Growth-Promoting Effects of Rhizosphere Growth Promoting Bacteria A2 on Germination and Seedling Stage of Wheat Under Water Stress

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb16030111

Abstract

Abstract: In order to define the growth-promoting effect of rhizosphere growth promoting bacteria A2 on the growth of plant, by indoor germination test, wheat was treated by four different concentrations of PEG6000, and then soaked in three different fermentation products of A2. The germination potential of seed, rate of germination, and index of coleoptile drought resistance were determined by“Method of Coleoptile Length” respectively. Meanwhile, the content of proline and soluble sugar were measured in leaf. The results indicated that there was no significant difference of coleoptile length, germination rate, proline content and soluble sugar content under the concentration of 4% PEG6000. When PEG6000 concentration reached 12%, the germination rate of wheat was 14.93% higher than that of the control. In addition, the content of proline and soluble sugar were 66.55% and 66.92% higher than those of the control respectively. In conclusion, with the increasing concentration of PEG6000, there was significant difference or very significant difference among indexes with seed soaking treatments. So, the A2 promotes the growth of plant and induces plant producing some resistance substances to adapt to the unfavorable environment.

CLC Number:

S476

References

[1]Verma J P, Yadav J, Tiwari K N et al. Impact of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on crop production [J]. International Journal of Agricultural Research, 2010, 5(11) : 954 -983.
[2]胡江春, 薛德林, 马成新, 等. 植物根际促生菌(PGPR)的研究与应用前景[J].应用生态学报, 2004, (10): 1963-1966.
[3] Zaidi S, Usmani S, Singh B R et al. Significance of Bacillussubtilis strain SJ-101 as a bioinoculant for concurrent plant growth promotion and nickel accumulation in Brassica juncea[J]. Chemosphere, 2006, 64: 991－997.
[4]赵青云, 赵秋芳, 王辉, 等. 根际促生菌Bacillus subtilis Y-IVI 在香草兰上的应用效果研究[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2015, 21( 2) : 535-540.
[5]Wang B B, Yuan J, Zhang J et al. Effects of novel bioorganic fertilizer produced by Bacillus amyloliquefaciens W19 on antagonism of Fusarium wilt of banana[J]. Biology and Fertility ofSoils, 2013, 49( 4) : 435-446.
[6]刘方春, 邢尚军, 马海林, 等. 干旱胁迫下植物根际促生细菌对侧柏生长及生理生态特征的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2014, 50(6): 67-73.
[7]Hafeez FY, Malik K A. Manual on biofertilizer technology[M]. Pakistan: NIBGE, 2000.
[8]Ali S, Hamid N, Nagin N et al.Screening of phosphate solublizing microorganisms using different original and modified culture media[J]. Biologia. 1998, 44 (102): 110-122．
[9]黄晓东, 季尚宁, BernardGlick. 植物促生菌及其促生机理(续)[J]. 现代化农业, 2002, (7): 13-15.
[10]杨海莲, 孙晓璐, 王云山. 植物促生细菌诱导水稻对白叶枯病抗性的初步研究[J]. 植物病理学报, 1999, 29(3): 286- 287.
[11]阿拉坦夫. 一株拮抗细菌A2的分离、鉴定及其对小麦白粉病的防治效果[D]. 内蒙古: 内蒙古师范大学. 2008.
[12]杨玉萍, 韦鹏霄, 岑秀芬,等. 干旱胁迫剂PEG处理对冬小麦萌芽期抗旱性影响的研究 [J]. 河南科技学院学报(自然科学版), 2007, 35(1): 4-7, 11
[13]李合生. 植物生理生化实验原理和技术[M] . 北京:高等教育出版社, 2000.
[14]王玮, 邹琦, 杨军, 等. 水分胁迫条件下抗旱性不同小麦品种芽鞘生长的动态分析[J]. 植物生理学通讯, 1999, 35(5) : 359-364.
[15]张勇, 薛林贵, 高天鹏, 等. 荒漠植物种子萌发研究进展[J]. 中国沙漠, 2005, 25 (1): 106-112.
[16]王玮, 邹奇. 水分胁迫下不同抗旱性小麦品种不同生育期渗透调节及渗透调节物质的研究[M]. 济南: 山东科学技术出版社, 1994.
[17]孙存华, 李扬, 贺鸿雁, 等. PEG6000渗透胁迫对藜幼苗叶片渗透调节物质的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学,2007, 35(25): 7784-7786.
[18]杨书运, 严平, 梅雪英. 水分胁迫对冬小麦抗性物质可溶性糖与脯氨酸的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2007, 23(12): 229-233.
[19]Goodger J Q D, Sharp R E, Marsh E L, et al. Relationships between xylem sap constituents and leaf conductance of well-watered and water-stressed maize across three xylem sap sampling techniques[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2005, 56 (419) : 2389 -2400．
[20]马富举, 李丹丹, 蔡剑, 等. 干旱胁迫对小麦幼苗根系生长和叶片光合作用的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2012, 23(3): 724-730.