Microbial priming elicits improved plant growth promotion and nutrient uptake in pea

References

• Abbasi MK, Majeed A, Sadiq A, Khan SR. 2008. Application of Bradyrhizobium japonicum and phosphorus fertilization improved growth, yield and nodulation of soybean in the sub-humid hilly region of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan. Plant Prod Sci. 58:368–376.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adesemoye A, Torbert H, Kloepper J. 2009. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria allow reduced application rates of chemical fertilizers. Microb Ecol. 58:921–929.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmad M, Zahir ZA, Asghar HN. 2011. Inducing salinity tolerance in mung bean through rhizobia and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria containing 1-aminocyclopropane 1- carboxylatedeaminase. Can J Microbiol. 57:578–589.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Albert F, Anderson AJ. 1987. The effect of Pseudomonas putida colonization on root surface peroxidases. Plant Physiol. 85:535–541.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Archana S, Prabhakar K, Raghuchander T, Huballi M, Valarmathi P, Prakasam V. 2011. Defense responses of grapevine to Plasmopara viticola induced by Pseudomonas fluorescens. Intl J Sust Agric. 3:30–38.
   Google Scholar
• Bakker PAHM, Pieterse CMJ, Van Loon LC. 2007. Induced systemic resistance by fluorescent Pseudomonas spp. Phytopathology. 97:239–243.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Becana M, Matamoros MA, Udvardi M, Dalton DA. 2010. Recent insights into antioxidant defenses of legume root nodules. New Phytologist. 188:960–976.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berggren I, Alstrom S, van Vuurde JWL, Martenson AM. 2005. Rhizoplane colonisation of peas by Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. viceae and a deleterious Pseudomonas putida. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 52:71–78.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boopathy T, Balamurugan V, Gopinath S, Sundararaman M. 2013. Characterization of IAA production by the mangrove cyanobacterium Phormidium sp. MI40519 and its influence on tobacco seed germination and organogenesis. J Plant Growth Regul. 32:758–766.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cakmakci R, Dönmez MF, Erdoğan Ü. 2007. The effect of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on barley seedling growth, nutrient uptake, some soil properties, and bacterial counts. Turk J Agric For. 31:189–199.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caldwell BA. 2005. Enzyme activities as a component of soil biodiversity: a review. Pedobiologia. 49:637–644.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Casida LEJ, Klein DA, Santoro T. 1964. Soil dehydrogenase activity. Soil Sci. 98:371–376.
   Google Scholar
• Chen J, Abawi GS, Zucherman BM. 2000. Efficacy of Bacillus thuringiensis, Paecilomyces marquandii and Streptomyces costaricanus with organic amendment against Meloidogyne hapla infecting lettuce. J Nematol. 32:70–77.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Compant S, Cle´ment C, Sessitsch A. 2010. Plant growth-promoting bacteria in the rhizo- and endosphere of plants: their role, colonization, mechanisms involved and prospects for utilization. Soil Biol Biochem. 42:669–678.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahl WJ, Foster LM, Tyler RT. 2012. Review of the health benefits of peas (Pisum sativum L.). Brit J Nutr. 108:S3–S10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dey R, Pal KK, Bhatt DM, Chauhan SM. 2004. Growth promotion and yield enhancement of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) by application of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria. Microbiol Res. 159:371–394.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egamberdiyeva D. 2008. Plant growth promoting properties of rhizobacteria isolated from wheat and pea grown in loamy sand soil. Turk J Biol. 32:9–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elkoca E, Kantar F, Sahin F. 2008. Influence of nitrogen fixing and phosphate solubilizing bacteria on nodulation, plant growth and yield of chickpea. J Plant Nutr. 33:157–171.
   Google Scholar
• Estevez J, Dardanelli MS, Megias M, Rodriguez, DN. (2009) Symbiotic performance of common bean and soybean co-inoculated with rhizobia and Chryseobacterium balustinum Aur9 under moderate saline conditions. Symbiosis. 49:29–36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Figueiredo MVB, Burity HA, Martinez CR, Chanway CP. 2008. Alleviation of water stress effects in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) by co-inoculation Paenibacillus x Rhizobium tropici. Appl Soil Ecol. 40:182–188.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glick BR. 1995. The enhancement of plant growth by free-living bacteria. Can J Microbiol. 41:107–117.
   Google Scholar
• Hanway JJ, Heidel. 1952. Soil analysis methods as used in Iowa State College Soil Testing Laboratory, Bulletin 57. USA: Iowa State College of Agriculture; p. 1–131.
   Google Scholar
• Hardy RWF, Burns RC, Holsten RD. 1973. Application of the acetylene–ethylene assay for measurement of nitrogen fixation. Soil Biol Biochem. 5:47–81.
   Google Scholar
• Hayat R, Ali S, Amara U, Khalid R, Ahmed I. 2010. Soil beneficial bacteria and their role in plant growth promotion: a review. Ann Microbiol. 64:579–598.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson ML. 1967. Soil chemical analysis. New Delhi: Prentice Hall of India Pvt. Ltd.; p. 134–144.
   Google Scholar
• Jennings PH, Brannaman BL, Zscheile FP Jr. 1969. Peroxidase and polyphenol oxidase activity associated with Helminthosporium leaf spot of maize. Phytopathology. 59:963–967.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiang F, Chen L, Belimov AA, Shaposhnikov AI, Gong F, Meng X, Hartung W, Jeschke DW, Davies WJ, Dodd IC. 2012. Multiple impacts of the plant growth-promoting rhizobacterium Variovorax paradoxus 5C-2 on nutrient and ABA relations of Pisum sativum. J Exp Bot. 63:6421–6430.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kohler J, Caravaca F, Carrasco L, Roldan A. 2007. Interactions between a plant growth promoting rhizobacterium, an AM fungus and a phosphate-solubilising fungus in the rhizosphere of Lactuca sativa. Appl Soil Ecol. 35:480–487.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kouas S, Debez A, Plassard C, Drevon J, Abdelly C. 2009. Effect of phosphorus limiting on phytase activity, proton efflux and oxygen consumption by nodulated roots of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris). Afr J Biotechnol. 8:5301–5309.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu A, Ma BL, Bomke AA. 2005. Effects of cover crops on soil aggregate stability, total organic carbon, and polysaccharides. Soil Sci Soc Am J. 69:2041–2048.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lugtenberg B, Kamilova F. 2009. Plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria. Annu Rev Microbiol. 63:541–546
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mader P, Kaiser F, Adholeya A, Singh R, Uppal HS, Sharma AK, Srivastava R, Sahai V, Aragno M, Wiemken A, et al. 2011. Inoculation of root microorganisms for sustainable wheat-rice and wheat black gram rotations in India. Soil Biol Biochem. 43:609–619.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nain L, Rana A, Joshi M, Jadhav SD, Kumar D, Shivay YS, Paul S, Prasanna R. 2010. Evaluation of synergistic effects of bacterial and cyanobacterial strains as biofertilizers for wheat. Plant Soil. 331:217–230.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nawab NN, Subhani GM, Mahmood K, Shakil Q, Saeed A. 2008. Genetic variability, correlation and path analysis studies in garden pea (Pisum sativum L.). J Agric Res. 46:333–340.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson DW, Sommers LE. 1973. Determination of total nitrogen in plant material. Agron J. 65:109–112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nunan N, Morgan MA, Herlihy M. 1998. Ultraviolet absorbance (280 nm) of compounds released from soil during chloroform fumigation as an estimate of the microbial biomass. Soil Biol Biochem. 30:1599–1603.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olsen SR, Cole CV, Watanabe FS, Dean LA. 1954. Estimation of available phosphorus in soil by extraction with sodium carbonate. Washington: USDA; p. 933.
   Google Scholar
• Osman MEH, El-Sheekh MM, El-Naggar AH, Saly F, Gheda SF. 2010. Effect of two species of cyanobacterial as biofertilizers on some metabolic activities, growth, and yield of pea plant. Biol Fertil Soils. 46:861–875.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prasad R, Shivay YS, Kumar D. 2006. A practical manual of analytical methods for soil and plant samples from agronomy field experiments. New Delhi: Indian Agricultural Research Institute; p. 58.
   Google Scholar
• Prasanna R, Babu S, Rana A, Kabi SR, Chaudhary V, Gupta V, Kumar A, Shivay YS, Nain L, Pal RK. 2013a. Evaluating the establishment and agronomic proficiency of cyanobacterial consortia as organic options in wheat-rice cropping sequence. Expl Agric. 49:416–434.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prasanna R, Babu S, Bidyarani N, Kumar A, Triveni S, Monga D, Mukherjee AK, Kranthi S, Gokte-Narkhedhar N, Adak A, et al. 2015a. Prospecting cyanobacteria fortified composts as plant growth promoting and biocontrol agents in cotton. Expl Agric. 51:42–65
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prasanna R, Bidyarani N, Babu S, Hossain F, Shivay YS, Nain L. 2015b. Cyanobacterial inoculation elicits plant defense response and enhanced Zn mobilization in maize hybrids. Cogent Food Agric. 1:995807.
   Google Scholar
• Prasanna R, Chaudhary V, Gupta V, Babu S, Kumar A, Shivay YS, Nain L. 2013b. Cyanobacteria mediated plant growth promotion and bioprotection against Fusarium wilt in tomato. Eur J Plant Pathol. 136:337–353.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prasanna R, Kumar A, Babu S, Chawla G, Chaudhary V, Singh S, Gupta V, Nain L, Saxena AK. 2013c. Deciphering the biochemical spectrum of novel cyanobacterium-based biofilms for use as inoculants. Biol Agric Hortic. 29:145–158.
   Google Scholar
• Prasanna R, Sharma E, Sharma P, Kumar A, Kumar R, Gupta V, Pal RK, Shivay YS, Nain L. 2013d. Soil fertility and establishment potential of inoculated cyanobacteria in rice crop grown under non-flooded conditions. Paddy Water Environ. 11:175–183.
   Google Scholar
• Prasanna R, Nain L, Tripathi R, Gupta V, Chaudhary V, Middha S, Joshi M, Ancha R, Kaushik BD. 2008. Evaluation of fungicidal activity of extracellular filtrates of cyanobacteria – possible role of hydrolytic enzymes. J. Basic Microbiol. 48:186–194.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prasanna R, Pattnayak S, Sugitha TCK, Nain L, Saxena AK. 2011. Development of cyanobacterium based biofilms and their in vitro evaluation for agriculturally useful traits. Folia Microbiol. 56:49–58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prasanna R, Triveni S, Bidyarani N, Babu S, Yadav K, Adak A, Khetarpal S, Pal M, Shivay YS, Saxena AK. 2014. Evaluating the efficacy of cyanobacterial formulations and biofilmed inoculants for leguminous crops. Arch Agron Soil Sci. 60(3):349–366.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prasanna R, Joshi M, Rana A, Shivay YS, Nain L. 2012. Influence of co-inoculation of bacteria-cyanobacteria on crop yield and C-N sequestration in soil under rice crop. W J Microbiol Biotechnol. 28:1223–1235.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Priya H, Prasanna R, Ramakrishnan B, Bidyarani N, Babu S, Thapa, S, Renuka N. 2015. Influence of cyanobacterial inoculation on the culturable microbiome and growth of rice. Microbiol Res. 171:78–89.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rana A, Joshi M, Prasanna R, Shivay YS, Nain L. 2012. Biofortification of wheat through inoculation of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria and cyanobacterial. Eur J Soil Biol. 50:118–126.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rana A, Saharan B, Kabi SR, Prasanna R, Nain L. 2011. Providencia, a PGPR with biocontrol potential elicits defense enzymes in wheat. Ann Plant Protect Sci. 19:138–141.
   Google Scholar
• Seneviratne. G. 2003. Development of eco-friendly, beneficial microbial biofilms. Curr Sci. 85:1395–1396.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singla R, Chahal SS, Kataria P. 2006. Economics of production of green peas (Pisum sativum L.) in Punjab. Agric. Econ Res Rev. 19:237–250.
   Google Scholar
• Stajkovic O, Delic D, Josic D, Kuzmanovic D, Rasulic N, Knezevicvukcevic J. 2011. Improvement of common bean growth by coinoculation with Rhizobium and plant growth-promoting bacteria. Rom Biotechnol Lett. 16:5919–5926.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Subbiah BV, Asija GL. 1956. A rapid procedure for assessment of available nitrogen in rice soils. Curr Sci. 25:259–260.
   Google Scholar
• Tabatabai MA, Bremner JM. 1969. Use of p-nitrophenyl phosphate for assay of soil phosphatase activity. Soil Biol Biochem. 1:301–307.
   Google Scholar
• Van Loon LC. 2007. Plant response to plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria. Eur J Plant Pathol. 119:243–254.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walkley AJ, Black IA. 1934. An examination of the Degtjareff method for determination of soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Sci. 37:29–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whetten RW, Sederoff RR. 1992. Phenylalanine ammonia-lyase from loblolly pine purification of the enzyme and isolation of complementary DNA clones. Plant Physiol. 98:380–386.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright SF, Anderson RL. 2000. Aggregates stability and glomalin in alternative crop rotations for the central Great Plains. Biol Fertil Soils. 31:249–253.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright SF, Nichols KA. 2002. Glomalin: hiding place for a third of the world's stored soil carbon. Agric Res Magazine. 50:4–7.
   Google Scholar
• Wright SF, Upadhyaya A. 1996. Extraction of an abundant and unusual protein from soil and comparison with hyphal protein of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Soil Sci. 161:575–568.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yadegari M, Rahmani HA, Noormohammadi G, Ayneband A. 2010. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria increase growth, yield and nitrogen fixation in Phaseolus vulgaris. J Plant Nutr. 33:1733–1743.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yolcu H, Gunes A, Gullap K, Cakmakci R. 2012. Effects of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria on some morphologic characteristics, yield and quality contents of Hungarian vetch. Turk J Field Crops. 17:208–214.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zafar M, Abbasi MK, Khan MA, Khaliq A, Sultan T, Aslam M. 2012. Effect of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria on growth, nodulation and nutrient accumulation of lentil under controlled conditions. Pedosphere. 22:848–859.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar