gonzalez EM, Hofhansl F, Bachmann G, et al. Evidence for a rhizobia-induced drought stress response strategy in Medicago truncatula. Journal of Proteomics. 2016;136:202-213
  158. 158. Raheem A, Shaposhnikov A, Belimov AA, Dodd IC, Ali B. Auxin production by rhizobacteria was associated with improved yield of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under drought stress. Archives of Agron and Soil Science. 2018;64(4):574-587
  159. 159. Saikia J, Sarma RK, Dhandia R, Yadav A, Bharali R, Gupta VK, et al. Alleviation of drought stress in pulse crops with ACC deaminase producing rhizobacteria isolated from acidic soil of Northeast India. Scientific Reports. 2018;8(1):3560
  160. 160. Amellal N, Burtin G, Bartoli F, Heulin T. Colonization of wheat rhizosphere by EPS producing Pantoea agglomerans and its effect on soil aggregation. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 1998;64:3740-3747
  161. 161. Timmusk S, Wagner EGH. The plant growth-promoting rhizobacterium Paenibacillus polymyxa induces changes in Arabidopsis thaliana gene expression, a possible connection between biotic and abiotic stress responses. Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions. 1999;12:951-959. DOI: 10.1094/MPMI.1999. 12.11.951
  162. 162. Dodd IC, Belimov AA, Sobeih WY, Safronova VI, Grierson D, Davies WJ. Will modifying plant ethylene status improve plant productivity in water-limited environments? In: 4th International Crop Science Congress. 2005
  163. 163. McLellan CA, Turbyville TJ, Wijeratne K, Kerschen A, Vierling E, Queitsch C, et al. A rhizosphere fungus enhances Arabidopsis thermo tolerance through production of an HSP90 inhibitor. Plant Physiology. 2007;145:174-182
  164. 164. Marquez LM, Redman RS, Rodriguez RJ, Roosinck MJ. A virus in a fungus in a plant: Three-way symbiosis required for thermal tolerance. Science. 2007;315(5811):513-515
  165. 165. Sandhya V, Ali SZ, Grover M, Reddy G, Venkateswarlu B. Alleviation of drought stress effects in sunflower seedlings by exopolysaccharides producing Pseudomonas putida strain P45. Biology and Fertility Soil. 2009b;46:17-26
  166. 166. Cho K, Toler H, Lee J, Ownley B, Stutz JC, Moore JL, et al. Mycorrhizal symbiosis and response of sorghum plants to combined drought and salinity stresses. Journal of Plant Physiology. 2006;163:517-528
  167. 167. Shukla PS, Agarwal PK, Jha B. Improved salinity tolerance of Arachisy pogaea L. by the interaction of halotolerant plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria.J. Plant Growth Regulation. 2012b;31:195-206
  168. 168. Ahmad M, Zahir ZA, Asghar HN, Asghar M. Inducing salt tolerance in mung bean through co-inoculation with rhizobia and plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria containing 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate deaminase. Canadian Journal of Microbiology. 2011;57:578-589
  169. 169. Chang P, Gerhardt KE, Huang X-D, Yu X-M, Glick BR, Gerwing PD, et al. Plant growth promoting bacteria facilitate the growth of barley and oats in salt impacted soil: Implications for phytoremediation of saline soils. International Journal of Phytoremediation. 2014;16:1133-1147. DOI: 10.1080/15226514.2013. 821447
  170. 170. Zahir ZA, Ghani U, Naveed M, Nadeem SM, Asghar HN. Comparative effectiveness of Pseudomonas and Serratia sp. containing ACC-deaminase for improving growth and yield of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under salt-stressed conditions. Archives of Microbiology. 2009;191:415-424
  171. 171. Nadeem SM, Zahir ZA, Naveed M, Arshad M. Rhizobacteria containing ACC-deaminase confers salt tolerance in maize grown on salt-affected fields. Canadian Journal of Microbiology. 2009;55:1302-1309
  172. 172. Jha Y, Subramanian RB. PGPR regulate caspase-like activity, programmed cell death, and antioxidant enzyme activity in paddy under salinity. Physiological Molecular Biology Plant. 2014;20:201-207
  173. 173. Nautiyal CS, Srivastava S, Chauhan PS, Seem K, Mishra A, Sopory SK. Plant growth-promoting bacteria Bacillus amyloliquefaciens NBRISN13 modulates gene expression profile of leaf and rhizosphere community in rice during salt stress. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 2013;66:1-9
  174. 174. Suarez C, Cardinale M, Ratering S, Steffens D, Jung S, Montoya AMZ, et al. Plant growth-promoting effects of Hartmannibacter diazotrophicus on summer barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) under salt stress. Applied Soil Ecology. 2015;95:23-30. DOI: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2015.04.017
  175. 175. Cheng Z, Woody OZ, McConkey BJ, Glick BR. Combined effects of the plant growth-promoting bacterium Pseudomonas putida UW4 and salinity stress on the Brassica napus proteome. Applied Soil Ecology. 2012;61:255-263
  176. 176. Vimal SR, Patel VK, Singh JS. Plant growth promoting Curtobacterium albidum strain SRV4: An agriculturally important microbe to alleviate salinity stress in paddy plants. Ecological Indicators. 2019;105(2019):553-562
  177. 177. de Zélicourt A, Synek L, Saad MM, Alzubaidy H, Jalal R, Xie Y, et al. Ethylene induced plant stress tolerance by Enterobacter sp. SA187 is mediated by 2-keto-4-methylthiobutyric acid production. PLoS Genetics. 2018;14(3):e1007273
  178. 178. Waller F, Achatz B, Baltruschat H, Fodor J, Becker K, Fischer M, et al. The endophytic fungus Piriformis indica reprograms barley to salt-stress tolerance, disease resistance, and higher yield. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2005;102:13386-13391
  179. 179. Rodriguez AA, Stella AM, Storni MM, Zulpa G, Zaccaro MC. Effect of cyanobacterial extracellular products and gibberellic acid on salinity tolerance in Oryza sativa L. Saline System. 2006;2:7. DOI: 10.1186/1746-1448-2-7
  180. 180. Ali SZ, Sandhya V, Grover M, Linga VR, Bandi V. Effect of inoculation with a thermotolerant plant growth promoting Pseudomonas putida strain AKMP7 on growth of wheat (Triticum spp.) under heat stress. Journal of Plant Interactions. 2011;6(4):239-246
  181. 181. Fougnies L, Renciot S, Muller F, Plenchette C, Prin Y, de Faria SM, et al. Arbuscular mycorrhizal colonization and nodulation improve tolerance in Pterocarpus officinalis Jacq. Seedlings. Mycorrhiza. 2007;17:159-166
  182. 182. Chen Y, Yang W, Chao Y, Wang S, Tang YT, Qiu RL. Metal-tolerant Enterobacter sp. strain EG16 enhanced phytoremediation using Hibiscus cannabinus via siderophore-mediated plant growth promotion under metal contamination. Plant and Soil. 2017;413(1-2):203-216
  183. 183. Saleem M, Asghar HN, Zahir ZA, Shahid M. Impact of lead tolerant plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on growth, physiology, antioxidant activities, yield and lead content in sunflower in lead contaminated soil. Chemosphere. 2018;195:606-614
  184. 184. Corsini A, Colombo M, Gardana C, Zecchin S, Simonetti P, Cavalca L. Characterization of As (III) oxidizing Achromobacter sp. strain N2: Effects on arsenic toxicity and translocation in rice. Annales de Microbiologie. 2018;68(5):295-304
  185. 185. Gupta DK, Rai UN, Sinha S, Tripathi RD, Nautiyal BD, Rai P, et al. Role of Rhizobium (CA-1) inoculation in increasing growth and metal accumulation in Cicer arietinum L. growing under fly-ash stress condition. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 2004;73:424-431
  186. 186. Jackson MB. Regulation of water relationships in flooded plants by ABA from leaves, roots and xylem sap. In: Davis WJ, editor. Abscisic Acid. Physiology and Biochemistry. Oxford: Bios Scientific); 1991. pp. 217-226
  187. 187. Belimov AA, Dodd IC, Safronova VI, Hontzeas N, Davies WJ. Pseudomonas brassicacearum strain Am3 containing 1-aminocyclopropane- 1-carboxylate deaminase can show both pathogenic and growth-promoting properties in its interaction with tomato. Journal of Experimental Botany 2007;58:1485-1495. DOI: 10. 1093/jxb/erm010
  188. 188. Tapias DR, Galvan AM, Diaz SP, Obando M, Rivera D, Bonilla R. Effect of inoculation with plant growth-promoting bacteria (PGPB) on amelioration of saline stress in maize (Zea mays). Applied Soil Ecology. 2012;61:264-272. DOI: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2012.01.006
  189. 189. Sharma A, Shankhdha D, Shankhdhar SC. Enhancing grain iron content of rice by the application of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria. Plant, Soil and Environment. 2013;59:89-94
  190. 190. Sen S, Chandrasekhar CN. Effect of PGPR on growth promotion of rice (Oryza sativa L.) under salt stress. Asian Journal of Plant Science and Research. 2014;4:62-67
  191. 191. Khan A, Sirajuddin Zhao XQ , Javed MT, Khan KS, Bano A, Shen RF, et al. Bacillus pumilus enhances tolerance in rice (Oryza sativa L.) to combined stresses of NaCl and high boron due to limited uptake of NaCl. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 2016;124:120-129. DOI: 10.1016/j.envexpbot.2015. 12.011
  192. 192. Pandey V, Ansari MW, Tula S, Yadav S, Sahoo RK, Shukla N, et al. Dose-dependent response of Trichoderma harzianum in improving drought tolerance in rice genotypes. Planta. 2016;243:1251-1264. DOI: 10.1007/s00425-016-2482-x
  193. 193. Brotman Y, Landau U, Cuadros-Inostroza Á, Takayuki T, Fernie AR, Chet I, et al. Trichoderma-plant root colonization: Escaping early plant defense responses and activation of the antioxidant machinery for saline stress tolerance. PLoS Pathogens. 2013;9:e1003221. DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1003221

Written By

Talaat El Sebai and Maha Abdallah

Submitted: 23 January 2022 Reviewed: 20 June 2022 Published: 03 August 2022