Quality Promotion and Disease Control Effects of Bacillus Strain R57 on Astragalus membranaceus var. mongholicus and Its Identification

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-0190

Abstract

Abstract:

The study aims to explore the quality promotion and disease control effects of strain R57 on root rot of Astragalus membranaceus var. mongholicus (AMM), and identify its classification status. The antifungal activity of bacteria-free filtrate was determined by Oxford cup method, the control effect in detached roots was evaluated by seedling root dipping method, and the control effect in potted plants was tested by conventional root-irrigation method. The changes of main active components in roots of AMM irrigated with the fermentation broth of strain R57 were tested by HPLC-UV-ELSD. The strain R57 was identified by means of morphology, physio-biochemical characteristics and 16S rDNA sequence analysis. In the inhibition test in vitro, the diameters of inhibition zone of R57 bacteria-free filtrate to F. solani and F. acuminatum were (18.02 ±1.71) mm and (19.96±2.42) mm, respectively. In the detached roots test, the therapeutic treatments using R57 bacteria-free filtrate showed significant control effect on F. solani and F. acuminatum infection on both 7 d and 15 d; the protective treatments showed significant control effect on F. solani infection on 7 d and on F. acuminatum infection on 15 d, respectively; the antagonistic treatments had obvious control effect on F. solani infection only on 7 d. In the pot experiment, the protective effects of the fermentation broth of strain R57 on the root rot caused by F. solani and F. acuminatum were 61.27%±4.89% and 64.33%±8.25%, respectively; no significant therapeutic effect on root rot was observed for all the treatments. The fermentation broth of strain R57 had obvious promotion effect on the accumulation of two main active components in AMM: calycosin-7-O-β-D-glucoside and ononin. The strain R57 was identified as Bacillus subtilis. The Bacillus subtilis strain R57 can reduce the incidence of root rot disease and promote the accumulation of main flavonoids active components in the AMM root; therefore, it can be further studied as a muti-functional strain for the development of microbial agent.

Key words: Astragalus membranaceus var. mongholicus, Bacillus subtilis, control effect, HPLC-UV-ELSD, root rot, active components

CLC Number:

S567.23

ZU Weixi, ZHAO Xiaoxia, GAO Fen. Quality Promotion and Disease Control Effects of Bacillus Strain R57 on Astragalus membranaceus var. mongholicus and Its Identification[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(21): 129-135.

Figures/Tables 5

References 27

[1]	秦雪梅, 李震宇, 孙海峰, 等. 我国黄芪药材资源现状与分析[J]. 中国中药杂志, 2013, 38(19):334-3238.
[2]	胡明勋, 郭宝林, 周然, 等. 山西浑源仿野生栽培蒙古黄芪的质量研究[J]. 中草药, 2012, 43(9):1829-1834.
[3]	任小霞, 秦雪梅, 王梦亮, 等. 山西黄芪根腐病优势病原菌的鉴定及拮抗菌的多重筛选[J]. 中药材, 2016, 39(10):2173-2177.
[4]	高芬, 赵晓霞, 秦雪梅, 等. 山西省蒙古黄芪根腐病优势致病菌群分析[J]. 植物保护学报, 2018, 45(4):878-885.
[5]	马莹莹, 关一鸣, 王秋霞, 等. 黄芪主要病害及防治措施研究进展[J]. 特产研究, 2019, 4:101-107.
[6]	杜国军, 秦雪梅, 李震宇, 等. 蒙古黄芪主产区2种不同种植模式黄芪药材的质量比较[J]. 中草药, 2013, 44(23):3386-3393.
[7]	熊一峰, 万燕晴, 李科, 等. 山西恒山地区蒙古传统黄芪和移栽黄芪的质量差异研究[J]. 中草药, 2017, 48(8):1635-1643.
[8]	刘凤波, 侯俊玲, 王文全, 等. 不同来源黄芪中黄芪总皂苷含量比较研究[J]. 中国现代中药, 2013, 15(8):650-654.
[9]	LI K, HAO X, GAO F R, et al. Identification of cultured and natural Astragalus root based on monosaccharide mapping[J]. Molecules, 2015, 20(9):16466-16490. doi: 10.3390/molecules200916466 URL
[10]	薛倩倩, 刘晓节, 李科, 等. 黄芪药材化学成分差异的研究进展[J]. 山西医科大学学报, 2018, 49(10):1259-1263.
[11]	关一鸣, 潘晓曦, 王莹, 等. 哈茨木霉菌、枯草芽孢杆菌对人参灰霉病和根腐病病原菌的拮抗作用[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2014, 42(5):123.
[12]	KIM Y S, BALARAJU K, JEON Y H. Biological characteristics of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens AK-0 and suppression of ginseng root rot caused by Cylindrocarpon destructans[J]. Journal of applied microbiology, 2017, 122(1):166-179. doi: 10.1111/jam.13325 URL
[13]	高芬, 赵晓霞, 闫欢, 等. 黄芪根腐病拮抗芽孢杆菌的筛选鉴定及其对根围细菌群落的影响[J]. 中国中药杂志, 2019, 44(18):3942-3947.
[14]	SHARAF-ELDIN M, HKHOLY S FERNDNDEZ J A, et al. Bacillus subtilis FZB24® affects flower quantity and quality of saffron (Crocus sativus L.)[J]. Planta medica, 2008, 74(10):1316-1320. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1081293 URL
[15]	阳湖荣, 陈飘雪, 戴传超, 等. 白术内生细菌分离与促生活性[J]. 生态学杂志, 2019, 38(12):3680-3688.
[16]	宋胜男, 郜玉钢, 张雪, 等. 人参内生多黏类芽孢杆菌对农田人参生长和皂苷累积的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2019, 47(11):155-160.
[17]	董占梅, 杜立财, 程林, 等. 四种微生物菌剂对老参地人参产量和质量的影响[J]. 特产研究, 2016(4):9-13.
[18]	郭捷, 田海娇, 秦雪梅, 等. 拮抗芽孢杆菌对蒙古黄芪主要药效成分的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(19):84-89.
[19]	布坎南R E, 吉本斯N E. 伯杰氏细菌鉴定手册[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 1984.
[20]	东秀珠, 蔡妙英. 常见细菌系统鉴定手册[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2001.
[21]	高芬, 郝锐, 秦雪梅, 等. 拮抗黄芪根腐病菌的根际促生菌的室内筛选与鉴定[J]. 中国中药杂志, 2016, 41(22):4188-4193.
[22]	王蕊, 王腾, 李二峰. 生防芽孢杆菌在植物病害领域的研究进展[J]. 天津农学院学报, 2021, 28(4):71-77.
[23]	SAXENA A K, KUMAR M, CHAKDAR H, et al. Bacillus species in soil as a natural resource for plant health and nutrition[J]. Journal of applied microbiology, 2020, 128:1583-1594. doi: 10.1111/jam.14506 URL
[24]	刘文欢, 邱芳颖, 王娅, 等. 枯草芽孢杆菌液态肥对柑橘养分吸收和果实品质的影响[J]. 园艺学报, 2021, https://doi.org/10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2021-0053 https://doi.org/10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2021-0053.
[25]	王君正, 张琪, 高子星, 等. 两种微生物菌剂对有机基质袋培秋黄瓜产量、品质及根际环境的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(14):3077-3087.
[26]	祝蕾, 严辉, 刘培, 等. 药用植物根际微生物对其品质形成的影响及其作用机制的研究进展[J]. 中草药, 2021, 52(13):4064-4073.
[27]	XIE Z C, CHU Y K, ZHANG W J, et al. Bacillus pumilus alleviates drought stress and increases metabolite accumulation in Glycyrrhiza uralensis Fisch[J]. Environmental and experimental botany, 2019, 158:99-106. doi: 10.1016/j.envexpbot.2018.11.021 URL

时间/d	处理组	病情指数
时间/d	处理组	接种F. solani	接种F. acuminatum
7	D组（保护）	36.11±2.78 b	30.56±17.35 ab
	E组（治疗）	14.77±2.20 d	5.56 ±4.81 b
	F组（拮抗）	25.00±10.01c	44.44±9.62 a
	B组(CK)	58.33±2.08 a	50.00±25.00 a
15	D组（保护）	63.89±0.00 a	38.89±9.62 b
	E组（治疗）	44.44±10.24 b	27.78±9.62 b
	F组（拮抗）	66.25±5.94 a	75.00±0.00 a
	B组(CK)	66.67±2.78 a	72.22±4.81 a

时间/d	处理组	病情指数
时间/d	处理组	接种F. solani	接种F. acuminatum
7	D组（保护）	36.11±2.78 b	30.56±17.35 ab
	E组（治疗）	14.77±2.20 d	5.56 ±4.81 b
	F组（拮抗）	25.00±10.01c	44.44±9.62 a
	B组(CK)	58.33±2.08 a	50.00±25.00 a
15	D组（保护）	63.89±0.00 a	38.89±9.62 b
	E组（治疗）	44.44±10.24 b	27.78±9.62 b
	F组（拮抗）	66.25±5.94 a	75.00±0.00 a
	B组(CK)	66.67±2.78 a	72.22±4.81 a

处理	接种F. acuminatum		接种F. solani
处理	发病率/%	防效/%	发病率/%	防效/%
B组(CK)	75.00±5.00 a	-	71.85±17.29 a	-
C组（保护）	26.67±5.77 c	64.33±8.25 a	27.41±4.49 b	61.27±4.89 a
D组（治疗）	41.11±8.39 b	45.30±9.28 b	37.78±3.85 b	46.14±8.28 b

处理	接种F. acuminatum		接种F. solani
处理	发病率/%	防效/%	发病率/%	防效/%
B组(CK)	75.00±5.00 a	-	71.85±17.29 a	-
C组（保护）	26.67±5.77 c	64.33±8.25 a	27.41±4.49 b	61.27±4.89 a
D组（治疗）	41.11±8.39 b	45.30±9.28 b	37.78±3.85 b	46.14±8.28 b

活性成分		R57	CK
黄酮类/ (mg/g)	毛蕊异黄酮葡萄糖苷	0.6795±0.03 a	0.4838±0.01 b
	芒柄花苷	0.8009±0.05 a	0.4374±0.00 b
	毛蕊异黄酮	0.1219±0.00 a	0.0859±0.02 a
	芒柄花素	0.0177±0.00 a	0.0141±0.00 a
	总黄酮	1.6200±0.09 a	1.0211±0.03 b
皂苷类/ (mg/g)	皂苷Ⅰ	0.0453±0.03 a	0.0256±0.01 a
	皂苷Ⅳ	0.0686±0.02 a	0.0515±0.01 a
	总皂苷	0.1139±0.05 a	0.0771±0.02 a
多糖/%	总多糖	10.54±1.34 a	11.74±0.38 a