Microbial diversity composition of apple tree roots and resistance of apple Valsa canker with different grafting rootstock types.
Apple Valsa canker
Grafting rootstock types
Roots microbiome
Valsa mali
Journal
BMC microbiology
ISSN: 1471-2180
Titre abrégé: BMC Microbiol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100966981
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 06 2022
03 06 2022
Historique:
received:
22
11
2021
accepted:
31
03
2022
entrez:
6
6
2022
pubmed:
7
6
2022
medline:
9
6
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The composition and diversity of root microbial community are affected by plant genotypes and soil environment, which in turn affect plant growth and development. Grafting rootstock types of the apple tree can affect phenotypes in cultivation practice, but it is not clear whether grafting rootstock types can affect the composition and diversity of root microbial community and the resistance of apple tree to apple Valsa canker. To explore root microbial differences and the correlation, 16S rRNA and ITS genes were sequenced using Novaseq technology. The results showed that the influence of grafting rootstock types on the composition of the root fungal community was greater than that of bacteria. And the bacterial community richness was higher in the healthy (OTUs: 1693) and dwarfing rootstock (OTUs: 1526) than in the disease (OTUs: 1181) and standard rootstock (OTUs: 1412), while the fungal community richness was the opposite. Moreover, the bacterial abundance of root zone, rhizosphere, and root endophytic microorganisms with the same grafting rootstock type exhibited a decreasing trend. Results of Nested PCR assay on soil and root tissue of Valsa mali showed that the content of V. mali in dwarfing rootstocks are lower than standard rootstocks. These results suggest that apple trees grafting with dwarfing rootstocks are more resistant to V. mali than standard rootstocks. Under different grafting types, the effect on the composition of fungal community in apple tree root was greater than that of bacteria. The bacterial community in dwarfing rootstocks is more abundant and diverse, including more beneficial microorganisms. Therefore, dwarfing rootstock is more conducive to the resistance to apple Valsa canker from biological control.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The composition and diversity of root microbial community are affected by plant genotypes and soil environment, which in turn affect plant growth and development. Grafting rootstock types of the apple tree can affect phenotypes in cultivation practice, but it is not clear whether grafting rootstock types can affect the composition and diversity of root microbial community and the resistance of apple tree to apple Valsa canker.
METHODS
To explore root microbial differences and the correlation, 16S rRNA and ITS genes were sequenced using Novaseq technology.
RESULTS
The results showed that the influence of grafting rootstock types on the composition of the root fungal community was greater than that of bacteria. And the bacterial community richness was higher in the healthy (OTUs: 1693) and dwarfing rootstock (OTUs: 1526) than in the disease (OTUs: 1181) and standard rootstock (OTUs: 1412), while the fungal community richness was the opposite. Moreover, the bacterial abundance of root zone, rhizosphere, and root endophytic microorganisms with the same grafting rootstock type exhibited a decreasing trend. Results of Nested PCR assay on soil and root tissue of Valsa mali showed that the content of V. mali in dwarfing rootstocks are lower than standard rootstocks. These results suggest that apple trees grafting with dwarfing rootstocks are more resistant to V. mali than standard rootstocks.
CONCLUSIONS
Under different grafting types, the effect on the composition of fungal community in apple tree root was greater than that of bacteria. The bacterial community in dwarfing rootstocks is more abundant and diverse, including more beneficial microorganisms. Therefore, dwarfing rootstock is more conducive to the resistance to apple Valsa canker from biological control.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35659248
doi: 10.1186/s12866-022-02517-x
pii: 10.1186/s12866-022-02517-x
pmc: PMC9164711
doi:
Substances chimiques
RNA, Ribosomal, 16S
0
Soil
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
148Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Nat Commun. 2015 Sep 24;6:8413
pubmed: 26400552
J Fungi (Basel). 2020 May 17;6(2):
pubmed: 32429548
New Phytol. 2003 Mar;157(3):493-502
pubmed: 33873407
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2017 Oct;15(10):579-590
pubmed: 28824177
Physiol Plant. 2015 Jan;153(1):79-90
pubmed: 24796562
Bioinformatics. 2011 Nov 1;27(21):2957-63
pubmed: 21903629
Environ Sci Technol. 2015 Jan 20;49(2):1095-104
pubmed: 25514174
BMC Plant Biol. 2013 Oct 21;13:165
pubmed: 24144190
Int J Food Microbiol. 2003 Jul 15;84(1):93-104
pubmed: 12781959
Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2013;64:839-63
pubmed: 23373699
Sci Rep. 2021 Jan 15;11(1):1544
pubmed: 33452372
Am J Bot. 2012 Jan;99(1):101-7
pubmed: 22174335
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2019 Jan 9;85(2):
pubmed: 30413478
Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 2005 Jun;18(6):555-61
pubmed: 15986925
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Jan 24;109(4):1159-64
pubmed: 22232669
Front Microbiol. 2018 Jul 26;9:1692
pubmed: 30093896
Microbiome. 2019 Feb 1;7(1):14
pubmed: 30709420
ISME J. 2018 Jun;12(6):1496-1507
pubmed: 29520025
Sci Rep. 2019 May 23;9(1):7738
pubmed: 31123304
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Jun 24;111(25):9259-64
pubmed: 24927540
Microorganisms. 2021 Sep 28;9(10):
pubmed: 34683372
Zhongguo Zhong Yao Za Zhi. 2020 Nov;45(21):5160-5168
pubmed: 33350231
Plant Sci. 2017 Aug;261:18-27
pubmed: 28554690
Nat Microbiol. 2018 Apr;3(4):470-480
pubmed: 29556109
Environ Microbiol. 2017 Aug;19(8):2984-2991
pubmed: 28229529
Semin Thromb Hemost. 2019 Oct;45(7):661-673
pubmed: 31096307
Ann Bot. 2007 Aug;100(2):347-57
pubmed: 17652339
Plant Dis. 2018 Jan;102(1):67-72
pubmed: 30673446
Trends Plant Sci. 2012 Aug;17(8):478-86
pubmed: 22564542
PeerJ. 2016 Oct 18;4:e2584
pubmed: 27781170
Phytopathology. 2017 Nov;107(11):1284-1297
pubmed: 28650266
Microbiome. 2017 Aug 10;5(1):97
pubmed: 28797279
Nat Methods. 2013 Jan;10(1):57-9
pubmed: 23202435
ISME J. 2016 Jan;10(1):265-8
pubmed: 26023875
Plant Sci. 2017 Mar;256:53-64
pubmed: 28167039
Plant Signal Behav. 2021 Feb 1;16(2):1854507
pubmed: 33289592
Glob Chang Biol. 2018 Jun;24(6):2352-2365
pubmed: 29251817
Nat Methods. 2010 May;7(5):335-6
pubmed: 20383131
J Vis Exp. 2018 Jul 24;(137):
pubmed: 30102263
Microb Cell Fact. 2014 Oct 24;13:144
pubmed: 25338952
Front Microbiol. 2020 Jun 18;11:1257
pubmed: 32625183