مطالعات علوم محیط زیست

مطالعات علوم محیط زیست

ارزیابی قابلیت های زیستی برخی باکتری های محرک رشد گیاه به عنوان کود زیستی چندمنظوره

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان
1 استادیار گروه علوم خاک، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه جیرفت، جیرفت، ایران
2 دانش‌آموخته کارشناسی ارشد گیاهپزشکی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه جیرفت، جیرفت، ایران
3 دانشیار، گروه گیاه‌پزشکی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه جیرفت، جیرفت، ایران.
4 دانش‌آموخته کارشناسی ارشد گیاهپزشکی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه جیرفت، جیرفت، ایران.
10.22034/jess.2025.523455.2376
چکیده
باکتری‌های محرک رشد گیاه (PGPB) نقش کلیدی در ارتقاء رشد گیاهان از طریق مکانیسم‌های مستقیم و غیرمستقیم ایفا می‌کنند. در این پژوهش، ۲۶ جدایه باکتریایی متعلق به چهار جنس سودوموناس (Pseudomonas) ، باسیلوس (Bacillus)، ازتوباکتر (Azotobacter) و آزوسپیریلیوم (Azospirillum) با هدف بررسی قابلیت آن‌ها در اعمال مکانیسم‌های محرک رشدی مورد ارزیابی قرار گرفتند. فعالیت‌های زیستی مورد بررسی شامل تولید ایندول-۳-استیک اسید (IAA) به‌عنوان هورمون محرک رشد، تثبیت بیولوژیک نیتروژن، انحلال فسفات‌های نامحلول معدنی و سنتز سیدروفور بودند. نتایج نشان داد جدایه‌های Bacillus subtilis، Bacillus paralicheniformis، Pseudomonas fluorescens، Azotobacter chroococcum و Azotobacter salinestris بیشترین میزان تولید سیدروفور را داشتند. همچنین جدایه‌های Bacillus subtilis، Bacillus velezensis و Pseudomonas fluorescens بیشترین توان حل کنندگی ترکیبات حاوی فسفات معدنی نامحلول را داشتند. نتایج بررسی کیفی توان تولید ایندول استیک‌ اسید و تثبیت بیولوژیک نیتروژن نشان دادند که 19 جدایه قادر به تثبیت نیتروژن و همچنین 10 جدایه قادر به تولید ایندول استیک اسید بودند. به طور کلی نتایج نشان داد که بسیاری از جدایه‌ها دارای توانایی قابل‌توجهی در یک یا چند مکانیسم محرک رشد گیاه بودند، که بیانگر پتانسیل بالای آن‌ها در استفاده به‌عنوان کودهای زیستی چندمنظوره می‌باشد. این پژوهش می‌تواند زمینه‌ساز شناسایی و بهره‌برداری از سویه‌های بومی مؤثر در تولید محصولات زیستی جهت ارتقاء رشد گیاهان در شرایط کم‌نهاده و استفاده آن‌ها در برنامه‌های مدیریت حاصلخیزی پایدار خاک ‌باشد.
کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله English

Evaluation of the biological potential of some plant growth-promoting bacteria as multifunctional biofertilizers

نویسندگان English

ghobad jalali 1
Zinab Firoozbakht 2
Hamidreza Alizadeh 3
Nasrin Seyyedi 4
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Soil Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Jiroft, Jiroft. Iran
2 M.Sc. of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Jiroft, Jiroft, Iran
3 Associate professor, Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Jiroft, Jiroft, Iran.
4 M.Sc. of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Jiroft, Jiroft, Iran
چکیده English

Introduction

The increasing global population and the limited availability of natural resources, particularly fertile soils, have posed significant challenges to modern agriculture in achieving sustainable food production. During their growth, plants are in constant and direct contact with microorganisms present in the root vicinity, collectively known as the rhizosphere. Microorganisms inhabiting the rhizosphere of various plants exert multiple positive effects on their hosts through diverse mechanisms and are commonly referred to as plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR). In the rhizosphere, plant roots release exudates that serve as attractants for microorganisms, ultimately enhancing the physical and chemical properties of the surrounding soil. These exudates also play a crucial role in maintaining the structure and function of microbial communities near the plant roots. PGPR promote plant growth through various biological mechanisms, including atmospheric nitrogen fixation, siderophore production, phytohormone synthesis (such as auxins, gibberellins, and cytokinins), and the solubilization of insoluble phosphorus compounds. Furthermore, certain bacteria enhance the availability of essential nutrients to plants. Research has demonstrated that the application of these bacteria can increase plant tolerance to abiotic stresses, such as salinity and drought. Moreover, PGPR can indirectly bolster plant resistance to biotic stresses by inducing systemic resistance, exerting antibiotic effects, and potentially enhancing the plant's cellular metabolite content. By reducing the reliance on chemical fertilizers and pesticides, PGPR also contribute to soil health and environmental sustainability.
In general, the development and application of biological products based on plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR), as an alternative or supplement to chemical fertilizers and pesticides, have gained significant attention in agricultural research and applications. This approach is recognized as an efficient and environmentally sustainable method for enhancing crop productivity. Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate the biological capabilities of certain plant growth-promoting bacterial isolates.
Materials and methods
Bacterial isolates effective in promoting plant growth were obtained from various genera through the Soil and Water Research Institute of Iran and the University of Jiroft. A total of 26 bacterial isolates were collected, including 15 isolates belonging to the genus Bacillus, 5 to Pseudomonas, and 3 each to the genera Azotobacter and Azospirillum. To ensure the purity of the isolates, all 26 were re-cultured using the pentagonal streaking method on NAS medium. Additionally, their morphological and phenotypic characteristics were examined using Gram staining, catalase testing, and evaluation of levan production capability.
Siderophore production was assessed on CAS-Agar medium following the method described by Alexander and Zuberer. Phosphate solubilization ability was tested using Sperber’s method, which involves a medium containing tricalcium phosphate that causes turbidity. The formation of a clear halo around the bacterial colonies was considered an indication of phosphate solubilization. For nitrogen fixation assessment, a nitrogen-free Winogradsky medium was prepared. To identify nitrogen-fixing bacteria, 5 µL of the bacterial suspension was spot-inoculated onto the medium and incubated at 28 °C for seven days. Bacterial growth or lack thereof was compared to that on NAS medium. Qualitative assessment of IAA (indole-3-acetic acid) production was performed using the method described by Bano and Musarrat. Bacterial isolates were cultured in 100 mL of liquid LB medium and incubated at 28 °C for 72 hours in a shaker incubator at 120 rpm. The cultures were then centrifuged at 5000 rpm for 30 minutes, and 2 mL of the supernatant was mixed with 1 mL of Salkowski reagent. The appearance of a pink to reddish color indicated IAA production.
Results and discussion
The results of the analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the ability of the isolates to produce siderophores showed significant differences at the 1% probability level among some of the isolates. The results of the mean comparison indicated that 15 isolates were capable of producing siderophores, with the highest production observed in the isolates UJB33 (Bacillus subtilis), UJB22 (Bacillus paralicheniformis), UJB31 (Pseudomonas fluorescens), UJB32 (Azotobacter chroococcum), and UJB36 (Azotobacter salinestris). The lowest production was observed in the isolates UJB24 and UJB34, which belonged to the genera Pseudomonas and Bacillus, respectively.
The ANOVA results for the semi-quantitative phosphate solubilization assay revealed significant differences at the 1% probability level among the isolates. Furthermore, the results of the mean comparison indicated that the highest phosphate solubilization was observed in the isolates UJB32, UJB11, UJB24, and UJB33, with halo diameters of 11.33, 9.33, 7.66, and 5.66 mm, respectively. The lowest phosphate solubilization was observed in the isolates UJB19, UJB28, and UJB18, with halo diameters of 2.66 and 2.33 mm. The qualitative assessment of nitrogen fixation by the antagonistic isolates revealed that 19 isolates were capable of growth in nitrogen-free medium, indicating their nitrogen-fixing ability. These isolates belonged to the genera Bacillus, Pseudomonas, Azotobacter, and Azospirillum. Growth and non-growth of the isolates were compared with the nutrient agar (NA) medium. The results of the qualitative assessment of auxin production by the isolates showed that 10 of the tested isolates were capable of producing auxins in the presence of tryptophan.
Conclusion
The results of this study demonstrated that isolates UJB33, UJB22, UJB31, UJB32, UJB36, UJB12, UJB18, UJB28, UJB11, UJB25, UJB29, UJB15, UJB35, UJB24, and UJB34 were capable of producing siderophores. These isolates belonged to four bacterial genera: Bacillus, Azotobacter, Azospirillum, and Pseudomonas. It was also found that isolates UJB32, UJB11, UJB24, UJB33, UJB20, UJB26, UJB31, UJB34, UJB36, UJB25, UJB35, UJB16, UJB18, UJB28, and UJB19 were able to solubilize phosphate. Phosphate solubilization by bacterial isolates is an important trait that can enhance plant growth and yield by improving phosphorus availability. Moreover, the ability to produce indole-3-acetic acid (IAA) in the presence of tryptophan was confirmed in isolates UJB11, UJB29, UJB12, UJB15, UJB32, UJB34, UJB27, UJB25, UJB14, and UJB18. IAA is a key phytohormone that promotes plant growth and contributes to increased plant height. In addition, nitrogen fixation tests showed that isolates UJB31, UJB32, UJB36, UJB12, UJB18, UJB11, UJB26, UJB25, UJB29, UJB15, UJB34, UJB35, UJB30, UJB14, UJB19, UJB17, UJB20, UJB21, and UJB16 were capable of fixing atmospheric nitrogen. These isolates also belonged to the genera Bacillus, Azotobacter, Azospirillum, and Pseudomonas. Overall, this study highlights the potential of plant growth-promoting bacteria (PGPB) from the genera Pseudomonas, Bacillus, Azotobacter, and Azospirillum to improve plant growth and optimize soil resource utilization through multiple mechanisms, including IAA production, nitrogen fixation, phosphate solubilization, and siderophore production. These bacteria play a vital role in enhancing nutrient availability to plants and suppressing soil-borne pathogens. Their application as biofertilizers offers a sustainable alternative to chemical fertilizers and holds promise for improving crop productivity in modern agriculture.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Beneficial bacteria
biological nitrogen fixation
phosphate solubilizing bacteria
siderophore
1.       Aasfar, A., Bargaz, A., Yaakoubi, K., Hilali, A., Bennis, I., Zeroual, Y., & Meftah Kadmiri, I. 2021. Nitrogen fixing Azotobacter species as potential soil biological enhancers for crop nutrition and yield stability. Frontiers in microbiology, 12, 62837.9.
2.       Abdel Latef, A. A. H., Abu Alhmad, M. F., Kordrostami, M., Abo–Baker, A.-B. A.-E., & Zakir, A. 2020. Inoculation with Azospirillum lipoferum or Azotobacter chroococcum reinforces maize growth by improving physiological activities under saline conditions. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation, 39(3), 1293-1306.   
3.       Abdel Latef, A. A. H., Omer, A. M., Badawy, A. A., Osman, M. S., & Ragaey, M. M. 2021. Strategy of salt tolerance and interactive impact of Azotobacter chroococcum and/or Alcaligenes faecalis inoculation on canola (Brassica napus L.) plants grown in saline soil. Plants, 10(1), 110.
4.       Ahmed, E., & Holmström, S. J. 2014. Siderophores in environmental research: roles and applications. Microbial biotechnology, 7(3), 196-208.   
5.       Alexander, D., & Zuberer, D. 1991. Use of chrome azurol S reagents to evaluate siderophore production by rhizosphere bacteria. Biology and fertility of soils, 12, 39-45.     
6.       Backer, R., Rokem, J. S., Ilangumaran, G., Lamont, J., Praslickova, D., Ricci, E., Subramanian, S., & Smith, D. L. 2018. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria: context, mechanisms of action, and roadmap to commercialization of biostimulants for sustainable agriculture. Frontiers in Plant Science, 9, 1473.
7.       Bent, E., Tuzun, S., Chanway, C. P., & Enebak, S. 2001. Alterations in plant growth and in root hormone levels of lodgepole pines inoculated with rhizobacteria. Canadian journal of microbiology, 47(9), 793-800.
8.       Bhardwaj, D., Ansari, M. W., Sahoo, R. K., & Tuteja, N. 2014. Biofertilizers function as key player in sustainable agriculture by improving soil fertility, plant tolerance and crop productivity. Microbial Cell Factories, 13, 1-10.           
9.       Bhattacharyya, P. N., & Jha, D. K. 2012. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR): emergence in agriculture. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 28, 1327-1350.
10.   Buysens, S., Heungens, K., Poppe, J., & Hofte, M. 1996. Involvement of pyochelin and pyoverdin in suppression of Pythium-induced damping-off of tomato by Pseudomonas aeruginosa 7NSK2. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 62(3), 865-871. 
11.   Canbolat, M. Y., Bilen, S., Çakmakçı, R., Şahin, F., & Aydın, A. 2006. Effect of plant growth-promoting bacteria and soil compaction on barley seedling growth, nutrient uptake, soil properties and rhizosphere microflora. Biology and fertility of soils, 42, 350-357.        
12.   Dommelen, A., Vanderleyden, J., Bothe, H., Ferguson, S., & Newton, W. 2007. Biology of the Nitrogen Cycle. In: Elsevier.
13.   Dutta, J., & Thakur, D. 2017. Evaluation of multifarious plant growth promoting traits, antagonistic potential and phylogenetic affiliation of rhizobacteria associated with commercial tea plants grown in Darjeeling, India. PLoS One, 12(8), e0182302. 
14.   Gamalero, E., & Glick, B. R. 2015. Bacterial modulation of plant ethylene levels. Plant physiology, 169(1), 13-22.      
15.   Gao, B., Chai, X., Huang, Y., Wang, X., Han, Z., Xu, X., Wu, T., Zhang, X., & Wang, Y. 2022. Siderophore production in pseudomonas SP. strain SP3 enhances iron acquisition in apple rootstock. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 133(2), 720-732.
16.   Gebrewold, A. Z. 2018. Review on integrated nutrient management of tea (Camellia sinensis L.). Cogent Food & Agriculture, 4(1), 1543536.      
17.   Ghazy, N., & El-Nahrawy, S. 2021. Siderophore production by Bacillus subtilis MF497446 and Pseudomonas koreensis MG209738 and their efficacy in controlling Cephalosporium maydis in maize plant. Archives of microbiology, 203(3), 1195-1209.
18.   Ghosh, S., & Basu, P. 2006. Production and metabolism of indole acetic acid in roots and root nodules of Phaseolus mungo. Microbiological research, 161(4), 362-366.    
19.   Glick, B. R. 2012. Plant growth-promoting bacteria: mechanisms and applications. Scientifica, 2012.
20.   Gopalakrishnan, S., Upadhyaya, H., Vadlamudi, S., Humayun, P., Vidya, M. S., Alekhya, G., Singh, A., Vijayabharathi, R., Bhimineni, R. K., & Seema, M. 2012. Plant growth-promoting traits of biocontrol potential bacteria isolated from rice rhizosphere. SpringerPlus, 1, 1-7.
21.   Gouda, S., Kerry, R. G., Das, G., Paramithiotis, S., Shin, H.-S., & Patra, J. K. 2018. Revitalization of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria for sustainable development in agriculture. Microbiological research, 206, 131-140.
22.   Hamdali, H., Bouizgarne, B., Hafidi, M., Lebrihi, A., Virolle, M. J., & Ouhdouch, Y. 2008. Screening for rock phosphate solubilizing Actinomycetes from Moroccan phosphate mines. Applied Soil Ecology, 38(1), 12-19.
23.   Hasanudin, H. 2003.. Increasing of the nutrient and uptake avaliability of N and P and through corn yield of inoculation of mycorrhiza, azotobacter and on ultisol organic matter. Journal of Agriculture Sciences of Indonesia, 5(1), 83-89.     
24.   Hoshino, Y., Chiba, K., Ishino, K., Fukai, T., Igarashi, Y., Yazawa, K., Mikami, Y., & Ishikawa, J. 2011. Identification of nocobactin NA biosynthetic gene clusters in Nocardia farcinica. Journal of bacteriology, 193(2), 441-448.
25.   Jarak, M., Protić, R., Janković, S., & Čolo, J. 2006. Response of wheat to Azotobacteractinomycetes inoculation and nitrogen fertilizers. Romanian agricultural research, 23, 37-40.        
26.   Juma, P. O., Fujitani, Y., Alessa, O., Oyama, T., Yurimoto, H., Sakai, Y., & Tani, A. 2022. Siderophore for lanthanide and iron uptake for methylotrophy and plant growth promotion in Methylobacterium aquaticum strain 22A. Frontiers in microbiology, 13, 921635.     
27.   Kennedy, I. R., Choudhury, A., & Kecskés, M. L. 2004. Non-symbiotic bacterial diazotrophs in crop-farming systems: can their potential for plant growth promotion be better exploited? Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 36(8), 1229-1244.      
28.   Kesaulya, H., Hasinu, J., & Tuhumury, G. N. 2018. Potential of Bacillus spp produces siderophores insuppressing thewilt disease of banana plants. IOP conference series: earth and environmental science.
29.   Khan, N., Ali, S., Shahid, M. A., Mustafa, A., Sayyed, R., & Curá, J. A. 2021. Insights into the interactions among roots, rhizosphere, and rhizobacteria for improving plant growth and tolerance to abiotic stresses: a review. Cells, 10(6), 1551.
30.   Kurrey, D. K., Sharma, R., Lahre, M. K., & Kurrey, R. L. 2018. Effect of Azotobacter on physio-chemical characteristics of soil in onion field. Pharma Inn J, 7(2), 10, 8-113.         
31.   Larkin, R. P. 2020. Biological control of soilborne diseases in organic potato production using hypovirulent strains of Rhizoctonia solani. Biological Agriculture & Horticulture, 36(2), 119-129.      
32.   Lastochkina, O., Garshina, D., & Pusenkova, L. 2020. Effect of endophytic Bacillus subtilis on drought stress tolerance of Triticum aestivum plants of steppe volga and forest-steppe west siberian agroecological groups. Proceedings of the Abstract book of the 2nd International Scientific ConferencePlants and Microbes: The Future of Biotechnology”, Saratov, Russia.
33.   Lemanceau, P., & Alabouvette, C. 1993. Suppression of Fusarium wilts by fluorescent pseudomonads: mechanisms and applications. Biocontrol Science and technology, 3(3), 219-234.
34.   Lugtenberg, B., & Kamilova, F. 2009. Plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria. Annual review of microbiology, 63, 541-556.    
35.   Manske, G., Lüttger, A., Behl, R., & Vlek, P. 1995. Nutrient efficiency based on VA mycorrhizae (VAM) and total root length of wheat cultivars grown in India.         
36.   Marques, J. M., Mateus, J. R., da Silva, T. F., Couto, C. R. d. A., Blank, A. F., & Seldin, L. 2019. Nitrogen fixing and phosphate mineralizing bacterial communities in sweet potato rhizosphere show a genotype-dependent distribution. Diversity. 231 (12). 11.     
37.   Mishra, A. K., & Baek, K.-H. 2021. Salicylic acid biosynthesis and metabolism: a divergent pathway for plants and bacteria. Biomolecules, 11(5), 705.
38.   Mohammed, A. F., Oloyede, A. R., & Odeseye, A. O. 2020. Biological control of bacterial wilt of tomato caused by Ralstonia solanacearum using Pseudomonas species isolated from the rhizosphere of tomato plants. Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection, 53(1-2), 1-16.
39.   Nepolean, P., Jayanthi, R., Pallavi, R. V., Balamurugan, A., Kuberan, T., Beulah, T., & Premkumar, R. 2012. Role of biofertilizers in increasing tea productivity. Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Biomedicine, 2(3), S1443-S1445.
40.   Olanrewaju, O. S., Glick, B. R., & Babalola, O. O. 2017. Mechanisms of action of plant growth promoting bacteria. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 33, 1-16.   
41.   Pandey, P., Irulappan, V., Bagavathiannan, M. V., & Senthil-Kumar, M. 2017. Impact of combined abiotic and biotic stresses on plant growth and avenues for crop improvement by exploiting physio-morphological traits. Frontiers in Plant Science, 8, 537.         
42.   Patten, C. L., & Glick, B. R. 2002. Role of Pseudomonas putida indoleacetic acid in development of the host plant root system. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 68(8), 3795-3801.          
43.   Rai, S., & Gaur, A. 1988. Characterization of Azotobacter spp. and effect of Azotobacter and Azospirillum as inoculant on the yield and N-uptake of wheat crop. Plant and soil, 109, 131-134. 
44.   Richardson, A. E., & Simpson, R. J. 2011. Soil microorganisms mediating phosphorus availability update on microbial phosphorus. Plant physiology, 156(3), 989-996.         
45.   Rodrı́guez, H., & Fraga, R. 1999. Phosphate solubilizing bacteria and their role in plant growth promotion. Biotechnology advances, 1. 319-329.    
46.   Romero-Perdomo, F., Abril, J., Camelo, M., Moreno-Galván, A., Pastrana, I., Rojas-Tapias, D., & Bonilla, R. 2017. Azotobacter chroococcum as a potentially useful bacterial biofertilizer for cotton (Gossypium hirsutum): Effect in reducing N fertilization. Revista Argentina de microbiologia, 49(4), 377-383.
47.   Saha, M., Sarkar, S., Sarkar, B., Sharma, B. K., Bhattacharjee, S., & Tribedi, P. 2016. Microbial siderophores and their potential applications: a review. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 23, 3984-3999.      
48.   Singh, P., Singh, R. K., Zhou, Y., Wang, J., Jiang, Y., Shen, N., Wang, Y., Yang, L., & Jiang, M. 2022. Unlocking the strength of plant growth promoting Pseudomonas in improving crop productivity in normal and challenging environments: a review. Journal of Plant Interactions, 17(1), 220-238.    
49.   Singh, R. K., Singh, P., Li, H.-B., Guo, D.-J., Song, Q.-Q., Yang, L.-T., Malviya, M. K., Song, X.-P., & Li, Y.-R. 2020. Plant-PGPR interaction study of plant growth-promoting diazotrophs Kosakonia radicincitans BA1 and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia COA2 to enhance growth and stress-related gene expression in Saccharum spp. Journal of Plant Interactions, 15(1), 427-445.
50.   SoltaniTolarood, A., Salehrastin, N., Khavazi, K., Asadi, H., & Abaszadeh, P. 2008. Isolation and study Plant Growth Promoting properties of Pseudomonas fluorescens species in soils of Iran. Journal of SoilandWaters Sciences, 21, 187-199.
51.   Sperber, J. I. 1958. The incidence of apatite-solubilizing organisms in the rhizosphere and soil. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 9(6), 778-781.
52.   Stephen, J., Shabanamol, S., Rishad, K., & Jisha, M. 2015. Growth enhancement of rice (Oryza sativa) by phosphate solubilizing Gluconacetobacter sp.(MTCC 8368) and Burkholderia sp.(MTCC 8369) under greenhouse conditions. 3 Biotech, 5, 831-837.        
53.   Tennakoon, P., Rajapaksha, R., & Hettiarachchi, L. 2019. Tea yield maintained in PGPR inoculated field plants despite significant reduction in fertilizer application. Rhizosphere, 10, 100146.   
54.   Vessey, J. K. 2003. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria as biofertilizers. Plant and soil, 255, 571-586.
55.   Wandersman, C., & Delepelaire, P. 2004. Bacterial iron sources: from siderophores to hemophores. Annu. Rev. Microbiol., 58, 611-647.
56.   Wu, S., Zhuang, G., Bai, Z., Cen, Y., Xu, S., Sun, H., Han, X., & Zhuang, X. 2018. Mitigation of nitrous oxide emissions from acidic soils by Bacillus amyloliquefaciens, a plant growth‐promoting bacterium. Global change biology, 24(6), 2352-2365.
57.   Xu, G., & Zheng, H. 1986. Handbook of analysis of soil microorganism. Agricul-ture Press, Beijing, 249-291.
58.   Yandigeri, M. S., Yadav, A. K., Srinivasan, R., Kashyap, S., & Pabbi, S. 2011. Studies on mineral phosphate solubilization by cyanobacteria Westiellopsis and Anabaena. Microbiology, 80, 558-565.
59.    Yu, X., Ai, C., Xin, L., & Zhou, G. 2011. The siderophore-producing bacterium, Bacillus subtilis CAS15, has a biocontrol effect on Fusarium wilt and promotes the growth of pepper. european journal of soil biology, 47(2), 138-145.             
60.  جمالی، ف،. مدرسی، م. و بیات، ف. 1395. توانایی بیوکنترل سویه­های fluorescens  Pseudomonas  مولد 2 و -4. دی استیل فلوروگلوسینول و سیانید هیدروژن علیه پژمردگی فوزاریومی گوجه فرنگی. کنترل بیولوژیک آفات و بیماریهای گیاهی. 5: 235 تا  246.
61.  خسروی، آ،. زارعی، م. و رونقی، ع. ا. 1396. بررسی تاثیر باکتری حل کننده فسفات، ورمی کمپوست و منابع فسفات بر رشد کاهو در یک خاک آهکی. نشریه زیست شناسی خاک، 5: 81 تا 94.