HTML
-
Plant height in uninoculated plants was 26.3 cm/ plant while in plants inoculated with C.et, P.di and C.et+P.di it was significantly more with values 31.0, 29.0 and 32.3 cm/ plant respectively (Table 1). Stem diameter followed a similar trend. BI in uninoculated plants was 114.8. In plants inoculated with C.et and C.et+P.di it was 136.7 and 144.1 respectively differing significantly from uninoculated plants. Shoot dry weight in uninoculated plants was 16.6g/ plant, while in C.et, P.di and C.et+P.di inoculated plants it was 22.1, 20.8 and 25.7g/ plant respectively, all the three being significantly more compared to uninoculated plants. The root dry weight followed more or less a similar trend. Total plant dry weight of C.et, P.di and C.et+P.di inoculated plants were 32, 25 and 47% more compared to uninoculated plants with 25.8g/ plant. All the three values of inoculated plants were significantly higher compared to uninoculated plants (Table 1). N, P, K concentrations in shoot & root of uninoculated plants was 0.89 & 0.70, 0.24 & 0.09, 2.02 & 0.86% respectively. All the three inoculated treatments significantly increased the three major nutrient concentrations, the highest increase being recorded in dual inoculated plants. The increase due to dual inoculation in shoot & root concentration of N was 12 & 10%; P was 29 & 111% and K was 6 & 86% (Table 2). Nutrient concentration of secondary nutrient Ca in shoot & root and Mg in shoot followed a similar trend (Table 3).
Table 1. Influence of microbial inoculants on plant growth parameters of broom grass
Treatments Height (cm/ plant) Stem diameter (mm/ plant) BI Shoot dry weight (g/ plant) Root dry weight (g/ plant) Total plant dry weight (g/ plant) Uninoculated control 26.3c 4.3b 114.8b 16.6c 9.2b 25.8c Claroideoglomus 31.0ab 4.4a 136.7a 22.1b 12.0a 34.1b Pantoea dispersa(P.di) 29.0b 4.4a 128.9ab 20.8b 11.4ab 32.2b C.et+ P.di 32.3a 4.4a 144.1a 25.7a 12.2a 37.9a SED 1.28 0.22 9.93 1.23 0.94 1.53 CD (0.05) 2.57 0.45 20.00 2.54 1.93 3.15 Values superscripted with identical letters within each column do not differ significantly at p≤0.05; CD: Critical difference; UC: Uninoculated control; C.et: Claroideoglomus etunicatum; P.di: Pantoea dispersa Table 2. Influence of microbial inoculants on major and secondary nutrient concentration (%) of broom grass
Treatments N P K Ca Mg Shoot Root Shoot Root Shoot Root Shoot Root Shoot Root UC 0.89c 0.70c 0.24b 0.09d 2.02d 0.86c 0.67c 0.34c 0.22c 0.12c C.et 0.95b 0.75b 0.29a 0.15b 2.09b 1.51b 0.76a 0.58a 0.26a 0.14b P.di 1.00a 0.75b 0.26b 0.11c 2.06c 1.50b 0.73b 0.52b 0.24b 0.12c C.et+P.di 1.00a 0.77a 0.31a 0.19a 2.13a 1.60a 0.77a 0.58a 0.27a 0.24a SED 0.002 0.01 0.009 0.01 0.007 2.35 0.008 0.01 0.008 0.01 CD (0.05) 0.001 0.02 0.002 0.01 0.017 5.76 0.020 0.01 0.020 0.01 Values superscripted with identical letters within each column do not differ significantly at p≤0.05; CD: Critical difference; UC: Uninoculated control; C.et: Claroideoglomus etunicatum; P.di: Pantoea dispersa Table 3. Influence of microbial inoculants on minor nutrient concentration (ppm) of broom grass
Treatments Zn Fe Cu Mn B Mo Shoot Root Shoot Root Shoot Root Shoot Root Shoot Root Shoot Root UC 42.4c 30.2d 371.1c 174.4d 26.9d 37.7c 22.8b 9.3c 18.2d 7.5c 7.6d 43.1c C.et 63.7a 62.6b 495.3b 276.3c 34.7b 58.4b 31.3a 17.1b 22.9c 11.9b 14.5b 72.0a P.di 53.3b 49.6c 501.9b 304.1b 31.4c 56.3b 31.4a 14.2b 29.0b 15.7a 11.5c 62.7b C.et+P.di 65.6a 73.5a 646.6a 327.6a 52.6a 142.0a 31.4a 52.0a 35.1a 16.4a 22.8a 79.3a SED 0.82 3.78 6.42 3.46 0.41 3.10 0.71 1.31 0.01 0.61 0.01 3.01 CD (0.05) 2.01 9.25 15.71 8.47 0.99 7.59 1.73 3.21 0.01 1.50 0.01 7.36 Values superscripted with identical letters within each column do not differ significantly at p≤0.05; CD: Critical difference; UC: Uninoculated control; C.et: Claroideoglomus etunicatum; P.di: Pantoea dispersa The mycorrhizal root colonization in uninoculated plants was 51.3% while it was 90.7, 69.3 and 96.7% in C.et, P.di and C.et+P.di inoculated plants respectively, all the inoculated treatments differing significantly from the uninoculated treatment. Mycorrhizal spore numbers was significantly higher in C.et+P.di treatment with 431 spores/50g of substrate compared to all other inoculated and uninoculated treatments. The population of Pd was 85 x 105/g substrate in C.et+P.di inoculated treatment but was not differing significantly from Pd alone treatment. Other treatments had significantly lower Pd population in the substrate, the least being in uninoculated plants with 8.5 x 105/ g substrate. Dehydrogenase activity which indicates the abundance and activity of microorganisms in soil was 2578, 2150 and 2513μg of TPF released/ g of substrate/ hr in C.et+P.di, P.di and C.et respectively differing significantly from uninoculated treatment with 1975 μg of TPF released/ g of substrate/ hr (Table 4).
Table 4. Influence of microbial inoculants on microbial parameters of broom grass
Treatments Mycorrhizal root colonization (%) Mycorrhizal spore number/ 50 g of substrate CFU of P. dispersa (105/ g substrate) Dehydrogenase (μg of TPF released/ g root zone soil/ hr) Uninoculated control 51.3c 20.5d 8.5b 1975d Claroideoglomus etunicatum (Ce) 90.7a 298.9b 10b 2512.5b Pantoea dispersa (Pd) 69.3b 110c 79a 2150c Ce+Pd 96.7a 430.6a 85a 2577.5a SED 0.52 10.33 2.93 8.16 CD (0.05) 1.06 21.16 6.75 18.82 Values superscripted with identical letters within each column do not differ significantly at p≤0.05; CD: Critical difference; UC: Uninoculated control; C.et: Claroideoglomus etunicatum; P.di: Pantoea dispersa
-
This work was financed by SEED Division, Department of Science and Technology, GOI with File no. SP/TSP/007/2016.
N NikhilSai, R Ashwin, DJ Bagyaraj, R VenugopalaRao. 2021. Claroideoglomus etunicatum and Pantoea dispersa significantly enhance growth and nutrition of broom grass. Studies in Fungi 6(1):327−333 doi: 10.5943/sif/6/1/23 |