Study of mechanisms for plant growth promotion elicited by rhizobacteria in Arabidopsis thaliana

Abstract

Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) colonize plant roots and exert beneficial effects on plant health and development. We are investigating the mechanisms by which PGPR elicit plant growth promotion from the viewpoint of signal transduction pathways within plants. We report here our first study to determine if well-characterized PGPR strains, which previously demonstrated growth promotion of various other plants, also enhance plant growth in Arabidopsis thaliana. Eight different PGPR strains, including Bacillus subtilis GB03, B. amyloliquefaciens IN937a, B. pumilus SE-34, B. pumilus T4, B. pasteurii C9, Paenibacillus polymyxa E681, Pseudomonas fluorescens 89B-61, and Serratia marcescens 90-166, were evaluated for elicitation of growth promotion of wild-type and mutant Arabidopsis in vitro and in vivo. In vitro testing on MS medium indicated that all eight PGPR strains increased foliar fresh weight of Arabidopsis at distances of 2, 4, and 6 cm from the site of bacterial inoculation. Among the eight strains, IN937a and GB03 inhibited growth of Arabidopsis plants when the bacteria were inoculated 2 cm from the plants, while they significantly increased plant growth when inoculated 6 cm from the plants, suggesting that a bacterial metabolite that diffused into the agar accounted for growth promotion with this strain. In vivo, eight PGPR strains promoted foliar fresh weight under greenhouse conditions 4 weeks after sowing. To define signal transduction pathways associated with growth promotion elicited by PGPR, various plant-hormone mutants of Arabidopsis were evaluated in vitro and in vivo. Elicitation of growth promotion by PGPR strains in vitro involved signaling of brassinosteroid, IAA, salicylic acid, and gibberellins. In vivo testing indicated that ethylene signaling was involved in growth promotion. Results suggest that elicitation of growth promotion by PGPR in Arabidopsis is associated with several different signal transduction pathways and that such signaling may be different for plants grown in vitro vs. in vivo.