Abstract
In the current study, inoculation with plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) and grafting were tested as possible cultural practices that may enhance resilience of tomato to stress induced by combined water and nutrient shortage. The roots of tomato grown on perlite were either inoculated or not with PGPR, applying four different treatments. These were PGPR-T1, a mix of two Enterobacter sp. strains (C1.2 and C1.5); PGPR-T2, Paenibacillus sp. strain DN1.2; PGPR-T3, Enterobacter mori strain C3.1; and PGPR-T4, Lelliottia sp. strain D2.4. PGPR-treated plants were either self-grafted or grafted onto Solanum lycopersicum cv. M82 and received either full or 50% of their standard water, nitrogen, and phosphorus needs. The vegetative biomass of plants subjected to PGPR-T1 was not reduced when plants were cultivated under combined stress, while it was reduced by stress to the rest of the PGPR treatments. However, PGPR-T3 increased considerably plant biomass of non-stressed tomato plants than did all other treatments. PGPR application had no impact on fruit biomass, while grafting onto ’M82’ increased fruit production than did self-grafting. Metabolomics analysis in tomato leaves revealed that combined stress affects several metabolites, most of them already described as stress-related, including trehalose, myo-inositol, and monopalmitin. PGPR inoculati o n with E. mori strain C3.1 affected metabolites, which are important for plant/microbe symbiosis (myo-inositol and monopalmitin). The rootstock M82 did not affect many metabolites in plant leaves, but it clearly decreased the levels of malate and D -fructose and imposed an accumulation of oleic acid. In conclusion, PGPR are capable of increasing tomato tolerance to combined stress. However, further research is required to evaluate more strains and refine protocols for their application. Metabolites that were discovered as biomarkers could be used to accelerate the screening process for traits such as stress tolerance to abiotic and/or abiotic stresses. Finally, ‘M82’ is a suitable rootstock for tomato, as it is capable of increasing fruit biomass production.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 12
Claim · model-written summary
PGPR-T1 prevented a reduction in vegetative biomass under combined stress.
- Taxon
- tomato
Solanum lycopersicumt0 - Treatment
- PGPR-T1e0
- Interactor
- Enterobacter sp. strains (C1.2 and C1.5)
Enterobacter sp.e1symbiont - Outcome
- vegetative biomasse0
- Direction
- not reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“vegetative biomass of plants subjected to PGPR-T1 was not reduced when plants were cultivated under combined stress”
t0“Tomato”
e1“a mix of two Enterobacter sp. strains (C1.2 and C1.5)”
Claim · model-written summary
Stress reduced vegetative biomass in the other PGPR treatments.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- stresse0
- Outcome
- vegetative biomasse1
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“it was reduced by stress to the rest of the PGPR treatments”
t0“Tomato”
e1“vegetative biomass”
Claim · model-written summary
PGPR-T3 increased biomass of unstressed tomato compared with all other treatments.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- PGPR-T3e0
- Interactor
- Enterobacter mori strain C3.1Enterobacter morie1symbiont
- Outcome
- plant biomasse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- all other treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“PGPR-T3 increased considerably plant biomass of non-stressed tomato plants than did all other treatments”
e1“Enterobacter mori strain C3.1”
Claim · model-written summary
PGPR application had no impact on fruit biomass.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- PGPR applicatione0
- Outcome
- fruit biomasse0
- Direction
- no impacte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“PGPR application had no impact on fruit biomass”
t0“Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Grafting onto M82 increased fruit production over self-grafting.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Material
- M82e0
- Treatment
- grafting onto ’M82’e0
- Outcome
- fruit productione0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- self-graftinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“grafting onto ’M82’ increased fruit production than did self-grafting”
t0“Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined stress affected several leaf metabolites including trehalose, myo-inositol and monopalmitin.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Organ / stage
- leavese1
- Treatment
- combined stresse0
- Outcome
- several metabolitese0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“combined stress affects several metabolites, most of them already described as stress-related, including trehalose, myo-inositol, and monopalmitin”
e1“tomato leaves”
Claim · model-written summary
E. mori C3.1 inoculation affected myo-inositol and monopalmitin.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- PGPR inoculati o n with E. mori strain C3.1e0
- Interactor
- E. mori strain C3.1Enterobacter morie0symbiont
- Outcome
- myo-inositol and monopalmitine0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“PGPR inoculati o n with E. mori strain C3.1 affected metabolites, which are important for plant/microbe symbiosis (myo-inositol and monopalmitin)”
t0“Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
M82 rootstock decreased leaf malate.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Material
- M82e0
- Treatment
- rootstock M82e0
- Outcome
- levels of malatee0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“rootstock M82 did not affect many metabolites in plant leaves, but it clearly decreased the levels of malate and D -fructose and imposed an accumulation of oleic acid”
t0“Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
M82 rootstock decreased leaf D -fructose.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- rootstock M82e0
- Outcome
- D -fructosee0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“rootstock M82 did not affect many metabolites in plant leaves, but it clearly decreased the levels of malate and D -fructose”
t0“Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
M82 rootstock caused oleic acid accumulation in leaves.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- rootstock M82e0
- Outcome
- oleic acide0
- Direction
- accumulatione0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“rootstock M82 did not affect many metabolites in plant leaves, but it clearly decreased the levels of malate and D -fructose and imposed an accumulation of oleic acid”
t0“Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
M82 rootstock did not affect many leaf metabolites.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- rootstock M82e0
- Outcome
- many metabolites in plant leavese0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“rootstock M82 did not affect many metabolites in plant leaves”
t0“Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors consider M82 suitable as a tomato rootstock for increased fruit biomass.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Material
- M82e0
- Outcome
- suitable rootstocke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“‘M82’ is a suitable rootstock for tomato, as it is capable of increasing fruit biomass production”
The same questions in other papers
grafting · molecular: metabolites · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results differ
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 18 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
21 papers more in this group
See all 25 papers →grafting · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
150 papers in the same direction as this paper · 25 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
172 papers more in this group
See all 176 papers →inoculation · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
53 papers in the same direction as this paper · 387 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
437 papers more in this group
See all 441 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.