Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-tpknm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-29T08:57:49.986Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - Meta-Omics Approach to Unravel the Endophytic Bacterial Communities of Brassica napus and Other Agronomically Important Crops in Response to Agricultural Practices

from Part III - Diversity and Community Ecology of Endophytes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2019

By
Ridhdhi Rathore ,
Kieran J. Germaine ,
Patrick D. Forristal ,
John Spink  and
David N. Dowling
Edited by
Trevor R. Hodkinson ,
Fiona M. Doohan ,
Matthew J. Saunders  and
Brian R. Murphy
Trevor R. Hodkinson
Affiliation:
Trinity College Dublin
Fiona M. Doohan
Affiliation:
University College Dublin
Matthew J. Saunders
Affiliation:
Trinity College Dublin
Brian R. Murphy
Affiliation:
Trinity College Dublin
Get access

Summary

Endophytes are microorganisms that colonise the internal compartments of host plants without harming the host. In many cases, endophytic bacteria have been shown to provide several beneficial effects to their host plant, including growth-promoting activity, modulation of plant metabolism and phytohormone signalling that leads to adaptation to environmental abiotic or biotic stresses. Endophytic bacterial community structure is influenced by plant genotype, soil type, abiotic and biotic factors, such as environmental conditions and microbe–microbe/plant–microbe interactions. In addition, agricultural management practices, such as soil tillage, crop rotation, and fertiliser and pesticide applications have a major effect on the function and structure of the soil, rhizosphere and endophytic bacterial communities. Oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) is an important break crop in cereal crop rotation and can significantly reduce the rate of ‘take-all’ fungal disease (Gaeumannomyces graminis var. tritici) and, as a result, improves the yield of subsequent cereal crops. Additionally, oilseed rape is the world’s third largest source of vegetable oil used for human nutrition and as a source of oil for biodiesel production. Therefore, the promotion of agricultural practices that maintain the natural diversity of B. napus endophytic bacteria is receiving attention as an important element for a sustainable agricultural system that ensures crop productivity and quality while reducing inputs. This chapter reviews the existing literature on the role of endophytic bacteria in oilseed rape crop production, agricultural factors influencing oilseed rape bacterial diversity and discusses how meta-omics is enhancing our understanding of the endophytic bacteria and their function.

Type
Chapter
Information
Endophytes for a Growing World , pp. 232 - 249
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abuamsha, R., Salman, M. and Ehlers, R.-U. (2011). Improvement of seed bio-priming of oilseed rape (Brassica napus ssp. oleifera) with Serratia plymuthica and Pseudomonas chlororaphis. Biocontrol Science and Technology, 21, 199–213.Google Scholar
Achouak, W., Sutra, L., Heulin, T. et al. (2000). Pseudomonas brassicacearum sp. nov. and Pseudomonas thivervalensis sp. nov., two root-associated bacteria isolated from Brassica napus and Arabidopsis thaliana. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, 50, 1, 9–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ahemad, M. and Khan, M. S. (2010). Comparative toxicity of selected insecticides to pea plants and growth promotion in response to insecticide-tolerant and plant-growth-promoting Rhizobium leguminosarum. Crop Protection, 29, 325–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alström, S. (2001). Characteristics of bacteria from oilseed rape in relation to their biocontrol activity against Verticillium dahliae. Journal of Phytopathology, 149, 57–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, A., Baldock, J. A., Rogers, S. L., Bellotti, W. and Gill, G. (2004). Influence of chlorsulfuron on rhizobial growth, nodule formation, and nitrogen fixation with chickpea. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 55, 1059–1070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Angus, J., Herwaarden, A., Howe, G. and Van, H. A. (1991). Productivity and break crop effects of winter-growing oilseeds. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 31, 669–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bais, H. P., Park, S. W., Weir, T. L., Callaway, R. M. and Vivanco, J. M. (2004). How plants communicate using the underground information superhighway. Trends in Plant Science, 9, 26–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bais, H. P., Weir, T. L., Perry, L. G., Gilroy, S. and Vivanco, J. M. (2006). The role of root exudates in rhizosphere interations with plants and other organisms. Annual Review of Plant Biology, 57, 233–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ball, B. C., Bingham, I., Rees, R. M., Watson, C. A. and Litterick, A. (2005). The role of crop rotations in determining soil structure and crop growth conditions. Canadian Journal of Soil Science, 85, 557–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, G. (2009). Plant-microbe interactions promoting plant growth and health, perspectives for controlled use of microorganisms in agriculture. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 84, 11–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boldt, T. S. and Jacobsen, C. S. (1998). Different toxic effects of the sulfonylurea herbicides metsulfuron methyl, chlorsulfuron and thifensulfuron methyl on fluorescent pseudomonads isolated from an agricultural soil. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 161, 29–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bottini, R., Cassan, F. and Piccoli, P. (2004). Gibberellin production by bacteria and its involvement in plant growth promotion and yield increase. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 65, 497–503.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bulgarelli, D., Schlaeppi, K., Spaepen, S., Ver Loren van Themaat, E. and Schulze-Lefert, P. (2013). Structure and functions of the bacterial microbiota of plants. Annual Review of Plant Biology, 64, 807–838.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bulgarelli, D., Rott, M., Schlaeppi, K. et al. (2012). Revealing structure and assembly cues for Arabidopsis root-inhabiting bacterial microbiota. Nature, 488, 91–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cardone, M., Mazzoncini, M., Menini, S. et al. (2003). Brassica carinata as an alternative oil crop for the production of biodiesel in Italy: agronomic evaluation, fuel production by transesterification and characterization. Biomass and Bioenergy, 25, 623–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christen, O., Sieling, K. and Hanus, H. (1992). The effect of different preceding crops on the development, growth and yield of winter wheat. European Journal of Agronomy, 1, 21–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costa, R., Gotz, M., Mrotzek, N. et al. (2006). Effects of site and plant species on rhizosphere community structure as revealed by molecular analysis of microbial guilds. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 56, 236–249.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Costa, R., Gomes, N. C., Krogerrecklenfort, E. et al. (2007). Pseudomonas community structure and antagonistic potential in the rhizosphere: insights gained by combining phylogenetic and functional gene-based analyses. Environmental Microbiology, 9, 2260–2273.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Croes, S., Weyens, N., Janssen, J. et al. (2013). Bacterial communities associated with Brassica napus L. grown on trace element-contaminated and non-contaminated fields: a genotypic and phenotypic comparison. Microbial Biotechnology, 6, 371–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danielsson, J., Reva, O. and Meijer, J. (2007). Protection of oilseed rape (Brassica napus) toward fungal pathogens by strains of plant-associated Bacillus amyloliquefaciens. Microbial Ecology, 54, 134–140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Datta, A., Sindel, B. M., Kristiansen, P., Jessop, R. S. and Felton, W. L. (2009). Effect of isoxaflutole on the growth, nodulation and nitrogen fixation of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Crop Protection, 28, 923–927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Degrune, F., Theodorakopoulos, N., Colinet, G. et al. (2017). Temporal dynamics of soil microbial communities below the seedbed under two contrasting tillage regimes. Frontiers in Microbiology, 8, 1127.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Delourme, R., Falentin, C., Huteau, V. et al. (2006). Genetic control of oil content in oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.). Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 113, 1331–1345.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dorr de Quadros, P., Zhalnina, K., Davis-Richardson, A. et al. (2012). The effect of tillage system and crop rotation on soil microbial diversity and composition in a subtropical acrisol. Diversity, 4, 375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eberbach, P. L. and Douglas, L. A. (1989). Herbicide effects on the growth and nodulation potential of Rhizobium trifolii with Trifolium subterraneum L. Plant and Soil, 119, 15–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eliason, R., Schoenau, J. J., Szmigielski, A. M. and Laverty, W. M. (2004). Phytotoxicity and persistence of flucarbazone-sodium in soil. Weed Science, 52, 857–862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Etesami, H. and Alikhani, H. A. (2016). Rhizosphere and endorhiza of oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) plant harbor bacteria with multifaceted beneficial effects. Biological Control, 94, 11–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fang, Y., Zhang, L., Jiao, Y. et al. (2016). Tobacco rotated with rapeseed for soil-borne Phytophthora pathogen biocontrol: mediated by rapeseed root exudates. Frontiers in Microbiology, 7, 894.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farrar, K., Bryant, D. and Cope-Selby, N. (2014). Understanding and engineering beneficial plant–microbe interactions: plant growth promotion in energy crops. Plant Biotechnology Journal, 12, 1193–1206.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fernandez, O., Theocharis, A., Bordiec, S. et al. (2012). Burkholderia phytofirmans PsJN acclimates grapevine to cold by modulating carbohydrate metabolism. Molecular Plant–Microbe Interactions, 25, 496–504.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fiddaman, P. J. and Rossall, S. (1995). Selection of bacterial antagonists for the biological control of Rhizoctonia solani in oilseed rape (Brassica napus). Plant Pathology, 44, 695–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, J. E., Gulledge, J., Engelhaupt, E., Burow, M. E. and McLachlan, J. A. (2007). Pesticides reduce symbiotic efficiency of nitrogen-fixing rhizobia and host plants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104, 10282–10287.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garbeva, P., van Veen, J. A. and van Elsas, J. D. (2004). Microbial diversity in soil: selection microbial populations by plant and soil type and implications for disease suppressiveness. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 42, 243–270.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
García-Orenes, F., Guerrero, C., Roldán, A. et al. (2010). Soil microbial biomass and activity under different agricultural management systems in a semiarid Mediterranean agroecosystem. Soil and Tillage Research, 109, 110–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
García-Orenes, F., Morugán-Coronado, A., Zornoza, R. and Scow, K. (2013). Changes in soil microbial community structure influenced by agricultural management practices in a Mediterranean agro-ecosystem. PLoS One, 8, e80522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
George, T. S., Dou, D. and Wang, X. (2016). Plant-microbe interactions: manipulating signals to enhance agricultural sustainability and environmental security. Plant Growth Regulation, 80, 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Germaine, K. J., Liu, X., Cabellos, G. G., Hogan, J. P., Ryan, D. and Dowling, D. N. (2006). Bacterial endophyte-enhanced phytoremediation of the organochlorine herbicide 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 57, 302–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Germida, J. J., Siciliano, S. D., Renato de Freitas, J. and Seib, A. M. (1998). Diversity of root-associated bacteria associated with field-grown canola (Brassica napus L.) and wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 26, 43–50.Google Scholar
Giller, P. S. (1996). The diversity of soil communities, the ‘poor man’s tropical rainforest’. Biodiversity and Conservation, 5, 135–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gkarmiri, K., Mahmood, S., Ekblad, A., Alstrom, S., Hogberg, N. and Finlay, R. (2017). Identifying the active microbiome associated with roots and rhizosphere soil of oilseed rape. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 83, e01938-17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Godfray, H. C., Beddington, J. R., Crute, I. R. et al. (2010). Food security: the challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science, 327, 812–818.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Granér, G. (2002). Studies on Fungal Pathogens on Oilseed Rape (Brassica napus). Uppsala, Sweden: Sveriges Lantbruksuniversitet (Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences).Google Scholar
Granér, G., Persson, P., Meijer, J. and Alstrom, S. (2003). A study on microbial diversity in different cultivars of Brassica napus in relation to its wilt pathogen, Verticillium longisporum. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 224, 269–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
He, H., Ye, Z., Yang, D. et al. (2013). Characterization of endophytic Rahnella sp. JN6 from Polygonum pubescens and its potential in promoting growth and Cd, Pb, Zn uptake by Brassica napus. Chemosphere, 90, 1960–1965.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hegewald, H., Koblenz, B., Wensch-Dorendorf, M. and Christen, O. (2017). Yield, yield formation, and blackleg disease of oilseed rape cultivated in high-intensity crop rotations. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, 63, 1785–1799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hooper, D. U., Bignell, D. E., Brown, V. K. et al. (2000). Interactions between aboveground and belowground biodiversity in terrestrial ecosystems: patterns, mechanisms, and feedbacks. BioScience, 50, 1049–1061.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopkins, B. G., Hutchinson, P. J., Patterson, P. et al. (2004). Cropping sequence and rotation: impact on potato production and soil condition. Proceedings of the University of Idaho Winter Commodity Schools, 35, 97–109.Google Scholar
Jeon, J. S., Lee, S. S., Kim, H. Y. et al. (2003). Plant growth promotion in soil by some inoculated microorganisms. The Journal of Microbiology, 41, 271–276.Google Scholar
Jiang, M. L., Zhao, R., Hu, X. J., Zhang, Y. B. and Wang, G. P. (2007). Colonization of antifungal endobacterium BY-2 in oilcrop rape and its control effect on disease caused by Sclerotinia sclerotiorum. Acta Phytopathologica Sinica, 37, 192–196.Google Scholar
Kalia, A. and Gosal, S. K. (2011). Effect of pesticide application on soil microorganisms. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, 57, 569–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khan, M. S., Zaidi, A. and Aamil, M. (2004). Influence of herbicides on chickpea-Mesorhizobium symbiosis. Agronomie 24, 123–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkegaard, J., Christen, O., Krupinsky, J. and Layzell, D. (2008). Break crop benefits in temperate wheat production. Field Crops Research, 107, 185–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kwak, Y.-S. and Weller, D. M. (2013). Take-all of wheat and natural disease suppression: a review. The Plant Pathology Journal, 29, 125–135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lally, R. D., Galbally, P., Moreira, A. S. et al. (2017). Application of endophytic Pseudomonas fluorescens and a bacterial consortium to Brassica napus can increase plant height and biomass under greenhouse and field conditions. Frontiers in Plant Science, 8, 2193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larkin, R. P., Griffin, T. S. and Honeycutt, C. W. (2010). Rotation and cover crop effects on soilborne potato diseases, tuber yield, and soil microbial communities. Plant Disease, 94, 1491–1502.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Le Cocq, K., Gurr, S. J., Hirsch, P. R. and Mauchline, T. H. (2017). Exploitation of endophytes for sustainable agricultural intensification. Molecular Plant Pathology, 18, 469–473.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lehman, M. R., Cambardella, A. C., Stott, E. D. et al. (2015). Understanding and enhancing soil biological health: the solution for reversing soil degradation. Sustainability, 7, 988–1027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehman, R. M., Osborne, S. L. and Duke, S. E. (2017). Diversified no-till crop rotation reduces nitrous oxide emissions, increases soybean yields, and promotes soil carbon accrual. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 81, 76–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lundberg, D. S., Lebeis, S. L., Paredes, S. H. et al. (2012). Defining the core Arabidopsis thaliana root microbiome. Nature, 488, 86–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McDaniel, M. D., Tiemann, L. K. and Grandy, A. S. (2014). Does agricultural crop diversity enhance soil microbial biomass and organic matter dynamics? A meta-analysis. Ecological Applications, 24, 560–570.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mendes, R., Kruijt, M., de Bruijn, I. et al. (2011). Deciphering the rhizosphere microbiome for disease-suppressive bacteria. Science, 332, 1097–1100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Montalban, B., Croes, S., Weyens, N. et al. (2016). Characterization of bacterial communities associated with Brassica napus L. growing on a Zn-contaminated soil and their effects on root growth. Internation Journal of Phytoremediation, 18, 985–993.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murphy, B. R., Doohan, F. M. and Hodkinson, T. R. (2018). From concept to commerce: developing a successful fungal endophyte inoculant for agricultural crops. Journal of Fungi, 4, 2–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Navarro-Noya, Y. E., Gómez-Acata, S., Montoya-Ciriaco, N. et al. (2013). Relative impacts of tillage, residue management and crop-rotation on soil bacterial communities in a semi-arid agroecosystem. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 65, 86–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Callaghan, K. J., Stone, P. J., Hu, X. et al. (2000). Effects of glucosinolates and flavonoids on colonization of the roots of Brassica napus by Azorhizobium caulinodans ORS571. Applied Environmental Microbiology, 66, 2185–2191.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pampulha, M. E. and Oliveira, A. (2006). Impact of an herbicide combination of bromoxynil and prosulfuron on soil microorganisms. Current Microbiology, 53, 238–243.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peters, R. D., Sturz, A. V., Carter, M. R. and Sanderson, J. B. (2003). Developing disease-suppressive soils through crop rotation and tillage management practices. Soil and Tillage Research, 72, 181–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pham, C., Min, J. and Gu, M. (2004). Pesticide induced toxicity and stress response in bacterial cells. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 72, 380–386.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raaijmakers, J. M. and Weller, D. M. (1998). Natural plant protection by 2,4-diacetylphloroglucinol-producing Pseudomonas spp. in take-all decline soils. Molecular Plant–Microbe Interactioins, 11, 144–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rajesh, R. and Fern, W. G. D. (2006). Preliminary phenotypic and molecular screening for potential bacterial biocontrol agents of Leptosphaeria maculans, the blackleg pathogen of canola. Biocontrol Science and Technology, 16, 567–582.Google Scholar
Rathore, R., Dowling, D. N., Forristal, P. D. et al. (2017). Crop establishment practices are a driver of the plant microbiota in winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.). Frontiers in Microbiology, 8, 1489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rybakova, D., Mancinelli, R., Wikstrom, M. et al. (2017). The structure of the Brassica napus seed microbiome is cultivar-dependent and affects the interactions of symbionts and pathogens. Microbiome, 5, 104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schonhammer, A. and Fischbeck, G. (1987). Investigations on cereal crop rotations and monocultures. III. Changes in soil properties. Bayerisches Landwirt Jahrb, 64, 681–694.Google Scholar
Schreiter, S., Ding, G.-C., Heuer, H. et al. (2014). Effect of the soil type on the microbiome in the rhizosphere of field-grown lettuce. Frontiers in Microbiology 5, 144.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seghers, D., Wittebolle, L., Top, E. M., Verstraete, W. and Siciliano, S. D. (2004). Impact of agricultural practices on the Zea mays L. endophytic community. Applied Environmental Microbiology, 70, 1475–1482.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sheng, X.-F., Xia, J.-J., Jiang, C.-Y., He, L.-Y. and Qian, M. (2008). Characterization of heavy metal-resistant endophytic bacteria from rape (Brassica napus) roots and their potential in promoting the growth and lead accumulation of rape. Environmental Pollution, 156, 1164–1170.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Souza, R., Ambrosini, A. and Passaglia, L. M. P. (2015). Plant growth-promoting bacteria as inoculants in agricultural soils. Genetics and Molecular Biology, 38, 401–419.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steinfeld, H., de Haan, C. and Blackburn, H. (1998). Livestock and the environment, issues and options. In Agriculture and the Environment Perspectives on Sustainable Development, ed. E. Lutz. New York: World Bank, pp. 283–301.Google Scholar
Teagasc (2009). Winter oilseed rape. Fact Sheet. Carlow, Ireland: Teagasc Crop Research Centre.Google Scholar
Tilman, D., Cassman, K. G., Matson, P. A., Naylor, R. and Polasky, S. (2002). Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature, 418, 671–677.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tilman, D., Balzer, C., Hill, J. and Befort, B. L. (2011). Global food demand and the sustainable intensification of agriculture. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108, 20260–20264.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trostle, R. (2008). Global Agricultural Supply and Demand: Factors Contributing to the Recent Increase in Food Commodity Prices. Washington, DC: US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.Google Scholar
Wang, W., Deng, Z., Tan, H. and Cao, L. (2013). Effects of Cd, Pb, Zn, Cu-resistant endophytic Enterobacter sr CBSB1 and Rhodotorula sp. CBSB79 on the growth and phytoextraction of Brassica plants in multimetal contaminated soils. International Journal of Phytoremediation, 15, 488–497.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weller, D. M., Raaijmakers, J. M., Gardener, B. B. and Thomashow, L. S. (2002). Microbial populations responsible for specific soil suppressiveness to plant pathogens. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 40, 309–348.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whipps, J. M. (1997). Developments in the biological control of soil-borne plant pathogens. Advances in Botanical Research, 26, 1–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, P. J., George, T. S., Gregory, P. J. et al. (2013). Matching roots to their environment. Annals of Botany, 112, 207–222.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xing, K., Han, J. and Liu, H (2005). A preliminary study on the inhibitory effect of an endophytic bacterium yc8 isolated from rape. Acta Agriculturae Universitatis Jiangxiensis, 27, 852–856.Google Scholar
Yin, C., Mueth, N., Hulbert, S. et al. (2017). Bacterial communities on wheat grown under long-term conventional tillage and no-till in the Pacific northwest of the United States. Phytobiomes, 1, 83–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, H., Sun, Y., Xie, X. et al. (2009). A soil bacterium regulates plant acquisition of iron via deficiency-inducible mechanisms. The Plant Journal, 58, 568–577.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhao, Y., Gao, Z., Tian, B. et al. (2017). Endosphere microbiome comparison between symptomatic and asymptomatic roots of Brassica napus infected with Plasmodiophora brassicae. PLoS One, 12, e0185907.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×