Integrated application of synthetic community reduces consumption of herbicide in field Phalaris minor control

Abstract

● Herbicide-based weeds control impacts wheat crops as well.

● SynComs of Pseudomonas strains reduce the need for high-dose herbicides.

● 100% Axial provides less weed control compared to 75% Axial with C4 SynCom.

● Axial 75% with C4 SynCom promotes wheat growth than the 75% Axial alone.

To address environmental concerns and manage resistant weeds, there is a growing demand for eco-friendly alternatives. In this study, we propose the integration of synthetic communities (SynComs) to reduce herbicide consumption. Four SynComs, consisting of bacteria isolated from weed or wheat rhizospheres, were first evaluated under greenhouse conditions. All SynComs enhanced wheat growth, which was manifested by increased Soil Plant Analysis Development (SPAD) values and fresh biomass. At the same time, SynCom C4 effectively reduced SPAD values and fresh biomass of the infesting weed, Phalaris minor, when combined with low-dose Axial herbicide. A field trial was then conducted using the C4 SynCom and various doses of Axial (100%, 75%, 50%, and 25%). Remarkably, the combination of C4 with 50% and 75% Axial significantly improved wheat growth by mitigating the side effects of herbicide on wheat. Weed infestation reduced grain yield by 16% and 25% at the dose of 50% and 75% Axial, respectively. The combination of Axial with C4 rescued up to 22% of grain yield loss under infested weed compared with Axial alone. Our findings suggested that the combination of herbicides with SynComs exhibited synergistic effects for controlling Phalaris minor and promoting wheat growth, so that such combination provides a sustainable and eco-friendly weed control strategy.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

weed control / synthetic microbial communities / Phalaris minor / wheat growth promotion / synergistic effect

References

[1] Abbas, T., Naveed, M., Siddique, S., Aziz, M.Z., Khan, K.S., Zhang, J., Mustafa, A., Sardar, M.F., 2020. Biological weeds control in rice (Oryza sativa) using beneficial plant growth promoting rhizobacteria. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology23, 522–528.

[2] Abbas, T., Zahir, Z.A., Naveed, M., 2017. Bioherbicidal activity of allelopathic bacteria against weeds associated with wheat and their effects on growth of wheat under axenic conditions. BioControl62, 719–730.

[3] Abbas, T., Zahir, Z.A., Naveed, M., 2021a. Field application of allelopathic bacteria to control invasion of little seed canary grass in wheat. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International28, 9120–9132.

[4] Abbas, T., Zahir, Z.A., Naveed, M., Abbas, S., Basra, S.A., 2021b. Weed antagonistic bacteria stimulate growth, physiology and yield of wheat (Triticum aestivum L. ) in multiple field experiments: A study of selectivity for sustainable weed control. Environmental Technology & Innovation24, 101974.

[5] Abd-Alla, M., Morsy, F., El-Enany, A., Ohyama, T., 2012. Isolation and characterization of a heavy metal resistant isolate of Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. viciae potentially applicable for biosorption of Cd (II) and Co. International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation67, 48–55.

[6] Armanhi, J.S.L., de Souza, R.S.C., Biazotti, B.B., Yassitepe, J.E. de C.T., Arruda, P., 2021. Modulating drought stress response of maize by a synthetic bacterial community. Frontiers in Microbiology12, 747541.

[7] Atieno, M., Herrmann, L., Okalebo, R., Lesueur, D., 2012. Efficiency of different formulations of Bradyrhizobium japonicum and effect of co-inoculation of Bacillus subtilis with two different strains of Bradyrhizobium japonicum. World Journal of Microbiology & Biotechnology28, 2541–2550.

[8] Chai, Y.N., Ge, Y., Stoerger, V., Schachtman, D.P., 2021. High-resolution phenotyping of sorghum genotypic and phenotypic responses to low nitrogen and synthetic microbial communities. Plant, Cell & Environment44, 1611–1626.

[9] Charudattan, R., 2001. Biological control of weeds by means of plant pathogens: Significance for integrated weed management in modern agro-ecology. BioControl46, 229–260.

[10] Chaudhary, S.U., Hussain, M., Ali, M.A., Iqbal, J., 2008. Effect of weed competition period on yield and yield components of wheat. Journal of Agricultural Research (Pakistan) 46, 47–53

[11] Christy, A.L., Herbst, K.A., Kostka, S.J., Mullen, J.P., Carlson, P.S., 1993. Synergizing weed biocontrol agents with chemical herbicides. ACS Symposium Series-American Chemical Society (USA)524, 87–100.

[12] Compant, S., Duffy, B., Nowak, J., Clément, C., Barka, E.A., 2005. Use of plant growth-promoting bacteria for biocontrol of plant diseases: principles, mechanisms of action, and future prospects. Applied and Environmental Microbiology71, 4951–4959.

[13] Damam, M., Kaloori, K., Gaddam, B., Kausar, R., 2016. Plant growth promoting substances (phytohormones) produced by rhizobacterial strains isolated from the rhizosphere of medicinal plants. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences Review and Research 37, 130–136

[14] Dar, A., Were, E., Hilger, T., Zahir, Z.A., Ahmad, M., Hussain, A., Rasche, F., 2023. Bacterial secondary metabolites: possible mechanism for weed suppression in wheat. Canadian Journal of Microbiology69, 103–116.

[15] Dar, A., Zahir, Z.A., Asghar, H.N., Ahmad, R., 2020. Preliminary screening of rhizobacteria for biocontrol of little seed canary grass (Phalaris minor Retz. ) and wild oat (Avena fatua L.) in wheat. Canadian Journal of Microbiology66, 368–376.

[16] de Souza, R.S.C., Armanhi, J.S.L., Arruda, P., 2020. From microbiome to traits: Designing synthetic microbial communities for improved crop resiliency. Frontiers in Plant Science11, 1179.

[17] Eng, A., Borenstein, E., 2019. Microbial community design: methods, applications, and opportunities. Current Opinion in Biotechnology58, 117–128.

[18] Flores-Vargas, R.D., O’Hara, G.W., 2006. Isolation and characterization of rhizosphere bacteria with potential for biological control of weeds in vineyards. Journal of Applied Microbiology100, 946–954.

[19] Grosskopf, T., Soyer, O.S., 2014. Synthetic microbial communities. Current Opinion in Microbiology18, 72–77.

[20] Heap, I., 2023. The international survey of herbicide resistant weeds. Herbicide Resistance Action Committee/Weed Science Society of America. See the weedscience website (accessed 7.20.23)

[21] Hoagland, D.R., Arnon, D.I., 1950. The water-culture method for growing plants without soil. Circular. California Agricultural Experiment Station357, 1–39.

[22] Hussain, S., Khaliq, A., Matloob, A., Fahad, S., Tanveer, A., 2015. Interference and economic threshold level of little seed canary grass in wheat under different sowing times. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International22, 441–449.

[23] Jain, A., Das, S., 2016. Insight into the interaction between plants and associated fluorescent Pseudomonas spp. International Journal of Agronomy2016, 1–8.

[24] Kennedy, A.C., 2016. Pseudomonas fluorescens strains selectively suppress annual bluegrass (Poa annua L. ). Biological Control103, 210–217.

[25] Kennedy, A.C., 2018. Selective soil bacteria to manage downy brome, jointed goatgrass, and medusahead and do no harm to other biota. Biological Control123, 18–27.

[26] Kennedy, A.C., Johnson, B.N., Stubbs, T.L., 2001. Host range of a deleterious rhizobacterium for biological control of downy brome. Weed Science49, 792–797.

[27] King, E.O., Ward, M.K., Raney, D.E., 1954. Two simple media for the demonstration of pyocyanin and fluorescin. Journal of Laboratory and Clinical Medicine44, 301–307.

[28] Kremer, R., 2006. The Role of Allelopathic Bacteria in Weed Management. In: Inderjit, Mukerji, K.G., ed. Allelochemicals: Biological Control of Plant Pathogens and Diseases. Springer Dordrecht. pp. 143–155.

[29] Kremer, R.J., 2023. Chapter 7−Bioherbicide development and commercialization: challenges and benefits. In: Koul, O., ed. Development and Commercialization of Biopesticides. Academic Press, pp. 119–148

[30] Larkin, R., Fravel, D., 1998. Efficacy of various fungal and bacterial biocontrol organisms for control of Fusarium Wilt of tomato. Plant Disease82, 1022–1028.

[31] Lee, S.M., Kong, H.G., Song, G.C., Ryu, C.M., 2021. Disruption of Firmicutes and Actinobacteria abundance in tomato rhizosphere causes the incidence of bacterial wilt disease. ISME Journal15, 330–347.

[32] Li, J., Kremer, R.J., 2006. Growth response of weed and crop seedlings to deleterious rhizobacteria. Biological Control39, 58–65.

[33] Mejri, D., Gamalero, E., Tombolini, R., Musso, C., Massa, N., Berta, G., Souissi, T., 2010. Biological control of great brome (Bromus diandrus) in durum wheat (Triticum durum): specificity, physiological traits and impact on plant growth and root architecture of the fluorescent pseudomonad strain X33d. BioControl55, 561–572.

[34] Mustafa, M.I., Sher, A., Sattar, A., Naeem, W.H.M., 2015. Cumulative effect of biochar, microbes and herbicide on the growth and yield of wheat (Triticum aestivum L. ). Pakistan Journal of Life and Social Sciences13, 73–78.

[35] Ofosu, R., Agyemang, E.D., Márton, A., Pásztor, G., Taller, J., Kazinczi, G., 2023. Herbicide resistance: Managing weeds in a changing world. Agronomy (Basel)13, 1595.

[36] Owen, A., Zdor, R., 2001. Effect of cyanogenic rhizobacteria on the growth of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasii) and corn (Zea mays) in autoclaved soil and the influence of supplemented glycine. Soil Biology & Biochemistry33, 801–809.

[37] Peng, G., Byer, K.N., 2005. Interactions of Pyricularia setariae with herbicides for control of green foxtail (Setaria viridis). Weed Technology19, 589–598.

[38] Qiu, Z., Egidi, E., Liu, H., Kaur, S., Singh, B.K., 2019. New frontiers in agriculture productivity: Optimised microbial inoculants and in situ microbiome engineering. Biotechnology Advances37, 107371.

[39] Qureshi, M.A., Iqbal, A., Akhtar, N., Shakir, M.A., Khan, A., eds., 2012. Co-inoculation of phosphate solubilizing bacteria and rhizobia in the presence of L-tryptophan for the promotion of mash bean (Vigna mungo L.). Soil and Environment 31, 47–54

[40] Romano-Armada, N., Amoroso, M.J., Rajal, V.B., 2017. Effect of glyphosate application on soil quality and health under natural and zero tillage field condition. Soil and Environment36, 141–154.

[41] Santhanam, R., Luu, V.T., Weinhold, A., Goldberg, J., Oh, Y., Baldwin, I.T., 2015. Native root-associated bacteria rescue a plant from a sudden-wilt disease that emerged during continuous cropping. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America112, E5013–E5020.

[42] Schnick, P.J., Boland, G.J., 2004. 2,4-D and Phoma herbarum to control dandelion (Taraxacum officinale). Weed Science52, 808–814.

[43] Sciegienka, J.K., Keren, E.N., Menalled, F.D., 2011. Interactions between two biological control agents and an herbicide for canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) Suppression. Invasive Plant Science and Management4, 151–158.

[44] Sharma, S., Chen, C., Navathe, S., Chand, R., Pandey, S.P., 2019. A halotolerant growth promoting rhizobacteria triggers induced systemic resistance in plants and defends against fungal infection. Scientific Reports9, 4054.

[45] Singh, S., 2007. Role of management practices on control of isoproturon-resistant littleseed canarygrass (Phalaris minor) in India. Wete21, 339–346.

[46] Solaimalai, A., Ramesh, R.T., Baskar, M., 2004. Pesticides and Environment. In: Kumar, A., ed. Environmental Contamination and Bio reclamation. APH Publishing Corporation, New Delhi, India. pp. 351–395

[47] Steel, R.G.D., Torrie, J.H., Dickey, D.A., 1997. Principles and Procedures of Statistics: a Biometrical Approach, 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill series in probability and statistics. WCB McGraw-Hill, Boston

[48] Sturz, A.V., Christie, B.R., 2003. Beneficial microbial allelopathies in the root zone: the management of soil quality and plant disease with rhizobacteria. Soil & Tillage Research72, 107–123.

[49] Taylor, A.G., Allen, P.S., Bennett, M.A., Bradford, K.J., Burris, J.S., Misra, M.K., 1998. Seed enhancements. Seed Science Research8, 245–256.

[50] Ulrich, A., Müller, C., Gasparetto, I.G., Bonafin, F., Diering, N.L., Camargo, A.F., Reichert Júnior, F.W., Paudel, S.R., Treichel, H., Mossi, A.J., 2023. Bioherbicide effects of Trichoderma koningiopsis associated with commercial formulations of glyphosate in weeds and soybean plants. Crop Protection (Guildford, Surrey)172, 106346.

[51] Wang, C., Li, Y., Li, M., Zhang, K., Ma, W., Zheng, L., Xu, H., Cui, B., Liu, R., Yang, Y., Zhong, Y., Liao, H., 2021. Functional assembly of root-associated microbial consortia improves nutrient efficiency and yield in soybean. Journal of Integrative Plant Biology63, 1021–1035.

[52] Zahir, Z., Ahmad, M., Hilger, T., Dar, A., Malik, S., Abbas, G., Rasche, F., 2018. Field evaluation of multistrain biofertilizer for improving the productivity of different mungbean genotypes. Soil & Environment37, 45–52.

[53] Zahir, Z.A., Arshad, M., Frankenberger, W.T.J., 2004. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria: applications and perspectives in agriculture. Advances in Agronomy 81, 97−168

[54] Zdor, R.E., Alexander, C.M., Kremer, R.J., 2005. Weed suppression by deleterious rhizobacteria is affected by formulation and soil properties. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis36, 1289–1299.

[55] Zeller, S.L., Brandl, H., Schmid, B., 2007. Host-plant selectivity of rhizobacteria in a crop/weed model system. PLoS One2, e846.

[56] Zhang, E., Zhang, S., Li, W., Li, T., 2010. Effects of exogenic benzoic acid and cinnamic acid on the root oxidative damage of tomato seedlings. Journal of Horticulture and Forestry 2, 022−029

[57] Zhang, J., Duan, G., Yang, S., Yu, L., Lu, Y., Tang, W., Yang, Y., 2022. Improved Bioherbicidal Efficacy of Bipolaris eleusines through Herbicide Addition on Weed Control in Paddy Rice. Plants11, 2659.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

Higher Education Press