Biyotik Stres Altındaki Bitkilerde Endofit Bakterilerin Hastalık ve Bitki Gelişimi Üzerine Etkileri

Öz

Bu çalışmada dört endofit bakterinin (EB) (Ochrobactrum sp. CB36/1, Pantoea agglomerans CC37/2, Bacillus thuringiensis CA41/1 ve Pseudomonas fluorescens CC44), domates ve biberin bitki gelişimi ile her iki konukçuda Xanthomonas euvesicatoria (Xe)’nın oluşturduğu bakteriyel leke hastalığına karşı olan etkilerinin ortaya konması amaçlanmıştır. Steril torf ortamında iklim odasında yetiştirilen domates ve biber fidelerine EB'ler iki farklı dönemde köklere uygulanmıştır. Patojen yapraklara pülverize edilerek inokule edilmiştir. Domateste ve biberde farklı sıkalalarla ölçülen hastalık şiddeti ve bitki gelişim parametreleri deneme sonunda belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca in-vitro çalışmalar ile EB’lerin Xe’ye karşı antagonistik etkileri ve 1-Aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylic asit (ACC) deaminase faliyetleri belirlenmiştir. Endofit bakterilerin domates ve biberdeki etkisi konukçu Bitki x Endofit x Patojen kombinasyonuna göre farklılık göstermiştir. Hiçbir bakteri in-vitro da patojene karşı etkinlik göstermez iken Ochrobactrum sp. CB36/1 domateste hastalık şiddetini %37 oranında engellemiş, fakat biberde bu etki gözlenmemiştir. Domates ve özellikle biberde hastalık baskısı altında EB’ler kök ve sürgün yaş ve kuru ağırlıklarını %28 ile %128 oran aralığında arttırmıştır. EB’lerin biyotik stress altında iken ölçülebilir etkilerinin stressiz koşullardan daha yüksek olduğu belirlenmiştir. Sonuç olarak çalışmada kullanılan endofit bakterilerin sürdürülebilir entegre tarım konsepti çerçevesinde kullanım potansiyelinin olduğu, bu etkinin konukçu, patojen ve endofit bakterilere göre değişebileceği belirlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Xanthomonas euvesicatoria,PGPR,Domates,Biber,Bakteriyel leke hastalığı,Xanthomonas euvesicatoria

Effects of Endophytic Bacteria on Disease and Growth in Plants under Biotic Stress

Abstract

The aim of this study was to reveal the effects of four endophytic bacteria (EB) (Ochrobactrum

sp. CB36/1, Pantoea agglomerans CC37/2, Bacillus thuringiensis CA41/1 and Pseudomonas fluorescens CC44) on the plant development of tomato and pepper and the effects against bacterial spot disease caused by Xanthomonas euvesicatoria (Xe) in both hosts. EB applied on tomato and pepper seedlings cultivated in a sterile peat growing medium in a climate chamber in two different periods to the roots. The pathogen inoculated on the leaves by spraying. Disease severity was measured by different scales for tomatoes and peppers, and plant development parameters were determined at the end of the study. The antagonistic effects of EB against Xe and 1-Aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylic acid (ACC) deaminase activities were determined with in vitro studies. The effect of endophytic bacteria on tomato and pepper varied according to the host plant x endophyte x pathogen combination. While no bacteria were effective against the pathogen in vitro, Ochrobactrum sp. CB36/1 inhibited the disease severity by 37% in tomato plants, but this effect was not observed in pepper. Tomato and especially pepper plants under disease stress had root and shoot fresh and dry weight increased by 28% to 128% by EB. The measurable effects of EB under biotic stress were determined to be higher than in stress-free conditions. In conclusion, the endophytic bacteria used in the study have potential for use within sustainable integrated agricultural concept framework, with their effects determined to vary according to the host, pathogen and endophytic bacteria.

Keywords

• Xanthomonas euvesicatoria,PGPR,Tomato,Pepper,Bacterial spot disease,Xanthomonas euvesicatoria

References

1. Abbasi P A, Soltani N, Cuppels D A, Lazarovits G (2002). Reduction of bacterial spot disease severity on tomato and pepper plants with foliar applications of ammonium lignosulfonate and potassium phosphate. Plant Dis. 86:1232-1236.
2. Akköprü A, Özaktan H (2018). Identification of rhizobacteria that increase yield and plant tolerance against angular leaf spot disease in cucumber. Plant Protection Science, 54 (2): 67–73.
3. Amaresan N, Jayakumar V, Kumar K, Thajuddin N (2012). Isolation and characterization of plant growth promoting endophytic bacteria and their effect on tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) and chilli (Capsicum annuum) seedling growth. Ann Microbiol (2012) 62:805–810
4. Barka E A, Nowak, J Clement C (2006). Enhancement of chilling Resistance of Inoculated Grapevine Plantlets with a Plant Growth-Promoting Rhizobacterium, Burkholderia phytofirmans Strain PsJN. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 72:11, 7246–7252.
5. Benhamou N, Gagné S, Quéré, D,, Dehbi L (2000). Bacterial mediated induced resistance in cucumber: Beneficial effect of the endophytic bacterium Serratia plymuthica on the protection against infection by Pythium ultimum. Phytopathology 90:45-56.
6. Bulgari D, Bozkurt AI, Casati P, Çağlayan K, Quaglino F, Bianco P A (2012). Endophytic bacterial community living in roots of healthy and ‘Candidatus Phytoplasma mali’-infected apple (Malus domestica) trees. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek, 102:677–687.
7. Conrath U, Beckers G J M , Flors V, García-Agustín P, Jakab G, Mauch F, Newman M, Pieterse C M J, Poinssot B, Pozo M J, Pugin A, Schaffrath U, Ton J, Wendehenne D, Zimmerli L, Mauch-Mani B (2006). Priming: getting ready for battle. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 19, 1062–1071.
8. D’Alessandro M, Erb M, Ton J, Brandenburg A, Karlen D, Zopfi J, Turlings T C J (2014). Volatiles produced by soil-borne endophytic bacteria increase plant pathogen resistance and affect tritrophic interactions. Plant, Cell and Environment, 37, 813–826.

9. Dworkin M, Foster J (1958) Experiments with some microorganisms which utilize ethane and hydrogen. J Bacteriol 75: 592–601.
10. EPPO (2013). PM 7/110 (1) Xanthomonas spp. (Xanthomonas euvesicatoria, Xanthomonas gardneri, Xanthomonas perforans, Xanthomonas vesicatoria) causing bacterial spot of tomato and sweet pepper. OEPP/EPPO Bulletin 43, 7–20
11. Eryiğit G. (2016) Classical and Molecular Diagnostic of Xanthomonad Species Causing Bacterial Spot on Tomato and Pepper (in Turkhis). Ege Üniv, Graduate Scho. of Natural and App. Sci.p 64.
12. Glick B R (2014). Bacteria with ACC deaminase can promote plant growth and help tofeed the world. Microbiological Research 169 (2014) 30– 39.
13. Hahm M, Sumayo M, Hwang Y, Jeon S, Park S, Lee J Y, Ahn J, Kim B, Ryu C, Ghim S (2012). Biological Control and Plant Growth Promoting Capacity of Rhizobacteria on Pepper under Greenhouse and Field Conditions. The Jour. of Microbio. 50,3,p. 380–385.
14. Hardoim, P.R, van Overbeek L S, Jan van Elsas D (2008). Properties of bacterial endophytes and their roposed role in plant growth. Trends in Microbiology Vol.16 No.10.
15. Huang P, de-Bashan L, Crocker T, Kloepper J W, Bashan Y (2017). Evidence that fresh weight measurement is imprecise for reporting the effect of plant growth-promoting (rhizo)bacteria on growth promotion of crop plants. Biol Fertil Soils, 53:199–208
16. Kang S H, Cho H, Cheong H, Ryu C, Kim J F, Park S (2007). Two Bacterial Entophytes Eliciting Both Plant Growth Promotion and Plant Defense on Pepper (Capsicum annuum L.). J. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 17(1), 96–103
17. Khan Z, Guelich G, Phan H, Redman R, Doty S (2012). Bacterial and Yeast Endophytes from Poplar and Willow Promote Growth in Crop Plants and Grasses. International Scholarly Research Network (ISRN) Agronomy, Article ID 890280, 11 pages doi:10.5402/2012/890280.
18. Mirik M, Aysan Y, Çinar Ö (2008). Biological Control of Bacterial Spot Disease of Pepper with Bacillus Strains. Turk J Agric For. 32: 381-390
19. Muthukumar A, Nakkeeran S, Eswarana, Sangeetha G (2010). In vitro efficacy of bacterial endophytes against the chilli damping-off pathogen Pythium aphanidermatum. Phytopathol. Mediterr. 49, 179–186.
20. Naue C R, Rocha D J A, Moura A B (2014). Biological control of tomato bacterial spot by seed microbiolization. Tropical Plant Pathology, vol. 39(5):413-416.
21. Özaktan H, Gül A, Çakir B, Yolageldi L, Akköprü A (2015). Bakteriyel Endofitlerin Hıyar Yetiştiriciliğinde Biyogübre ve Biyopestisit Olarak Kullanılma Olanakları. Tubitak-COST 111O505 nolu Proje kesin raporu. (in Turkhis) (COST Action FA1103: Endophytes in Biotechnology and Agriculture) p. 149
22. Penrose D M, Glick B R (2003). Methods for isolating and characterizing ACC deaminase-containing plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria. Physiologia Plantarum, 118: 10–15.
23. Ribaudo C M, Riva D S, Gori J I, Zaballa J I, Molina C (2016) Identification of Endophytic Bacteria and their Characterization as Biocontrol Agents against Tomato Southern Blight Disease. Appli Micro Open Access 2: 1000123. doi:10.4172/2471-9315.1000123
24. Romero F M, Marina M, Pieckenstain F L (2016). Novel components of leaf bacterial communities of field-grown tomato plants and their potential for plant growth promotion and biocontrol of tomato diseases. Research in Microbiology 167 (2016) 222-233.
25. Rosenblueth M, Martínez-Romero E (2006). Bacterial Endophytes and Their Interactions with Hosts. Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions, Vol. 19, No. 8; 827–837. Saharan B, Nehra V (2011). Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria: A critical review. Life Sciences and Medicine Research, 2011: 1-30.
26. Tobita H, Kucho K, Yamanaka T (2013). Abiotic Factors Influencing Nitrogen-Fixing Actinorhizal Symbioses. In: R. Aroca (ed.), Symbiotic Endophytes, Soil Biology 37. DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-39317-4_6, © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
27. Van Buren A M, Andre C,, Ishimaru C A (1993). Biological control of the bacterial ring rot pathogen by endophytic bacteria isolated from potato. Phytopathology, 83: 1406.
28. Van Loon L C (2007). Plant responses to plant gowth-promoting rhizobacteria. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 119: 243–254.
29. Xia Y, DeBolt S, Dreyer J, Scott D, Williams MA (2015). Characterization of culturable bacterial endophytes and their capacity to promote plant growth from plants grown using organic or conventional practices. Front. Plant Sci. 6:490.
30. Yi H, Yang JW, Ryu C (2013). ISR meets SAR outside: additive action of the endophyte Bacillus pumilus INR7 and the chemical inducer, benzothiadiazole, on induced resistance against bacterial spot in field-grown pepper. Frontiers in Plant Science, 4. 122.