https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2167-9465
Figures
Abstract
Chemcial fertilizer as the main strategy for improving the vegetable yields was excessively applied in recent years which led to progressively serious soil problems such as the soil acidification. According the situation, five different biofertilizer treatments [no fertilizer (CK), inoculations of Bacillus subtilis (Bs, T1), combination of Bs and Bacillus mucilaginosus (Bs+Bm, T2), Bs and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens (Bs+Ba, T3), and Bm+Ba (T4)] were conducted to investigate the effect of the growth, leaf physiological indices, and chlorophyll fluorescence of spinach seedlings in the growth chamber. The growth and physiological indices of the spinach seedlings attained a maximum under the T2 treatments. Under the T2 treatment, the ABS/RC (Absorption flux per RC), TR0/RC (Trapping flux per RC), and ET0/RC (Electron transport flux per RC) was significantly increased, while the DI0/RC [Dissipated energy flux per RC (at t = 0)] was decreased. The OJIP curve was improved under of the inoculations of fertilizers, and the increasing range was the largest under the T2 treatment. The leaf light response curve (LC) was also significantly increased under the T2 treatment. The plant growth characteristics [leaf length (LL), leaf weight (LW), plant height (PH)] were positively correlated with the J-I-P test chlorophyll fluorescence parameters [PIABS (Performance index for energy conservation from exciton to the reduction of intersystem electron acceptors), φP0 (Maximum quantum yield of primary photochemistry), φE0 (Quantum yield of electron transport), ψ0 (The probability that a trapped exciton moved an electron in electron transport chain further than QA-), TR0/RC, and ET0/RC] while negatively correlated with φD0 (Quantum yield of energy dissipation) and DI0/RC. The leaf physiological characteristics [SP (soluble protein concentrations), SC (soluble carbohydrate concentrations), Chl a (chlorophyll a), Chl b (chlorophyll b), Chl a+b, Chl a/b, and WP (water potential)] were positively correlated with the J-I-P test chlorophyll fluorescence parameters (PIABS, φP0, φE0, ψ0, ABS/RC, TR0/RC, and ET0/RC) while negatively correlated with φD0 and DI0/RC. These results indicated that the combination of Bs+Bm inoculations promoted the growth of the spinach and improved the adaptability of the vegetable to acid soil while Ba inoculation didn’t have any effects to plants.
Citation: Zhang B, Zhang H, Lu D, Cheng L, Li J (2023) Effects of biofertilizers on the growth, leaf physiological indices and chlorophyll fluorescence response of spinach seedlings. PLoS ONE 18(12): e0294349. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0294349
Editor: Mayank Gururani, United Arab Emirates University, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
Received: May 10, 2023; Accepted: October 31, 2023; Published: December 14, 2023
Copyright: © 2023 Zhang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.
Funding: This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC, No. 41601016, 41771036), Special Support Program for High-Level Personnel Recruitment (Youth Top-Talent) of Shaanxi province, National Natural Science Foundation of Shaanxi province (No. 2015JM4136), Doctoral research start-up fee of Pingdingshan University (PXY-BSQD-2022039), Key projects of Shaanxi Provincial Department of Education(20JS011). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
Spinach (Spinacia oleracea L.) is a big-leaf variety, which belonged to the spinach genus Chenopodiaceae (annual herbaceous plant), as an important leafy green vegetable its leaves and shoots that contain large quantities of bioactive compounds, minerals, and vitamins like A, B, and C and nutrients [1, 2]. It can scavenge free radicals and has several medical and food applications [3]. The spinach plant has also several antibacterial compounds and folic acid which is useful for the treatment of anemia [4]. In 2020, the global spinach planting area is about 929, 000 hectares and the production is about 31.43 million tons [5, 6]. Among them, the global spinach production mainly came from China and Chinese spinach production was accounting for 91.51% of the global output [7]. So, the soil condition seriously affects the growth and yield of spinach. Recent years, fertilization as the main strategy to improve the vegetables’ yield, the excessive application of chemical fertilizers has led to progressively serious soil problems such as the soil acidification, while the spinach is sensitive to it [8]. Therefore, biofertilizers have gradually replaced chemical fertilizers to improve soil quality to increase vegetable yield. Biofertilizers are also referred to as bacterial fertilizer, biological fertilizer, and microbial inoculant [9], which contains beneficial microorganisms that provide fertilization for crops through their activities.
The metabolic activities of microorganisms can improve soil fertility and crop quality, and also increase soil microorganism populations, reduce plant diseases, and enhance plant root activities [10, 11]. Among them, Bacillus is a type of growth-promoting bacteria that can produce phytase at the rhizosphere of plants. It has strong resistance to ultraviolet light, high salt, high acid, high heat, and radiation, with the capacity to inhibit bacteria, prevent disease, and increase production [12]. Bacillus subtilis (Bs) can improve the stress resistance of plants [13] and the availability of nitrogen and phosphorus in soil [14]. Bacillus mucilaginosus (Bm) can convert the unusable phosphorus in soil to available phosphorus for plants. Simultaneously, Bm can secrete substances that promote plant growth and development, such as growth hormones, gibberellin, and more [15, 16]. Bacillus amyloliquefaciens (Ba) has a certain antagonistic effect on bacterial diseases [17].
Photosynthesis as a process, through it plants can convert captured light energy into biochemical energy [18]. Photosynthetic performance was found to be a very informative indicator, because of its extreme sensitivity to environment [19].Chlorophyll fluorescence measurements as one of photosynthetic indicators have become a widely used method to study the functioning of the photosynthetic apparatus and are a powerful tool to study the plant’s response to different environments [20]. Through the analyses of chlorophyll fluorescence parameters, a further elucidation of the light energy absorption, utilization, transfer, and dissipation of plant chloroplast Photosystem I (PSI) and Photosystem II (PSII) processes can be obtained [21]. The chlorophyll fluorescence technique has also been widely investigated for the detection of physiological changes in plants that are caused by bacterial and fungal infections [22]. Chu et al. [23] and Bing et al. [24] revealed that there was a significant correlation between chlorophyll fluorescence parameters and the degree of Verticillium wilt infection in cotton leaves. Tung et al. [25] quantitatively analyzed the degree of infected tobacco (infected, unmanifested infection, healthy) according to Fv/Fm images, which indicated that chlorophyll fluorescence imaging technologies could detect the degree of infected tobacco.
The purpose of this research was to evaluate the variables related to growth, physiological characters and chlorophyll florescence of spinach seedlings in response to different biofertilizers under acid soil condition. The results of this study would be used to give guidance on growth, yield and soil improvement for spinach cultivation in a controlled environment.
Materials and methods
Experimental materials
The spinach variety Spinacia oleracea L.was used as the experimental material. The Bacillus subtilis (Bs), Bacillus mucilaginosus (Bm), and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens (Ba) selected the original strains produced by Lvlong Biotecnology Co., Ltd., which contained >200 million live bacteria per gram. The fertilizer components were the Bacillus and its metabolites, and the rate of miscellaneous bacteria <3%.
No specific permissions were required for research locations and the studies did not involve endangered or protected species. All the authors consent for publication.
Growth conditions and experiment design.
The soil came from the Qinxi demonstration garden in Taibai County whose nutrients were comprised of 33.35 g·kg-1 organic matter, 2.79 g·kg-1 total nitrogen, 1.51 g·kg-1 total phosphorus, and 10.75 mg·kg-1 available phosphorus, and a pH of 5.2. The experiments were carried out in some growth chambers (FytoScope FS 130-WIR, Brno, Czech) under a 12 h day/night photoperiod at temperatures of 25/15°C, respectively, a photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) of 300 μmol/(m2·s), and humidity of 60%. According to the experiment design, the growth chambers (FytoScope FS 130-WIR) could monitor, control and adjust the temperature, PAR and humidity automatically. Five different biofertilizer treatments [no fertilizer (CK), inoculations of Bacillus subtilis (Bs, T1), combination of Bs and Bacillus mucilaginosus (Bs+Bm, T2), Bs and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens (Bs+Ba, T3), and Bm+Ba (T4)] were conducted at March 10th, 2021. The experimental design was a factorial scheme with 4 replicates per treatment.
The spinach seeds were soaked in deionized water for 12 h and placed in a 4°C refrigerator for 24 h to promote germination. The germinated seeds were placed on a seedling tray, covered with nutritious soil, and germinated in the dark in a 25°C incubator. Following seven days of treatment, the seedlings were transferred to pot (Ø25 cm x 20 cm high) filled with soil 18 cm deep, and 10 seedlings were planted in each pot. For this experiment, 90 kg·km-2 of phosphate fertilizer (potassium dihydrogen phosphate) was used as base fertilizer with biofertilizer 0.5 kg·km-2.
Measurement of growth indices.
For this experiment, all of the characteristics of the spinach leaves were measured at 7th day after treatments. The plant height (PH), leaf length (LL) and leaf weight (LW) were measured with a scale.
Measurement of leaf physiological indices.
After 7 to 10 days treatment, the leaf soluble protein concentration (SP) was determined by the Coomassie brilliant blue (CBB) method at 595 nm using a DR6000 spectrophotometer [26], whereas the soluble carbohydrate concentration (SC) was determined using an anthrone method at 620 nm [27]. The leaf Chlorophyll a (Chl a) and Chlorophyll b (Chl b) concentrations were determined by Litchtenthaler [28] at 645 and 663 nm, whereas the leaf malondialdehyde (MDA) was determined by the thiobarbituric acid method [29]. The leaf water potential (WP) (ψ) was measured by dew point potentiometer (WP4, Decagon Devices, Pullman, USA).
Chlorophyll fluorescence measurements.
Prior to the fluorometer measurements, the leaves were dark-adapted for 20 min and then measured using a FluorPen FP 100Max hand fluorescence meter (Photon Systems Instruments, Brno, Czech), and calculated according to the JIP-test algorithm proposed by Strasser et al. [30] (Table 1).
To compare the OJIP curve with the normalized Chlorophyll fluorescence (CF) transient curve between OJ and OK, the following Formulas (1), (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) were used.
The leaf light-response curve (LC) measurement, based on pulse modulated fluorometry (PAM) was designed using seven photosynthetic photon flux densities (PPFD) (10, 20, 50, 100, 300, 500, and 1000 μmol/(m2·s)) to acquire chlorophyll fluorescence parameter changing curves (Ft, QY) relating the rate of photosynthesis.
Statistical analysis of data.
All collected data were subjected to one-way ANOVA analysis using SPSS (SPSS software version 22.0, Chicago, Illinois, USA). Differences between means were compared by Bonferroni test at P<0.05. The correlations between parameters were determined using Pearson’s simple correlation test function in SPSS.
Results
Effects of biofertilizers on growth and physiological indices of spinach seedlings
There were significant differences in plant height (PH), leaf length (LL), leaf weight (LW) (F = 54.37, 13.30, and 46.03, respectively; P<0.01), where the original data of growth indices was maximum under the T2 treatment (Table 2). There were significant differences among the treatments in the leaf physiological indices (Table 3). Biofertilzer adding had impact on the leaf physiological responses especially under T2 treatment. Compared with the F value, the difference in soluble sugar (SC) was the highest (F = 118.35; P<0.01).
Effect of biofertilizers on chlorophyll fluorescence parameters of spinach seedlings
According to the values of the basic fluorescence parameters (Table 4), the F0 value of the T2 treatment was the highest, which was 41.29% higher than that of CK. Further, the Fm value of the T2 treatment was 17751 higher than that of CK, and there was a significant difference in FV value under the five treatments. The relative variable fluorescence value (VI) at 30 ms was highest under the T2 treatment. In terms of the Fv/F0 value, the T2 treatment remained the largest.
There were significant differences between the M0 and PIABS values under the five different treatments (F = 7.66 and 4.09, respectively; P<0.05) (Table 5). There was a significant difference between the TR0/RC and DI0/RC under T2 treatment (Table 6). However, there was no significant difference in the ABS/RC and ET0/RC between the treatments. The quantum yield (φP0) and efficiency (φE0) values were highest under the T2 treatment, and with the exception of ψ0. On the contrary, the value of φD0 was lowest under the T2 treatment.
Effect of biofertilizers on transient analysis of prompt fluorescence OJIP of spinach seedlings
The transient curve of OJIP was shown in Fig 1 and the OJIP curves of the five treatments were similar to those reported by Strasser et al. [31]. In Fig 1(A), compared with CK, the fluorescence trend of other treatments gradually increased. Among them, during the O-J band, the fluorescence value of the T1 treatment was the largest, and From I-P band, the fluorescence value of the T2 treatment was the largest, which signified that it had a greater effect on the photosynthetic chemical rate of the leaves. As shown in Fig 1(B), the difference of relative variable fluorescence (Vt) at point J (2 ms) was the largest from the statically analysis (F = 2354.87, P<0.01). This was better illustrated in Fig 1(C) ΔVt. Over time the difference between the treatments increased initially, then decreased, and the difference of the initial slope during the O-J stage curve was maximized. It can be seen in Fig 1D and 1E, while there was an obvious positive K band under the T1 and T2 treatments, and a negative growth trend under the T3 and T4 treatments. The transient double normalization of OJIP between F0 and FK and the difference of double normalization between the treatments and the control group were regarded as the L band. As shown in Fig 1F and 1G, the WOK value of the T2 treatment was higher, and there was a significant higher positive L band.
Each curve represents the average of three independent measurements. (A) Relative chlorophyll fluorescence intensity transient curves; (B) Relative variable fluorescence intensity transient curves (Vt); (C) Normalized the relative variable fluorescence intensity transient curves (ΔVt); (D) Relative variable fluorescence intensity transient curves of the O-J segments (WOJ); (E) Normalized the relative variable fluorescence intensity transient curves of the O-J segments (ΔWOJ); (F) Relative variable fluorescence intensity transient curves of the O-K segments (WOK); (G) Normalized the relative variable fluorescence intensity transient curves of the O-K segments (ΔWOK)。No fertilizer (CK), inoculations of Bacillus subtilis (Bs, T1), combination of Bs and Bacillus mucilaginosus (Bs+Bm, T2), Bs and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens (Bs+Ba, T3), and Bm+Ba (T4).
Effect of biofertilizers on the difference of the light response curve (LC) of the spinach seedlings
In Fig 2, compared with the five treatments, the quantum yield (QY) of leaves under the T2 treatment attained a maximum at about 20 μmol/(m2·s) PPFD, which indicated that the light compensation point (LCP) was around 20 μmol/(m2·s) PPFD. The maximum value of the other treatments was before 10 μmol/(m2·s) PPFD, indicating that the LCP was earlier than 10 μmol/(m2·s) PPFD.
Data are the means of three experiments. No fertilizer (CK), inoculations of Bacillus subtilis (Bs, T1), combination of Bs and Bacillus mucilaginosus (Bs+Bm, T2), Bs and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens (Bs+Ba, T3), and Bm+Ba (T4).
Correlations between growth, leaf physiological indices and chlorophyll fluorescence
Through correlation analyses, the indices of growth, physiology, and chlorophyll fluorescence of leaves were quantified. Plant growth indices (LL, LW, PH) were positively correlated with chlorophyll fluorescence parameters (PIABS, φP0, φE0, ψ0, TR0/RC, ET0/RC), while which was negatively correlated with φD0 and DI0/RC. The physiological indices of the leaves (SP, SC, Chl a, Chl b, Chl a+b, Chl a/b, and WP) were positively correlated with PIABS, φP0, φE0, ψ0, ABS/RC, TR0/RC and ET0/RC, and negatively correlated with φD0 and DI0/RC. The leaf MDA was significantly positively correlated with φD0 and DI0/RC, and positively correlated with other chlorophyll fluorescence parameters (Table 7).
Discussion
Physiological indices of growth and leaves
In terms of plant phenology and biological characteristics, plant growth, leaf chlorophyll concentration, and other physiological indices were critical influencing factors [32]. The results of Yan et al. [33] revealed that the application of biofertilizer could effectively improve the plant height of pakchoi. In this study, the inoculations of biofertilizer effectively improved the plant height, leaf length, and leaf weight of spinach. The spinach plants growth status under the inoculations of Bs or Bm was improved and it was similar to the results of Samia et al. [34].
The leaf soluble protein (SP), soluble carbohydrate (SC), and water potential (WP) were closely related to plant metabolism. Chlorophyll (Chl) was an important substance in plant photosynthesis, and malondialdehyde (MDA) can reflect the degree of membrane lipid peroxidation [35]. In this research, When Bs and Bm (T2) were inoculated together, the leaf physiological indices of spinach seedling (SP, SC, Chl a, Chl b, Chl a+b, Chl a/b, and WP) were significantly enhanced. Wang et al. [36] found that the application of biofertilizer could effectively increase the chlorophyll concentration of winter wheat at the different growth stages.
For this study, the leaf chlorophyll concentration treated with the combination of Bs+Bm treatment (T2) was the highest, whereas when Bs or Bm were paired with Ba there was less chlorophyll. It might be possibly explained that it could convert ineffective nitrogen or phosphorus into available nitrogen or phosphorus in the soil and improved the increase in N fixation and P solubilization of the plants after the application of Bs or Bm. It also maybe promoted the synthesis of ATP (Adenosine triphosphate) and NADPH (nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate) in leaves then promoting the plant growth. Likewise, from Awan’s results, after inoculation it also could affect the regulation of phytohormone biosynthesis pathways; modulate ethylene levels in plants and the launch of host plants’ systemic tolerance [37]. The inoculation of Ba didn’t have more effects. The reason for the analysis may be that Ba mainly targets the repair effect of plant facing to bacterial and fungal infections, and the plants used in the experiment were not infected, so the promoting effect on plant growth is not significant. When plants were under stress, the MDA concentration was typically an important indicator of membrane lipid peroxidation, which reflected the harmful effects of stress on plant cells and tissues [38]. In this study, the concentration of MDA in leaves treated with biofertilizer was decreased which mean the plant was in a suitable environment.
Leaf chlorophyll fluorescence
In this research, the values of F0 and Fm were enhanced, which indicated that the Bs and Bm promoted an increase in the size of leaf PSII antenna and a decrease in the non-radiative dissipation of chlorophyll in PSII antenna, thus increasing the capacity of leaves to capture light energy [39]. We observed higher Fv and Fv/F0 (nFv) values under the combination of Bs+Bm treatment, which signified an increase in the efficiency of supplying electrons to PSII reaction centre (RCS) and the photosynthetic quantum conversion rate of PSII RCS. This translated to less energy being used for non-photochemical dissipation in the dark adaptation process [40].
In this experiment, the ABS/RC values of the leaves increased, indicating that after inculcating Bs+Bm the size of active RCS was increased, which led to a higher number of active PSII reaction centers and enhanced dark accumulation [20]. Under the action of the Bs+Bm, the TR0/RC value increased, which reflected the higher electron capture rate of RC, where more QA (the primary electron acceptor in Photosystem II) was converted to QA-. This resulted in an increase in the electron transfer energy (ET0/RC), thus reducing the energy dissipated by non-photochemical activities (DI0/RC) [41, 42].
The φP0 (Fv/Fm) represented the maximum quantum yield of PS Ⅱ, and the ψ0 value reflected the electron transfer efficiency, from QA- to QB, whereas φE0 reflected the quantum yield of electron transport. The increase of φP0, ψ0, and φE0 indicated that the combination of Bs+Bm promoted the redox reaction following QA, which resulted in an increase of the electron transfer rate between QA- and QB [43].
Oukarroum et al. [39] regarded the double normalization of the OJIP transient between the peak value of 0.05 to 2 ms, and the difference of double normalization between the treatment and the control group as the K-band. The change of the chlorophyll fluorescence curve was closely related to the physiological morphology of plants [44]. Changes in the O-J segment were related to an increased number of inactive reaction centers, or the energy transfer from the LHC II (Light-harvesting Complex) to PS II RCS [45]. The K and L bands reflected the connection between the S state of the PSII oxygen evolution complex (OEC) and PS II unit, as well as the energy connection between the PS II units [46, 47].
An increase in the J-I segment could reflect a decrease in the relative number of active PQ (plastoquinone) molecules that was reduced by each active RCS of PSII [47]. Further, changes in the I-P segment were closely related to the pool of electron receptors (ferredoxin and NADPH) at the end of the PSI, signifying the kinetic flow rate to the electron receptors at the end of the PSI [48]. In this experiment, the OJIP transient curves of the spinach seedlings were affected by biofertilizer (Fig 1).
Under the T2 treatment, the relative fluorescence intensity of chlorophyll in the O-J segment exhibited a larger value, indicating that the population of active PSII centers decreased, whereas the QA- accumulated massively. (Fig 1E and 1G) showed that there were obvious K bands and positive L bands under the T2 treatment, which indicated that the PSII had an inhibitory effect on the OEC. This resulted in a weakening of the connectivity between PSII and OEC and a decreased energy connection between the PSII units. This might due to the variable light and ventilation that was present at different locations in the incubator, which might have led to PSI receptor side damage and chlorophyll protein denaturation in some plant leaves [49]. In addition, the fluorescence of J-I and I-P segments remained large under the T2 treatment, which indicated that the relative number of PQ decreased, while there was an increase in the pool of electron receptors (ferredoxin and NADPH) at the end of PSI, which led to a higher kinetic flow rate to the electron receptors at the end of PSI. Combined with PIABS, the higher PIABS values under combination of Bs and Bm treatment indicated increases in the density of active PSII centers, the efficiency of photoreactions, and efficiency of biochemical dark redox reactions, as well as the production and utilization of NADPH [50].
Conclusions
In this study, the role of different biofertilizers was analyzed in spinach seedling. It was observed that the inoculations of biofertilizers Bs or Bm stabilized the plant cell membrane and increased the rate of photosynthesis which led toward the improvement of plant growth. Acid soil reduced the growth of plant and increased the amount of ROS production which disrupted the plant metabolism. The application of biofertilizers triggered osmotic adjustment, maintained the production of antioxidants, improved the leaf chlorophyll fluorescence and promoted the growth in plants. The T2 treatment significantly (p<0.05) increased the growth, physiological index and leaf chlorophyll fluorescence of spinach. It could be concluded that combined inoculations of Bs+Bm was a better strategy for reducing the negative effects of acid soil on spinach. Due to limited experimental conditions, the experiment was only analyzed at 300 μmol/(m2•s) light conditions without designing the multiple light conditions. In the next experiment, the impact of biofertilizer inoculation on spinach under multiple light conditions will be explored. Likewise, future research also should endeavor to analyze the utilization of mineral elements in the soil, prevent soil acidification caused by the excessive accumulation of mineral elements and spinach quality to control the fertilization concentrations of microorganisms, so as to provide an improved theoretical basis for spinach production and obtained the great economic benefits.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to Jing Qi, Jiaxuan Wang, Jiayi Han and Xiaoying Hu for assistance with the data measuring.
References
- 1. Xu CP, Leskovar DI. Effects of A. nodosum seaweed extracts on spinach growth, physiology and nutrition value under drought stress. Sci Hortic 2015; 183: 39–47.
- 2. Roberts JL, Moreau R. Functional properties of spinach (Spinacia oleracea L.) phytochemicals and bioactives. Food funct 2016; 7(8): 3337–3353. pmid:27353735
- 3. Bunea A, Andjelkovic M, Socaciu C, Bobis O, Neacsu M, Verhé R, et al. Total and individual carotenoids and phenolic acids content in fresh, refrigerated and processed spinach (Spinacia oleracea L.). Food Chem 2008; 108 (2): 649–656. pmid:26059144
- 4. Atti AR, Palmer K, Volpato S, Zuliani G, Winblad B, Fratiglioni L. Anaemia increases the risk of dementia in cognitively intact elderly. Neurobiol Aging 2006; 27 (2): 278–284. pmid:15893409
- 5. Wang M. Analysis of spinach planting area, output and price in the world and China in 2020. Industrial Information Network, 2020-04-08: https://www.chyxx.com/industry/202104/943941.html.
- 6. Awika HO, Solorzano J, Cholula U, Shi AR, Enciso J, Avila CA. Prediction modeling for yield and water-use efficiency in spinach using remote sensing via an unmanned aerial system. Smart Agr Tech 2021; 1: 100006.
- 7. Liu J. Production status and development strategy of spinach in China. Chin Fruit & Vegetable 2020; 40 (3): 3–4.
- 8. Dawson CJ, Hilton J. Fertilizer availability in a resource-limited world: production and recycling of nitrogen and phosphorus. Food Policy 2012; 36: 14–22.
- 9. Osman M, El-Sheekh MM, El-Naggar AH, Gheda SH. Effect of two species of cyanobacteria as biofertilizers on some metabolic activities, growth, and yield of pea plant. Biol Fert Soils 2010; 46(8): 861–875.
- 10. Cao EH, Hou XW, Li GY, et al. Effect of combination bacteria on soil physicochemical properties and soil microbial activity by pot tomato experiments. Ecology and Environmental Sciences 2011; 20(5): 875–880.
- 11. Dinesh R, Srinivasan V, Hamza S, Manjusha A. Short-term incorporation of organic manures and biofertilizers influences biochemical and microbial characteristics of soils under an annual crop [Turmeric (Curcuma longa L.)]. Bioresource Techno 2010; 101(12): 4697–4702.
- 12. Guérout-Fleury AM, Shazand K, Frandsen N. Antibiotic-resistance cassettes for Bacillus subtilis. Gene 1995; 167(1–2): 335–336.
- 13. Pliego C, Ramos C. Screening for candidate bacterial biocontrol agents against soilborne fungal plant pathogens. Plant Soil 2010; 340(1): 505–520.
- 14. Idriss EE, Makarewicz O, Farouk A, Rosner K, Greiner R, Bochow H, et al. Extracellular phytase activity of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens FZB45 contributes to its plant-growth-promoting effect. Microbiology 2002; 148(7): 2097–2109. pmid:12101298
- 15. Liu SN,Tang WZ, Yang F Meng J, Li XZ. Influence of biochar application on potassium-solubilising Bacillus mucilaginosus as potential biofertilizer. Prep Biochem Biotech 2016; 1: 32–37.
- 16. Zhao Y, Zhang XB, Guo W. Physiological and biochemical characteristics and capacities of potassium-releasing of Bacillus mucilaginosus screened from different soils. Ecol Environ Sci 2009; 6: 2283–2286.
- 17. Arrebola E, Jacobs R, Korsten L. Iturin A is the principal inhibitor in the biocontrol activity of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens PPCB004 against postharvest fungal pathogens. J Appl Microbiol 2010; 108(2):386–395. pmid:19674188
- 18. Maxwell K, Johnson GN. Chlorophyll fluorescence e a practical guide. J Exp Bot 2000; 51: 659–668.
- 19. Massacci A, Nabiev SM, Pietrosanti L, Nematov SK, Chernikova TN, Thor K, et al. Response of the photosynthetic apparatus of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) to the onset of drought stress under field conditions studied by gas-exchange analysis and chlorophyll fluorescence imaging. Plant Physiol Bioch 2008; 46: 189–195.
- 20. Mehta P, Jajoo A, Mathur S, Bharti S. Chlorophyll a fluorescence study revealing effects of high salt stress on Photosystem II in wheat leaves. Plant Physiol Bioch 2010; 48: 16–20. pmid:19932973
- 21. Li PM, Gao HY, Reto JS. Application of the fast chlorophyll fluorescence induction dynamics analysis in photosynthesis study. J Pla Physiol Mol Biol 2005; 31(6): 559–566. pmid:16361781
- 22. Zaidi A, Ahmad E, Khan MS, Saif S, Rizvi A. Role of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria in sustainable production of vegetables: Current perspective. Sci Hortic 2015; 193: 231–239.
- 23. Chu Z, Xin W, Li Y, Yu H, Li J, Lu Y, et al. Genomic Organization, Phylogenetic and Expression Analysis of the B-BOX Gene Family in Tomato. Front Plant Sci 2016; 10(7): 1522. pmid:27807440
- 24. Bing C, Wang KR, Li SK, Xiao CH, Wang K. Monitoring Cotton Field with Suspected Verticillium wilt Using Satellite Remote Sensing with TM Satellite Image as an Example. Acta Agron Sinica 2012; 38(1):129–139.
- 25. Tung J, Goodwin PH, Hsiang T. Chlorophyll fluorescence for quantification of fungal foliar infection and assessment of the effectiveness of an induced systemic resistance activator. Eur J Plant Pathol 2013; 136(2): 301–315.
- 26. Bradford MM. Arapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of proteindye binding. Anal Biochem 1976; 72: 248–254. pmid:942051
- 27. Jermyn MA. Increasing the sensitivity of the anthrone method for carbohydrate. Anal Biochem 1975; 68(1): 332–335. pmid:1190448
- 28. Litchtenthaler HK, Wellburn AR. Determinations of total carotenoids and chlorophylls a and b of leaf extracts in different solvents. Biochem Soc T 1983; 11(5): 591–592.
- 29. Draper HH, Squires EJ, Mahmoodi H,Wu J, Agarwal S, Haley M. A Comparative evaluation of thiobarbituric acid methods for the determination of malondialdehyde in biological materials. Free Radical Bio Med 1993; 15(4): 353–363. pmid:8225017
- 30. Strasser RJ, Tsimilli-Michael M, Qiang S, Goltsev V. Simultaneous in vivo recording of prompt and delayed fluorescence and 820-nm reflection changes during drying and after rehydration of the resurrection plant Haberlea rhodopensis. BBA-Biomembranes 2010; 1797: 1313–1326. pmid:20226756
- 31.
Strasser RJ, Tsimilli-Michael M, Srivastava A. Analysis of the chlorophyll a fluorescence transient. In: Papageorgiou G.C., Govindjee (Eds.), Chlorophyll Fluorescence: a Signature of Photosynthesis. Kluwer Academic Publishers Press, Netherlands 2004; 321–362.
- 32. Bennie J, Davies TW, Cruse D, et al. Ecological effects of artificial light at night on wild plants. J Eco 2016; 104(3): 611–620.
- 33. Yan DY, He XY, Li YG. Effect of compound microbial fertilizer on the production of brassica chinensis. J Anhui Agri 2017; 45(14): 33–34.
- 34. Samia AA, Salwa MA. Application of trichoderma Harzianum T22 as a biofertilizer poteneial in maize growth. J Plant Nutr 2014; 37(1): 30–49.
- 35. Xi ZM, Wang ZZ, Fang YL, Hu ZY, Hu Y, Deng MM, et al. Effects of 24- epibrassinolide on antioxidation defense and osmoregulation systems of young grapevines (V. vinifera L.) under chilling stress. Plant Growth Regul 2013; 71: 57–65.
- 36. Wang JW, Zhao JJ, Li GL. Effects of new compound microbial fertilizer on physiological indexes of winter wheat. J South Agri 2018; 49(10): 1953–1958.
- 37. Awan ZA, Shoaib A. Combating early blight infection by employing Bacillus subtilis in combination with plant fertilizers. Curr Plant Biol 2019; 20: 100125.
- 38. Han YY, Fan SX, Qiao Z, Wang Y. Effect of heat stress on the MDA, proline and soluble sugar content in leaf lettuce seedlings. Agri Sci 2013; 4(5): 112–115.
- 39. Oukarroum A, Madidi SDE, Schansker G. Probing the responses of barley cultivars (Hordeum vulgare L.) by chlorophyll a fluorescence OLKJIP under drought stress and re-watering. Environ Exp Bot 2007; 60(3): 438–446.
- 40. Spoustova P, Synkova H, Valcke R. Chlorophyll a fluorescence as a tool for a study of the Potato virus Y effects on photosynthesis of nontransgenic and transgenic Pssuipt tobacco. Photosynthetica 2013; 51(2): 191–201.
- 41. Yiotis C, Manetas Y. Sinks for photosynthetic electron flow in green petioles and pedicels of Zantedeschia aethiopica: evidence for innately high photorespiration and cyclic electron flow rates. Planta 2010; 232: 523–531. pmid:20490542
- 42. Tang YP, Sun X, Wen T, Liu MJ, Yang MY, Chen XF. Implications of terminal oxidase function in regulation of salicylic acid on soybean seedling photosynthetic performance under water stress. Plant Physiol Bioch 2017; 112: 19–28. pmid:28024235
- 43. Lebkuecher JG, Haldeman KA, Harris CE, Holz S, Joudah SA, Milton DA. Development of photosystem II activity during irradiance of etiolated Helianthus (Asteraceae) seedlings. Am J Bot 1999; 86(8): 1087–1092. pmid:10449386
- 44. Malaspina P, Giordani P, Pastorino G, Modenesi P, Mariotti MG. Interaction of sea salt and atmospheric pollution alters the OJIP fluorescence transient in the lichen Pseudevernia furfuracea (L.) Zopf. Ecol Indic 2015; 50, 251–257.
- 45. Tomar RS, Jajoo A. A quick investigation of the detrimental effectsof environmental pollutant polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon fluo-ranthene on the photosynthetic efficiency of wheat (Triticum aestivum). Ecotoxicology 2013; 22: 1313–1318. pmid:23979534
- 46. Dąbrowski P. Baczewska AH, Pawluśkiewicz B. Prompt chlorophyll a fluorescence as a rapid tool for diagnostic changes in PSII structure inhibited by salt stress in Perennial ryegrass. J Photoch Photobio B 2016; 157: 22–31. pmid:26878219
- 47. Paunov M, Koleva L, Vassilev A. Effects of different metals on photosynthesis: cadmium and zinc affect chlorophyll fluorescence in durum wheat. Int J Mol Sci 2018; 19(3): 787. pmid:29522461
- 48.
Tsimilli-Michael M, Strasser R. Biophysical phenomics: evalua-tion of the impact of mycorrhization with Piriformospora indica. In:V arma A, Kost G, Oelmüller R (eds) Piriformospora indica. SoilBiology. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg 2013; 173–190.
- 49. Bertamini M, Nedunchezhian N. Photoinhibition of photosynthesis in mature and young leaves of grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.). Plant Sci 2003; 164(4): 635–644.
- 50. Athar HUR, Ambreen S, Javed M, Hina M, Ashraf M. Influence of sub-lethal crude oil concentration on growth, water relations and photosynthetic capacity of maize (Zea mays L.) plants. Environ Sci Pollut Res 2016; 23(18): 18320–18331. pmid:27278069