Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Nov 9;14(1):27350.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-78485-1.

Impact of bioinoculants on growth enhancement, physicochemical characteristics, biochemical profiles, and enzymatic defense mechanisms in tomato (Lycopersicum esculentum)

Areeb Anjum  1   2 , Sumara Shaheen  1   3 , Habiba  4 , Afshan Rahman  2 , Shahina Naz  3 , Kashif Shafique  1
Affiliations

Impact of bioinoculants on growth enhancement, physicochemical characteristics, biochemical profiles, and enzymatic defense mechanisms in tomato (Lycopersicum esculentum)

Areeb Anjum et al. Sci Rep. .

Abstract

The excessive use of fungicides in agriculture causes challenges like pathogen resistance, soil and water contamination, and potential health risks. Sustainable options like Pseudomonas spp. and yeast are being explored as bioinoculants to promote plant growth and inhibit fungal proliferation. 87 isolates, comprising 36 fluorescent Pseudomonas spp. and 51 yeast isolates were obtained from healthy fruits and vegetables. Yeast (YFSL) and Pseudomonas (PFSL) isolates significantly (p < 0.05) inhibited the in-vitro growth of Fusarium solani and Drechslera sp. Experiments in a screen house for 90 days used a randomized block design to study the effects of bioinoculants on plant and fruit health. Moreover, plants and fruits treated with these bioinoculants showed increased levels of salicylic acid (66.14%), total phenolic content (59.67%), chlorophyll (24.31%), carbohydrates (40.38%), phosphorus (0.24%), and antioxidant activity (90%). The treatments displayed higher levels of plant defensive enzymes, chitinase (0.09 mg/h/protein) and β-1-3-glucanase (0.093 mg/h/protein). The increased concentrations of antioxidant enzymes like SOD (0.07 U/L), POD (0.23 U/L), and APX (0.24 U/L) were also observed in the fruits of bio-inoculated plants. However., the difference in results was non-significant (P ≤ 0.05). This study demonstrates the Efficacy of bioinoculants in improving plant growth, compositional characteristics, and antioxidant activities while reducing losses in tomato plants and fruits.

Keywords: Antioxidant enzymes; Bioinoculants; Defensive enzymes; Fluorescent Pseudomonas Spp.; Salicylic acid; Tomato.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Graphical representation of root infection % (LSD0.05: F. solani1 = 0.0141) inhibited in tomato plants grown under screen house inoculated with bioinoculants separately and in combinations. Data are reported as mean ± standard deviation, derived from the analysis of three replicates per sample. Letters highlight statistically significant differences among analyzed samples, based on a one-way ANOVA test (p < 0.05). Different letters within columns indicate differences according to Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (P ≤ 0.05). Whereas Control sterilized distilled water, Positive control Topsin M@ 200ppm, YFSL-Yeast, PFSL- fluorescent Pseudomonas, YFSL + PFSL-combinations of yeast and fluorescent Pseudomonas spp.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The graphical representation of the antioxidant (SOD, POD, APX) enzymatic activity of tomato plants grown under screen house inoculated with bioinoculants separately and in combinations. Data are reported as mean ± standard deviation, derived from the analysis of three replicates per sample. Letters highlight statistically significant differences among analyzed samples (LSD0.05 SOD = 0.0021, POD = 0.0031, APX = 0.0221), based on a one-way ANOVA test (p < 0.05). Different letters within columns indicate differences according to Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (P ≤ 0.05). Whereas Control- sterilized distilled water, Positive control Topsin M@ 200ppm, YFSL-Yeast, PFSL fluorescent Pseudomonas, YFSL + PFSL combinations of yeast and fluorescent Pseudomonas spp.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
The graphical representation of the antioxidant (β-1-3-Glucanase, Chitinase) enzymatic activity of tomato plants grown under screen house inoculated with bioinoculants separately and in combinations. Data are reported as mean ± standard deviation, derived from the analysis of three replicates per sample. Letters highlight statistically significant differences among analyzed samples (LSD0.05 CHI = 0.003, β-1-3-Glucanase = 0.003), based on a one-way ANOVA test (p < 0.05). Different letters within columns indicate differences according to Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (P ≤ 0.05). Whereas Control sterilized distilled water, Positive control Topsin M@ 200ppm, YFSL-Yeast, PFSL fluorescent Pseudomonas, YFSL + PFSL combinations of yeast and fluorescent Pseudomonas spp.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
The graphical representation of the enzymatic activity of tomato fruit grown under screen house inoculated with biocontrol agents separately and in combinations. Figure (A) Biocontrol efficacy of different isolates of yeast (YFSL) and fluorescent Pseudomonas spp. (PFSL) on the antioxidant enzyme (POD LSD0.05=0.001) activity of tomato fruit grown under screen house. Figure (B) Biocontrol efficacy of different isolates of yeast (YFSL) and fluorescent Pseudomonas spp. (PFSL) on the antioxidant (SOD LSD0.05= 0.003 and APX LSD0.05=0.024) activity of tomato fruit grown in a screen house. Data are reported as mean ± standard deviation, derived from the analysis of three replicates per sample. Letters highlight statistically significant differences among analyzed samples, based on a one-way ANOVA test (p < 0.05). Different letters within columns indicate differences according to Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (P ≤ 0.05). Whereas Control sterilized distilled water, Positive control Topsin M@ 200ppm, YFSL Yeast, PFSL fluorescent Pseudomonas, YFSL + PFSL combinations of yeast and fluorescent Pseudomonas spp.
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
The graphical representation of the defensive enzymatic activity (β-1-3-Glucanase & Chitinase) of tomato fruit grown under screen house inoculated with bio-inoculants individually and in combinations (LSD0.05β-1-3-Glucanase = 0.004, CHI = 0.0.003). Data are reported as mean ± standard deviation, derived from the analysis of three replicates per sample. Letters highlight statistically significant differences among analyzed samples, based on a one-way ANOVA test (p < 0.05). Different letters within columns indicate differences according to Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (P ≤ 0.05). Whereas Control sterilized distilled water, Positive control Topsin M@ 200ppm, YFSL Yeast, PFSL fluorescent Pseudomonas, YFSL + PFSL combinations of yeast and fluorescent Pseudomonas spp.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Abdelaziz, A. M., Hashem, A. H., Alwasel, Y. A., Abdelgawad, H. & Attia, M. S. Protective role of endophytic fungi and salicylic acid as therapeutic nutrients to improve immune responses of tomato plants against fusarial wilt disease. Not. Bot. Hortic. Agrobot.52 (1), 13497–13497 (2024).
    1. Shi, X. Q. et al. Growth promotion and biological control of fungal diseases in tomato by a versatile rhizobacterium, Pseudomonas chlororaphis subsp. aureofaciens SPS-41. Physiol. Mol. Plant. Pathol.131, 102274 (2024).
    1. Ali, S., Khan, J., Jadoon, A., Riaz, M. & Khan, A. Evaluation of farmers socioeconomic characteristics influencing tomato output in district Peshawar, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Sarhad J. Agric.36 (3), 894–899 (2020).
    1. Sibomana, M. S., Workneh, T. S., Audain, K. & J.F.S. A review of postharvest handling and losses in the fresh tomato supply chain: a focus on Sub-saharan Africa. J. Food Secur.8, 389–404 (2016).
    1. Ons, L., Bylemans, D., Thevissen, K. & Cammue, B. P. Combining biocontrol agents with chemical fungicides for integrated plant fungal disease control. Microorganisms 8 (12), 1930 (2020). - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms

Supplementary concepts

LinkOut - more resources