Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 7-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Effects of foliar application of amino acid liquid fertilizers, with or without Bacillus amyloliquefaciens SQR9, on cowpea yield and leaf microbiota

Effects of foliar application of amino acid liquid fertilizers, with or without Bacillus... OPENACCESS Leaf surface fertilization with liquid fertilizer produced from amino acids constitutes a poten- Citation: Wang D, Deng X, Wang B, Zhang N, Zhu tially important source of nitrogen and is important for plant production. However, few C, Jiao Z, et al. (2019) Effects of foliar application reports have focused on the plant growth promotion by novel liquid fertilizers created by new of amino acid liquid fertilizers, with or without amino acid resources, let alone the influence on leaf microbiota. In this study, the effects of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens SQR9, on cowpea yield and leaf microbiota. PLoS ONE 14(9): e0222048. liquid fertilizer, created by amino acids hydrolyzed from animal hairs with or without the https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 PGPR strain Bacillus amyloliquefaciens SQR9, on crop yield and leaf microbiota were Editor: Ricardo Aroca, Estacion Experimental del investigated. The results showed that leaves sprayed with amino acid liquid fertilizer (AA) Zaidin, SPAIN and liquid biological fertilizer (AA9) persistently increased cowpea yields compared to the Received: April 7, 2019 control amended with chemical fertilizer (CF). Fertilization with amino acid fertilizer showed no significant difference in microbial composition compared with the CF treatment; however, Accepted: August 20, 2019 the introduction of functional microbes altered the microbial composition. Pearson correla- Published: September 4, 2019 tion analysis, VPA analysis and SEM models all revealed that the amino acids liquid fertilizer Copyright:© 2019 Wang et al. This is an open application, but not the functional strain or the altered microbiota, performed as the direct access article distributed under the terms of the driver attributing to yield enhancement. We conclude that leaf fertilization with a novel amino Creative Commons Attribution License, which acid liquid fertilizer can greatly enhance the crop yield and that the addition of beneficial permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original microbes may perform the role in further altering the composition of leaf microbiota. author and source are credited. Data Availability Statement: The data underlying the results presented in the study are available from NCBI Sequence Read Archive database with the accession number (SRP161560). Introduction Funding: RL, the National Key Research and Development Program of China Agricultural intensification stimulates increased production of staple crops and leads to greater (2018YFD0500201); RL, the Fundamental food security for a continuously growing world population [1, 2]. Intensive practices in mod- Research Funds for the Central Universities ern agriculture through the extensive use of chemical fertilizers in soil also alter biotic interac- (KYZ201871); RL, the Natural Science Foundation tions and influence patterns of resource availability in ecosystems [3], leading to increased of Jiangsu (BK20160710); QS, the Priority Academic Program Development of the Jiangsu awareness of adverse environmental impacts [4]. Thus, developing new types of fertilizer and PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 1 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota Higher Education Institutions (PAPD); QS, the 111 exploring novel application patterns to ensure high fertilizer-use efficiency have caused wide project (B12009); QS, Top-notch Academic concern among researchers, administrators of agriculture, and farmers. Nutrient uptake is per- Programs Project of Jiangsu Higher Education formed primarily by plant roots [5], but nutrients can also be absorbed by leaves through foliar Institution (PPZY2015A061). The funders had no applications at adequate levels [6]. Since the early 1980s, a surge of studies have focused on role in study design, data collection and analysis, foliar fertilizer application [7], which can induce fast absorption, high nutrient availability and decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. high economic benefits; therefore, foliar fertilization is now becoming increasingly popular [8]. Competing interests: The authors have declared Currently, much attention has been devoted to the evaluation of the importance of dis- that no competing interests exist. solved organic nitrogen, particularly free amino acids and peptides, for plant uptake [9]. The importance of amino acids is attributed to their wide utilization for the biosynthesis of a large variety of different organic compounds [10]. Amino acids have already showed the greatest importance in plant nutrition for obtaining of higher yields and quality and shortening of the productive cycle with better dry material [11]. Considerable differences have been reported among fertilizer sources in burning foliage with foliar application of inorganic fertilizers, espe- cially N [12]; however, there are few studies focusing on the plant growth promotion by foliar application of amino acids. Thus, liquid fertilizer produced by amino acids constitutes a poten- tially important source of nitrogen [13], and foliar application of the novel liquid fertilizer is important for plants in various ecosystems. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) that exert beneficial effects on plant devel- opment have been widely used in soil to promote plant growth and suppress soil-borne disease [14, 15]. Often, beneficial microbes are employed as a root inoculant [16], while the foliar application and its subsequent effects are of less concern [17]. However, foliar application can avoid the adverse influences of many biotic and abiotic factors on the soil environment [18] and the plants can be treated throughout the whole season with the microbial inoculants, at certain growth stages to promote plant growth and improve plant resilience or at distinct weather conditions to fight plant diseases pests [19] due to PGPR can promote the plant growth by a wide variety of mechanisms such as phosphate solubilization, phytohormone pro- duction, induction of systemic resistance, and suppress pathogens [20]. PGPR sprayed on plant leaves not only have biocontrol function [21], but also could promote plant growth [22, 23]. Moreover, compound liquid amino acids have been already reported to enhance the PGPR activity [24]. Thus, the hypothesis of this study is that foliar application of PGPR, partic- ularly combined with amino acids, will provide further beneficial to plant growth and offer a novel strategy for enhancing crop yield. Plants in nature are colonized by a large, diverse array of nonpathogenic microbes [25], which are usually defined as phyllospheric and endophytic microbes that are assumed to play a key role in the metabolism of host plants [26]. The global population of phyllosphere bacterial population is estimated to be ~10 cells [27], and cell densities in the phyllosphere are typi- 6 7 -2 cally approximately 10 to 10 cells cm [25]. Recently, studies have been performed to exam- ine the relationship between foliar fertilization, which has recently become popular in plant production, and plant yield [6, 7]. However, how the foliar application of amino acids, let alone combining amino acids with PGPR, alters leaf microbiota has attracted less attention and remains unclear. In this study, amino acids hydrolyzed from animal hairs and a PGPR strain, Bacillus amylo- liquefaciens SQR9, with effective plant growth promotion and various pathogen suppression abilities [28] were selected to create a liquid fertilizer (only amino acids) and a liquid biological fertilizer (amino acids plus strain SQR9). Then, field experiments were performed to explore the crop yield enhancement efficiency using cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) as a model plant. This system was also selected as a model to investigate to what extent and how specifically leaf PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 2 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota microbiota can be manipulated through inputs. Overall, the aims of this study were to (1) ana- lyze the crop yield efficiency by foliar spray containing different inputs; (2) explore leaf micro- biota variation after application of different liquid fertilizers; and (3) decipher the indicator for particular cropping practices (liquid fertilizer vs. liquid biological fertilizer) contributing to high crop yield. Methods Ethics statement Our study was carried out on the farmers’ land (31˚43’N, 118˚46’E) at the Nanjing Institute of Vegetable Science, Nanjing, China and the leader of the institute Zhongyang Huang should be contacted for future permissions. No specific permits were required for the described field studies and the locations are not protected. The field studied did not involve endangered or protected species. Field description Two seasons of continuous field experiments were performed at the Nanjing Institute of Vege- table Science, Nanjing, China (31˚43’N, 118˚46’E). This region has a tropical monsoon climate with an average annual temperature and precipitation of 15.4 ˚C and 1106 mm, respectively. The field soil before the experiment establishment had a pH value of 6.7 and contained 21.3 g -1 -1 -1 kg organic matter, 1.43 g kg total nitrogen, 185 mg kg available phosphorus and 242 mg -1 kg available potassium. A 2-season field experiment was performed from August 2015 to June 2016 and included the following three treatments: (1) CF treatment, leaves sprayed with chemical fertilizer; (2) AA treatment, leaves sprayed with amino acid liquid fertilizer; and (3) AA9 treatment, leaves sprayed with liquid biological fertilizer (amino acid liquid fertilizer mixed with B. amylolique- faciens SQR9). Each treatment had three randomized independent replications. The amino acid liquid fertilizer was produced as follows: pig hairs from the slaughterhouse were washed -1 and dried. After that, the pig hair was put in an acid hydrolysis reactor with 3–4 mol L sulfu- ric acids to material ratio of 1:2 (weight/volume). After 5–6 hours acid hydrolysis in 105–110 -1 ˚C, the amino acid solution which concentration was more than 100 g L was obtained. Then, a certain proportion of trace elements such as Fe, Mn, Cu, Zn, B, and Mo were poured in the stirred tank with the amino acid solution. Finally, amino acid liquid fertilizer was obtained after all the trace elements were dissolved. The amino acid liquid fertilizer contained -1 -1 total amino acids higher than 100 g kg , total N, total P, and total K contents of 29.7 g kg , -1 -1 2.9 g kg and 18.8 g kg , respectively, and the liquid biological fertilizer was amended with 9 -1 1% of liquid fermented strain SQR9 cells (concentrations higher than 10 CFU mL ) to -1 produce the new formulation. All treatments were amended with 6000 kg ha of organic -1 fertilizer and 750 kg ha of compound chemical fertilizer (N+P O5+K O�45%) as basal 2 2 fertilizers. The organic fertilizer was produced by Nantong Huinong Co. Ltd, Jiangsu, China, by composting chicken manure at 30–70 ˚C for more than 20 days. All liquid fertilizers -1 -1 -1 were adjusted to the same amount of N (29.7 g kg ), P (2.9 g kg ) and K (18.8 g kg ) for each season using mineral fertilizers as necessary and surfactant was not added. In every season, the liquid fertilizers were sprayed four times at an interval of 1 week and started from the seedlings stage (beginning from August 19 in 2015 and April 2 in 2016). For each time, all liquid fertilizers were diluted 500 times by water and sprayed on plant leaves twice in the afternoon. PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 3 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota Cowpea yield assay For the total cowpea yield of each plot, all mature cowpea fruits were harvested and weighed. st nd The fruit yield from each crop season (1 : autumn; 2 : spring) was analyzed in this study. The agronomic characteristics (plant height and stem diameter) were measured after transferring the seedlings for 22 days. Leaf sampling, DNA extraction and Illumina MiSeq sequencing Leaf sampling was performed in Jun. 2016, one day after the last spray during cowpea harvest- ing. Soon after, 6 plants in each pot were randomly selected, 9 leaves from one randomly selected plant were collected, and 54 leaves were mixed as a subsample for each treatment. Thus, 3 subsamples were collected for each treatment. The leaves were macerated by a liquid nitrogen grinding method, and DNA extraction was performed using the PowerPlant Pro DNA Isolation Kit (MoBio Laboratories Inc., Carlsbad, USA) according to the manufacturer’s protocol. The quality and concentration of the DNA samples were determined using a spectro- photometer (NanoDrop 2000, USA). The DNA of each leaf sample served as a template for the amplification of the 16S rRNA gene and the ITS1 region. The V5-V6 region of the bacterial 16S rRNA gene was amplified using primers 799F (5'-AACMGGATTAGATACCCKG-3') and 1115R (5'-AGGGTTGCGCTC GTTG-3'), and ITS1F (5'-CTTGGTCATTTAGAGGAAGTAA-3') and ITS2 (5'-GCTGCGT TCTTCATCGATGC-3') were used for the ITS1 region of the fungal ITS gene. The programs for amplification and sequencing of the 16S and ITS genes were performed at Personal Bio- technology Co., Ltd. (Shanghai, China) on the Illumina MiSeq instrument. All sequences were deposited in the NCBI Sequence Read Archive database with the accession number (SRP161560). Bioinformatics analysis Quality control and annotation of the raw sequences were performed according to Liu et al. [24]. A total of 21,050 16S rRNA and 17,901 ITS gene sequences for each sample were ran- domly selected for further bacterial and fungal microbial community analysis, respectively. To compare the similarities and differences of the bacterial and fungal community compositions among all soil samples, nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) based on the Bray-Cur- tis distance metric was performed using MOTHUR software [24], and analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) was performed to evaluate the significant differences in bacterial and fun- gal community structures among the three treatments. AMOVA was used to compare the rela- tive abundance of different groups according to the ordination base on OTU. In addition, Pearson’s correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the correlation between treatments, microbial diversity and cowpea yield. To evaluate the contribution of amino acids and micro- bial agents to cowpea yield and the yield promotion mechanism, variance partitioning analysis (VPA) and structural equation model (SEM) were carried out via the vegan and lavaan pack- ages of R (version 3.3.1). Statistical analysis The differences among the different treatments were assessed using a one-way ANOVA analy- sis, and the calculated means were subjected to Duncan’s multiple range test at P < 0.05. All analyses were performed in SPSS v18.0 (SPSS Inc., USA). PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 4 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota Results Effects of different fertilization management programs on cowpea yield As shown in Fig 1, cowpea yields in treatments sprayed with amino acid liquid fertilizer (AA) and liquid biological fertilizer (AA9) were significantly higher than those sprayed with CF in all crop seasons (Fig 1a). For the two seasons, the application of amino acid liquid fertilizer (AA) and liquid biological fertilizer (AA9) significantly (P < 0.05) increased the yield by 10.7% and 12.7%, respectively, compared to the CF treatment. These results indicated that the fertili- zation treatments (AA and AA9) persistently increased cowpea crop yields compared to the CF treatment. Moreover, in the first season, spraying amino acid liquid fertilizer (AA) signifi- cantly improved plant height compared to treatments with liquid biological fertilizer (AA9) and chemical fertilizer (CF), and significant enhancement was also observed in AA9 compared to CF (Fig 1b). For stem diameter, plants treated with AA and AA9 showed higher values than those treated with CF but there was no significant difference (Fig 1c)). Fig 1. Effects of spraying different fertilizers on cowpea biomass. Effects of spraying different fertilizers on cowpea yields (a; Mean ± SD, n = 3) and plant height (b; Mean ± SD, n = 15) over two seasons, and stem diameter (c; Mean ± SD, n = 15) in the first season. CF, treatment sprayed with chemical fertilizer; AA, treatment sprayed with amino acids liquid fertilizer; AA9, treatment sprayed with liquid biological fertilizer. Different letters in the same line indicate significant differences as defined by Duncan’s test (P < 0.05). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048.g001 PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 5 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota Sequencing results After basal quality control, a total of 219,848 16S rRNA and 217,508 ITS sequences were obtained for all soil samples. The number of high-quality sequences per sample varied from 21,050 to 27,853 for bacteria and from 17,901 to 30,385 for fungi. Moreover, at the 97% simi- larity cut-off level, 315 bacterial and 582 fungal OTUs were obtained. Shifts in microbial community richness and diversity Bacterial and fungal observed richness (Sobs) and diversity (Shannon) indices were calculated based on the rarefied sequences (Fig 2). No significant difference was observed for Sobs, regardless of bacteria and fungi composition (Fig 2a and 2c). Furthermore, a significantly lower diversity (Shannon) of bacteria was noted for the treatment sprayed with liquid biologi- cal fertilizer (AA9) with the letter b in the above of the column (P < 0.05) (Fig 2b), while for fungi, no significant difference was observed (Fig 2d). Fig 2. Bacterial and fungalα diversity. Bacterial and fungal richness (Sobs) and diversity (Shannon) indices in different treatments corresponding to different fertilization treatments. CF, treatment sprayed with chemical fertilizer; AA, treatment sprayed with amino acids liquid fertilizer; AA9, treatment sprayed with liquid biological fertilizer. Different letters in the same line indicate significant differences as defined by Duncan’s test (P < 0.05). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048.g002 PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 6 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota Fig 3. Bacterial and fungal composition. NMDS result showed the bacterial (a, with Bacillus; c, without Bacillus) and fungal (b) microbial community compositions of the different treatments. CF, treatment sprayed with chemical fertilizer; AA, treatment sprayed with amino acids liquid fertilizer; AA9, treatment sprayed with liquid biological fertilizer. The P value was calculated through AMOVA. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048.g003 Shifts in microbial community composition NMDS and AMOVA analyses indicated that bacterial (P = 0.029) (Fig 3a) community composition significantly differed but the result of fungi showed none significant difference (P = 0.213) (Fig 3b). The bacterial community structures in the AA9 treatment differed from those in the AA and CF treatments. Interestingly, after removing the OTUs belonging to Bacil- lus, no significant differences in bacterial community structures were also observed (P = 0.382) for bacteria, suggesting that the inoculation of functional microbes resulted in the difference (Fig 3c). Driving factor connected to yield enhancement As shown by the Pearson correlation analysis, amino acid liquid fertilizer significantly corre- lated with the crop yield (r = 0.868, p = 0.002), while functional strain SQR9 (r = 0.550, p = 0.125), bacterial Sobs (r = -0.523, p = 0.149) and Shannon (r = -0.642, p = 0.062) and fungal Sob (r = -0.122, p = 0.755) and Shannon (r = -0.267, p = 0.488) showed no significant relation- ship (Table 1). Moreover, amino acid liquid fertilizer, functional strain SQR9, and their inter- action explained 50.0%, -2.4% and 22.3%, respectively, of the observed variation, leaving 30.2% of the variation unexplained for yield enhancement, as revealed by VPA analysis (Fig 4a). Our multivariate causal model linking amino acid liquid fertilizer, functional strain SQR9, bacterial composition, fungal composition and yield was supported by the data (χ = 1.884, df = 1, P = 0.170; Fig 4). The exploratory SEM explained 77.8% of the variation in the yield. As shown in the model (Fig 4), consistent with the Pearson correlation analysis and VPA analysis, Table 1. Pearson correlation analysis between different indicators and crop yields. AA SQR-9 Bacteria Fungi Sobs Shannon Sobs Shannon r 0.868 0.550 -0.523 -0.642 -0.122 -0.267 p 0.002 0.125 0.149 0.062 0.755 0.488 Note: AA, amino acids fertilizer; SQR9, functional PGPR strain SQR9. The index was constructed by 0 when the factor was inexistence and 1 when the factor was positive. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048.t001 PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 7 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota Fig 4. Mechanism of crop yield promotion. Variance partitioning analysis (VPA) map of the effects of amino acids, SQR9 and their interactions on the crop yields (a) and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) analysis of a hypothesized network of linkages among amino acids, SQR9, bacterial composition, fungal composition and crop yield. AA, amino acids fertilizer; SQR9, functional PGPR strain SQR9 (b). The index was constructed by 0 when the factor was inexistence and 1 when the factor was positive. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048.g004 amino acid liquid fertilizer played a crucial role in yield enhancement, while functional strain SQR9 drove the bacterial composition. Microbial composition variation induced by liquid biological fertilizer At the genus level (Fig 5), the abundance of Bacillus in treatments with liquid biological fertil- izer (AA9) was significantly higher than that in treatments applied with amino acid liquid fer- tilizer (AA) and chemical fertilizer (CF). In contrast, the abundances of Methylobacterium, Frondihabitans, and Streptophyta were significantly lower in AA9 than in other treatments. Moreover, the values of Clavibacter and Plesiocystis were significantly lower in AA9 than in AA. Discussion In our previous study, we observed that compared to non-treated plants (CK1) and plants treated with equal volume water (CK2), spray of amino acid liquid fertilizer (AA) significantly increased Cowpea yield [8]. Thus, the chemical fertilizer treatment as control to test the effects of foliar application of an amino acid liquid fertilizer, with or without PGPR strain SQR9, on PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 8 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota Fig 5. Microbial composition variation. Square root of the relative abundances (Mean ± SD, n = 3) of different genera with significant differences in different treatments. CF, treatment sprayed with chemical fertilizer; AA, treatment sprayed with amino acids liquid fertilizer; AA9, treatment sprayed with liquid biological fertilizer. Different letters in the same line indicate significant differences as defined by Duncan’s test (P < 0.05). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048.g005 the yield enhancement of cowpea in a two-season field experiment. Compared to chemical fer- tilizer, a significant yield enhancement effect was observed with the spraying of amino acid liq- uid fertilizer and liquid biological fertilizer treatments. These results were in agreement with the reports of other researchers who evaluated the effects of amino acids on the yield and/or growth of common bean, two wheat cultivars and Urtica pilulifera plants and suggested that foliar application of amino acid liquid fertilizer showed pleasant results [6, 10, 11]. However, these previously reported amino acid liquid fertilizers were produced by one or a solution composed of different amino acids, whereas the amino acids used in the present study were created from animal hairs resulted from the slaughterhouse. Due to the improvement of Chi- nese living standards, the increasing development of animal husbandry was induced [24, 29], especially for the scale and consumption of pork causing a huge amount of animal hair waste in the slaughterhouse that can generate a great risk to the environment. Thus, this study pro- vides an effective and ecological leaf fertilization method based on amino acids created from dead animals that will not only enhance crop yield but also make full use of animal hairs to protect the environment. In addition, additional yield enhancement has also been achieved, and the results were in agreement with previous reports that PGPR strain SQR9 promoted crop growth [13, 14]. However, no significant difference was observed between foliar applica- tion of amino acid liquid fertilizer with or without PGPR strain SQR9, which may be due to the masking effect induced by amino acids, which showed impressive yield enhancement. Moreover, application of strain SQR9 showed significant lower plant height compared to none application, this may be due to that part of the nutrients in the liquid biological fertilizer is used by the bacteria and nutrient competition between plants and microbes have already been reported [30]. PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 9 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota No significant differences in bacterial and fungal richness (Sobs), diversity (Shannon) and composition (NMDS) were identified between spraying amino acid liquid fertilizer and chemi- cal fertilizer. Richness (Sobs), diversity (Shannon) and composition were the three key factors to describe the general microbiota characteristics [31], and the function of microbiome in the leaf surface have already been reported [32]; however, few reports to our knowledge focused on the leaf microbiota alteration via amino acid fertilization. Therefore, our findings here sug- gest that amino acid liquid fertilizer application induced less variation of leaf microbial diver- sity and composition. In the liquid biological fertilizer treatment application, significantly lower bacterial diversity (Shannon) and differences in bacterial composition (NMDS) were observed than in the other treatments, which may be due to the amendment of functional bac- terial cells, which disturbed the leaf microbial community through colonization and was also supported by the NMDS analysis based on the data when Bacillus was removed. A similar phe- nomenon was observed in different environments in which one microbe invasion affected the indigenous microbiome [24, 33], suggesting that inoculation of PGPR strain Bacillus amyloli- quefaciens SQR9 can also alter leaf microbial composition which can also be supported by the genus level results (Fig 5). Pearson correlation analysis, VPA analysis, and SEM all showed that amino acid liquid fer- tilizer application, but not the functional strain and altered microbiota, was direct driver of yield enhancement. This result is supported by previous reports that showed the efficiency of amino acid uptake by plants [34, 35]. The results are also in accordance with the results of yield enhancement in this study and in previous studies [6, 10, 11] and with the general finding that amino acid liquid fertilizer treatments showed no significant effect on microbial composi- tion and general microbiota characteristics. Moreover, in accordance with the results from NMDS and genera-level analysis, a significantly higher abundance of Bacillus was observed in the treatment sprayed with liquid biological fertilizer (AA9) than in the other two treatments, suggesting that Bacillus amyloliquefaciens SQR9 drove the bacterial composition. We have done the further analysis using taxonomic tree to do the key OTUs identification, and the OTUs belonging to Bacillus were selected. However, after using the Illumina sequencing primer pairs to search the matched segment from the whole genome of strain SQR9 which was download from Genebank, we found the matched segment wasn’t located in the 16S rRNA but in another place; thus the matched segment and 16s rRNA of SQR9 were included in the tree together (S1 Fig, the tree was built by maximum likelihood method including 10 more 16S rRNA sequences of type Bacillus species). From the tree, we found that one OUT (OTU4) was most similar to SQR9, and then we deduced that the functional PGPR strain SQR9 could effi- ciently colonize the leaf and alter the leaf microbial community. Although we did not identify the disease suppression ability and find significantly additional yield enhancement in this study, the colonization of functional microbes was still speculated to have positive functions on crop productivity. This is due to that in addition to some studies which showed disease sup- pression abilities of different bacteria isolated from rhizosphere when they were sprayed on the leaves [21, 36, 37] and observed varied effectiveness in causing localized disease inhibition when applied to leaves [38], plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) sprayed on plant leaves were also found to directly promote plant growth [22, 23]. However, this issue should be investigated in the future to test the direct plant growth promotion by avoid the masking effect from other nutrients. Conclusion In the present study, leaves sprayed with amino acid liquid fertilizer (AA) and liquid biological fertilizer (AA9) experienced significantly enhanced cowpea yields compared to treatments PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 10 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota with chemical fertilizer. Functional PGPR strain SQR9 was observed to efficiently colonize the leaf and alter the leaf microbial community, while amino acid liquid fertilizer treatment did not significantly alter the leaf microbiota. Of greatest interest is that amino acid liquid fertilizer resulted in the great degree of yield enhancement. Moreover, we speculate that foliar sprayed PGPR may have positive function due to the colonization of the beneficial microbe; however, more work should be done to make the effect of PGPR clear. Supporting information S1 Fig. Classification of OTU4. Taxonomic tree of OTU4 built by maximum likelihood method including 10 more 16S rRNA sequences (GQ360077.1) of type Bacillus species and matched segment (CP0068901.1) from the whole genome of strain SQR9. a, taxonomic tree; b, matched segment from the whole genome and 16S rRNA sequence of strain SQR9. (DOCX) Acknowledgments This research was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2018YFD0500201), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (KYZ201871), the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu (BK20160710), the Priority Aca- demic Program Development of the Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (PAPD), the 111 project (B12009), and Top-notch Academic Programs Project of Jiangsu Higher Education Institution (PPZY2015A061). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Author Contributions Conceptualization: Rong Li, Qirong Shen. Data curation: Xuhui Deng. Formal analysis: Dongsheng Wang, Xuhui Deng, Bei Wang, Na Zhang, Chengzhi Zhu, Zix- uan Jiao, Rong Li, Qirong Shen. Investigation: Dongsheng Wang, Bei Wang, Na Zhang, Rong Li. Methodology: Dongsheng Wang, Xuhui Deng, Na Zhang, Chengzhi Zhu, Zixuan Jiao. Writing – original draft: Dongsheng Wang, Xuhui Deng, Rong Li, Qirong Shen. Writing – review & editing: Dongsheng Wang, Xuhui Deng, Rong Li, Qirong Shen. References 1. Tilman D. Global environmental impacts of agricultural expansion: the need for sustainable and efficient practices. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1999, 96: 5995–6000. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.96.11.5995 PMID: 10339530 2. Godfray HCJ, Beddington JR, Crute IR, Haddad L, Lawrence D, Muir JF, et al. Food security: the chal- lenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science, 2010, 327: 812–818. https://doi.org/10.1126/science. 1185383 PMID: 20110467 3. Matson PA, Parton WJ, Power AG, Swift MJ. Agricultural intensification and ecosystem properties. Sci- ence, 1997, 277: 504–509. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.277.5325.504 PMID: 20662149 4. Hartman K, van der Heijden MGA, Wittwer RA, Banerjee S, Walser JC, Schlaeppi K. Cropping practices manipulate abundance patterns of root and soil microbiome members paving the way to smart farming. Microbiome, 2018, 6: 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40168-017-0389-9 PMID: 29338764 5. Fageria NK. 2009. The use of nutrients in crop plants. Boca Raton, Florida/New York, USA: CRC Press. PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 11 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota 6. Moreira A, Moraes LAC. Yield, nutritional status and soil fertility cultivated with common bean in response to amino-acids foliar application. J Plant Nutr, 2017, 40(3): 344–351. 7. Girma K, Martin KL, Freeman KW, Mosali J, Teal RK, Raun WR, et al. Determination of optimum rate and growth for foliar applied phosphorus in corn. Commun Soil Sci Plant. 2007, 38: 1137–1154. 8. Wang B, Gao X, Wang T, Wang D, Xie Y, Gong Z, et al. Effects of foliar spraying of water soluble fertil- izer containing amino acids on growth of pepper and cowpea. Soils (in Chinese with English abstract), 2017, 49(4): 692–698 9. Cao XC, Chen XY, Li XY, Yuan L, Wu LH, Zhu YH. Rice uptake of soil adsorbed amino acids under ster- ilized environment. Soil Biol Biochem. 2013, 62: 13–21. 10. El-Said MAA, Mahdy AY. Response of two wheat cultivars to foliar application with amino acids under low levels of nitrogen fertilization. Middle East Journal of Agriculture Research. 2016, 5(4): 462–472. 11. Wahba HE, Motawe HM, Ibrahim AY. Growth and chemical composition of Urtica pilulifera L. plant as influenced by foliar application of some amino acids. J Mater Environ Sci, 2015, 6 (2): 499–506. 12. Phillips SB, Mullins GL. Foliar Burn and Wheat Grain Yield Responses Following Topdress-Applied Nitrogen and Sulfur Fertilizers. J. Plant Nutr. 2004, 27, 921–930. 13. Huang Y, Sun L, Zhao J, Huang R, Li R, Shen Q. Utilization of different waste proteins to create a novel PGPR-containing bio-organic fertilizer. Sci Rep-UK, 2015, 5: 7766. 14. Zhang M, Li R, Cao L, Shi J, Liu H, Huang Y, et al. Algal sludge from Taihu Lake can be utilized to create novel PGPR-containing bio-organic fertilizers. J Environ Manage, 2014, 132: 230–236. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.10.031 PMID: 24321283 15. Fu L, Penton CR, Ruan Y, Shen Z, Xue C, Li R, et al. Inducing the rhizosphere microbiome by biofertili- zer application to suppress banana Fusarium wilt disease. Soil Biol Biochem, 2017, 104: 39–48. 16. Lee KH, Koh RH, Song HG. Enhancement of growth and yield of tomato by Rhodopseudomonas sp under greenhouse conditions. J Microbiol, 2008, 46(6): 641–646. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12275-008- 0159-2 PMID: 19107392 17. Xu J, Feng Y, Wang Y, Luo X, Tang J, Lin X. The foliar spray of Rhodopseudomonas palustris grown under Stevia residue extract promotes plant growth via changing soil microbial community. J Soils Sedi- ments, 2016, 16: 916–923. 18. Pandey N, Gupta B, Pathak GC. Enhanced yield and nutritional enrichment of seeds of Pisum sativum L. through foliar application of zinc. Sci Hortic, 2013, 164: 474–483. 19. Preininger C, Sauer U, Bejarano A, Berninger T. Concepts and applications of foliar spray for microbial inoculants. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2018, 102 (17), 7265–7282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253- 018-9173-4 PMID: 29961100 20. Bhattacharyya PN, Jha DK. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR): emergence in agriculture. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 28, 2012, 1327–1350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11274-011-0979-9 PMID: 22805914 21. Raupach GS, Kloepper JW. Mixtures of Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria enhance biological con- trol of multiple cucumber pathogens. Phytopathology, 1998, 88: 1158–1164. https://doi.org/10.1094/ PHYTO.1998.88.11.1158 PMID: 18944848 22. Esitken A, Karlidag H, Ercisli S, Sahin F. Effects of foliar application of Bacillus substilis Osu-142 on the yield, growth and control of shot-hole disease (Coryneum blight) of apricot. Gartenbauwissenschaft, 2002, 67: 139–142. 23. Esitken A, Karlidag H, Ercisli S, Turan M, Sahin F. The effect of spraying a growth promoting bacterium on the yield, growth and nutrient element composition of leaves of apricot (Prunus armeniaca L. cv. Hacihaliloglu). Aus J Agric Res, 2003, 54: 377–380. 24. Liu H, Chen D, Zhang R, Hang X, Li R, Shen Q. Amino acids hydrolyzed from animal carcasses are a good additive for the production of bio-organic fertilizer. Front Microbiol, 2016, 7: 1290. https://doi.org/ 10.3389/fmicb.2016.01290 PMID: 27574521 25. Maignien L, DeForce EA, Chafee ME, Eren AM, Simmons SL. Ecological succession and stochastic variation in the assembly of Arabidopsis thaliana phyllosphere communities. mBio, 2014, 5: e00682- 13. https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.00682-13 PMID: 24449749 26. Gargallo-Garriga A, Sardans J, Pe ´ rez-Trujillo M, Guenther A, Llusià J, Rico L, et al. Shifts in plant foliar and floral metabolomes in response to the suppression of the associated microbiota. BMC Plant Biol, 2016, 16: 78. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-016-0767-7 PMID: 27048394 27. Morris CE, Kinkel LL, Lindow SE, Hecht-Poinar EI, Elliott VJ. Fifty years of phyllosphere microbiology: significant contributions to research in related fields, p 365–375. In Lindow SE, Hecht-Poinar EI, Elliott VJ (ed), Phyllosphere microbiology. APS Publishing, St. Paul, MN. 2002. PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 12 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota 28. Liu H, Xiong W, Zhang R, Hang X, Wang D, Li R, et al. Continuous application of different organic addi- tives can suppress tomato disease by inducing the healthy rhizospheric microbiota through alterations to the bulk soil microflora. Plant Soil, 2018, 423: 229–240. 29. Wei YQ, Zhao Y, Xi BD, Wei ZM, Li X, Cao ZY. Changes in phosphorus fractions during organic wastes composting from different sources. Bioresour Technol, 2015, 189: 349–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. biortech.2015.04.031 PMID: 25912971 30. Zhu Q, Riley WJ, Tang J, Koven CD. Multiple soil nutrient competition between plants, microbes, and mineral surfaces: model development, parameterization, and example applications in several tropical forests. Biogeosciences. 2016, 13, 341–363. 31. Wittebolle L, Marzorati M, Clement L, Balloi A, Daffonchio D, Heylen K, et al. Initial community evenness favours functionality under selective stress. Nature, 2009, 458: 623–626 https://doi.org/10.1038/ nature07840 PMID: 19270679 32. Ritpitakphong U, Falquet L, Vimoltust A, Berger A, Me ´ traux JP, L’Haridon F. The microbiome of the leaf surface of Arabidopsis protects against a fungal pathogen. New Phytol. 2016, 210 (3), 1033–1043. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.13808 PMID: 26725246 33. You C, Zhang C, Kong F, Feng C, Wang J. Comparison of the effects of biocontrol agent Bacillus subti- lis and fungicide metalaxyl–mancozeb on bacterial communities in tobacco rhizospheric soil. Ecol Eng, 2016, 91:119–125. 34. Persson J, Ho ¨ gberg P, Ekblad A, Ho ¨ gberg MN, Nordgren A, Na ¨ sholm T. Nitrogen acquisition from inor- ganic and organic sources by boreal forest plants in the field. Oecologia, 2003, 137: 252–257. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s00442-003-1334-0 PMID: 12883986 35. Gioseffi E, de Neergaard A, Schjoerring JK. Interactions between uptake of amino acids and inorganic nitrogen in wheat plants. Biogeosciences, 2012, 9: 1509–1518. 36. Radja Commare R, Nandakumar R, Kandan A, Suresh S, Bharathi M, Raguchander T, et al. Pseudo- monas fluorescens based bio-formulation for the management of sheath blight disease and leaffolder insect in rice. Crop Prot, 2002, 21: 671–677. 37. Vidhyasekaran P, Muthamilan M. Evaluation of a powder formulation of Pseudomonas fluorescens Pf1 for control of rice sheath blight. Biocontrol Sci Techn, 1999, 9: 67–74. 38. Kilic-Ekici O, Yuen GY. Comparison of strains of Lysobacter enzymogenes and PGPR for induction of resistance against Bipolaris sorokiniana in tall fescue. Biol Control, 2004, 30: 446–455. PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 13 / 13 http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png PLoS ONE Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journal

Effects of foliar application of amino acid liquid fertilizers, with or without Bacillus amyloliquefaciens SQR9, on cowpea yield and leaf microbiota

Download PDF
13 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/public-library-of-science-plos-journal/effects-of-foliar-application-of-amino-acid-liquid-fertilizers-with-or-G6ePGHJwFk

References (76)

Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journal
Copyright
Copyright: © 2019 Wang 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: The data underlying the results presented in the study are available from NCBI Sequence Read Archive database with the accession number (SRP161560). Funding: RL, the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2018YFD0500201); RL, the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (KYZ201871); RL, the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu (BK20160710); QS, the Priority Academic Program Development of the Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (PAPD); QS, the 111 project (B12009); QS, Top-notch Academic Programs Project of Jiangsu Higher Education Institution (PPZY2015A061). 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.
eISSN
1932-6203
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0222048
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

OPENACCESS Leaf surface fertilization with liquid fertilizer produced from amino acids constitutes a poten- Citation: Wang D, Deng X, Wang B, Zhang N, Zhu tially important source of nitrogen and is important for plant production. However, few C, Jiao Z, et al. (2019) Effects of foliar application reports have focused on the plant growth promotion by novel liquid fertilizers created by new of amino acid liquid fertilizers, with or without amino acid resources, let alone the influence on leaf microbiota. In this study, the effects of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens SQR9, on cowpea yield and leaf microbiota. PLoS ONE 14(9): e0222048. liquid fertilizer, created by amino acids hydrolyzed from animal hairs with or without the https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 PGPR strain Bacillus amyloliquefaciens SQR9, on crop yield and leaf microbiota were Editor: Ricardo Aroca, Estacion Experimental del investigated. The results showed that leaves sprayed with amino acid liquid fertilizer (AA) Zaidin, SPAIN and liquid biological fertilizer (AA9) persistently increased cowpea yields compared to the Received: April 7, 2019 control amended with chemical fertilizer (CF). Fertilization with amino acid fertilizer showed no significant difference in microbial composition compared with the CF treatment; however, Accepted: August 20, 2019 the introduction of functional microbes altered the microbial composition. Pearson correla- Published: September 4, 2019 tion analysis, VPA analysis and SEM models all revealed that the amino acids liquid fertilizer Copyright:© 2019 Wang et al. This is an open application, but not the functional strain or the altered microbiota, performed as the direct access article distributed under the terms of the driver attributing to yield enhancement. We conclude that leaf fertilization with a novel amino Creative Commons Attribution License, which acid liquid fertilizer can greatly enhance the crop yield and that the addition of beneficial permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original microbes may perform the role in further altering the composition of leaf microbiota. author and source are credited. Data Availability Statement: The data underlying the results presented in the study are available from NCBI Sequence Read Archive database with the accession number (SRP161560). Introduction Funding: RL, the National Key Research and Development Program of China Agricultural intensification stimulates increased production of staple crops and leads to greater (2018YFD0500201); RL, the Fundamental food security for a continuously growing world population [1, 2]. Intensive practices in mod- Research Funds for the Central Universities ern agriculture through the extensive use of chemical fertilizers in soil also alter biotic interac- (KYZ201871); RL, the Natural Science Foundation tions and influence patterns of resource availability in ecosystems [3], leading to increased of Jiangsu (BK20160710); QS, the Priority Academic Program Development of the Jiangsu awareness of adverse environmental impacts [4]. Thus, developing new types of fertilizer and PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 1 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota Higher Education Institutions (PAPD); QS, the 111 exploring novel application patterns to ensure high fertilizer-use efficiency have caused wide project (B12009); QS, Top-notch Academic concern among researchers, administrators of agriculture, and farmers. Nutrient uptake is per- Programs Project of Jiangsu Higher Education formed primarily by plant roots [5], but nutrients can also be absorbed by leaves through foliar Institution (PPZY2015A061). The funders had no applications at adequate levels [6]. Since the early 1980s, a surge of studies have focused on role in study design, data collection and analysis, foliar fertilizer application [7], which can induce fast absorption, high nutrient availability and decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. high economic benefits; therefore, foliar fertilization is now becoming increasingly popular [8]. Competing interests: The authors have declared Currently, much attention has been devoted to the evaluation of the importance of dis- that no competing interests exist. solved organic nitrogen, particularly free amino acids and peptides, for plant uptake [9]. The importance of amino acids is attributed to their wide utilization for the biosynthesis of a large variety of different organic compounds [10]. Amino acids have already showed the greatest importance in plant nutrition for obtaining of higher yields and quality and shortening of the productive cycle with better dry material [11]. Considerable differences have been reported among fertilizer sources in burning foliage with foliar application of inorganic fertilizers, espe- cially N [12]; however, there are few studies focusing on the plant growth promotion by foliar application of amino acids. Thus, liquid fertilizer produced by amino acids constitutes a poten- tially important source of nitrogen [13], and foliar application of the novel liquid fertilizer is important for plants in various ecosystems. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) that exert beneficial effects on plant devel- opment have been widely used in soil to promote plant growth and suppress soil-borne disease [14, 15]. Often, beneficial microbes are employed as a root inoculant [16], while the foliar application and its subsequent effects are of less concern [17]. However, foliar application can avoid the adverse influences of many biotic and abiotic factors on the soil environment [18] and the plants can be treated throughout the whole season with the microbial inoculants, at certain growth stages to promote plant growth and improve plant resilience or at distinct weather conditions to fight plant diseases pests [19] due to PGPR can promote the plant growth by a wide variety of mechanisms such as phosphate solubilization, phytohormone pro- duction, induction of systemic resistance, and suppress pathogens [20]. PGPR sprayed on plant leaves not only have biocontrol function [21], but also could promote plant growth [22, 23]. Moreover, compound liquid amino acids have been already reported to enhance the PGPR activity [24]. Thus, the hypothesis of this study is that foliar application of PGPR, partic- ularly combined with amino acids, will provide further beneficial to plant growth and offer a novel strategy for enhancing crop yield. Plants in nature are colonized by a large, diverse array of nonpathogenic microbes [25], which are usually defined as phyllospheric and endophytic microbes that are assumed to play a key role in the metabolism of host plants [26]. The global population of phyllosphere bacterial population is estimated to be ~10 cells [27], and cell densities in the phyllosphere are typi- 6 7 -2 cally approximately 10 to 10 cells cm [25]. Recently, studies have been performed to exam- ine the relationship between foliar fertilization, which has recently become popular in plant production, and plant yield [6, 7]. However, how the foliar application of amino acids, let alone combining amino acids with PGPR, alters leaf microbiota has attracted less attention and remains unclear. In this study, amino acids hydrolyzed from animal hairs and a PGPR strain, Bacillus amylo- liquefaciens SQR9, with effective plant growth promotion and various pathogen suppression abilities [28] were selected to create a liquid fertilizer (only amino acids) and a liquid biological fertilizer (amino acids plus strain SQR9). Then, field experiments were performed to explore the crop yield enhancement efficiency using cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) as a model plant. This system was also selected as a model to investigate to what extent and how specifically leaf PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 2 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota microbiota can be manipulated through inputs. Overall, the aims of this study were to (1) ana- lyze the crop yield efficiency by foliar spray containing different inputs; (2) explore leaf micro- biota variation after application of different liquid fertilizers; and (3) decipher the indicator for particular cropping practices (liquid fertilizer vs. liquid biological fertilizer) contributing to high crop yield. Methods Ethics statement Our study was carried out on the farmers’ land (31˚43’N, 118˚46’E) at the Nanjing Institute of Vegetable Science, Nanjing, China and the leader of the institute Zhongyang Huang should be contacted for future permissions. No specific permits were required for the described field studies and the locations are not protected. The field studied did not involve endangered or protected species. Field description Two seasons of continuous field experiments were performed at the Nanjing Institute of Vege- table Science, Nanjing, China (31˚43’N, 118˚46’E). This region has a tropical monsoon climate with an average annual temperature and precipitation of 15.4 ˚C and 1106 mm, respectively. The field soil before the experiment establishment had a pH value of 6.7 and contained 21.3 g -1 -1 -1 kg organic matter, 1.43 g kg total nitrogen, 185 mg kg available phosphorus and 242 mg -1 kg available potassium. A 2-season field experiment was performed from August 2015 to June 2016 and included the following three treatments: (1) CF treatment, leaves sprayed with chemical fertilizer; (2) AA treatment, leaves sprayed with amino acid liquid fertilizer; and (3) AA9 treatment, leaves sprayed with liquid biological fertilizer (amino acid liquid fertilizer mixed with B. amylolique- faciens SQR9). Each treatment had three randomized independent replications. The amino acid liquid fertilizer was produced as follows: pig hairs from the slaughterhouse were washed -1 and dried. After that, the pig hair was put in an acid hydrolysis reactor with 3–4 mol L sulfu- ric acids to material ratio of 1:2 (weight/volume). After 5–6 hours acid hydrolysis in 105–110 -1 ˚C, the amino acid solution which concentration was more than 100 g L was obtained. Then, a certain proportion of trace elements such as Fe, Mn, Cu, Zn, B, and Mo were poured in the stirred tank with the amino acid solution. Finally, amino acid liquid fertilizer was obtained after all the trace elements were dissolved. The amino acid liquid fertilizer contained -1 -1 total amino acids higher than 100 g kg , total N, total P, and total K contents of 29.7 g kg , -1 -1 2.9 g kg and 18.8 g kg , respectively, and the liquid biological fertilizer was amended with 9 -1 1% of liquid fermented strain SQR9 cells (concentrations higher than 10 CFU mL ) to -1 produce the new formulation. All treatments were amended with 6000 kg ha of organic -1 fertilizer and 750 kg ha of compound chemical fertilizer (N+P O5+K O�45%) as basal 2 2 fertilizers. The organic fertilizer was produced by Nantong Huinong Co. Ltd, Jiangsu, China, by composting chicken manure at 30–70 ˚C for more than 20 days. All liquid fertilizers -1 -1 -1 were adjusted to the same amount of N (29.7 g kg ), P (2.9 g kg ) and K (18.8 g kg ) for each season using mineral fertilizers as necessary and surfactant was not added. In every season, the liquid fertilizers were sprayed four times at an interval of 1 week and started from the seedlings stage (beginning from August 19 in 2015 and April 2 in 2016). For each time, all liquid fertilizers were diluted 500 times by water and sprayed on plant leaves twice in the afternoon. PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 3 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota Cowpea yield assay For the total cowpea yield of each plot, all mature cowpea fruits were harvested and weighed. st nd The fruit yield from each crop season (1 : autumn; 2 : spring) was analyzed in this study. The agronomic characteristics (plant height and stem diameter) were measured after transferring the seedlings for 22 days. Leaf sampling, DNA extraction and Illumina MiSeq sequencing Leaf sampling was performed in Jun. 2016, one day after the last spray during cowpea harvest- ing. Soon after, 6 plants in each pot were randomly selected, 9 leaves from one randomly selected plant were collected, and 54 leaves were mixed as a subsample for each treatment. Thus, 3 subsamples were collected for each treatment. The leaves were macerated by a liquid nitrogen grinding method, and DNA extraction was performed using the PowerPlant Pro DNA Isolation Kit (MoBio Laboratories Inc., Carlsbad, USA) according to the manufacturer’s protocol. The quality and concentration of the DNA samples were determined using a spectro- photometer (NanoDrop 2000, USA). The DNA of each leaf sample served as a template for the amplification of the 16S rRNA gene and the ITS1 region. The V5-V6 region of the bacterial 16S rRNA gene was amplified using primers 799F (5'-AACMGGATTAGATACCCKG-3') and 1115R (5'-AGGGTTGCGCTC GTTG-3'), and ITS1F (5'-CTTGGTCATTTAGAGGAAGTAA-3') and ITS2 (5'-GCTGCGT TCTTCATCGATGC-3') were used for the ITS1 region of the fungal ITS gene. The programs for amplification and sequencing of the 16S and ITS genes were performed at Personal Bio- technology Co., Ltd. (Shanghai, China) on the Illumina MiSeq instrument. All sequences were deposited in the NCBI Sequence Read Archive database with the accession number (SRP161560). Bioinformatics analysis Quality control and annotation of the raw sequences were performed according to Liu et al. [24]. A total of 21,050 16S rRNA and 17,901 ITS gene sequences for each sample were ran- domly selected for further bacterial and fungal microbial community analysis, respectively. To compare the similarities and differences of the bacterial and fungal community compositions among all soil samples, nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) based on the Bray-Cur- tis distance metric was performed using MOTHUR software [24], and analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) was performed to evaluate the significant differences in bacterial and fun- gal community structures among the three treatments. AMOVA was used to compare the rela- tive abundance of different groups according to the ordination base on OTU. In addition, Pearson’s correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the correlation between treatments, microbial diversity and cowpea yield. To evaluate the contribution of amino acids and micro- bial agents to cowpea yield and the yield promotion mechanism, variance partitioning analysis (VPA) and structural equation model (SEM) were carried out via the vegan and lavaan pack- ages of R (version 3.3.1). Statistical analysis The differences among the different treatments were assessed using a one-way ANOVA analy- sis, and the calculated means were subjected to Duncan’s multiple range test at P < 0.05. All analyses were performed in SPSS v18.0 (SPSS Inc., USA). PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 4 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota Results Effects of different fertilization management programs on cowpea yield As shown in Fig 1, cowpea yields in treatments sprayed with amino acid liquid fertilizer (AA) and liquid biological fertilizer (AA9) were significantly higher than those sprayed with CF in all crop seasons (Fig 1a). For the two seasons, the application of amino acid liquid fertilizer (AA) and liquid biological fertilizer (AA9) significantly (P < 0.05) increased the yield by 10.7% and 12.7%, respectively, compared to the CF treatment. These results indicated that the fertili- zation treatments (AA and AA9) persistently increased cowpea crop yields compared to the CF treatment. Moreover, in the first season, spraying amino acid liquid fertilizer (AA) signifi- cantly improved plant height compared to treatments with liquid biological fertilizer (AA9) and chemical fertilizer (CF), and significant enhancement was also observed in AA9 compared to CF (Fig 1b). For stem diameter, plants treated with AA and AA9 showed higher values than those treated with CF but there was no significant difference (Fig 1c)). Fig 1. Effects of spraying different fertilizers on cowpea biomass. Effects of spraying different fertilizers on cowpea yields (a; Mean ± SD, n = 3) and plant height (b; Mean ± SD, n = 15) over two seasons, and stem diameter (c; Mean ± SD, n = 15) in the first season. CF, treatment sprayed with chemical fertilizer; AA, treatment sprayed with amino acids liquid fertilizer; AA9, treatment sprayed with liquid biological fertilizer. Different letters in the same line indicate significant differences as defined by Duncan’s test (P < 0.05). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048.g001 PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 5 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota Sequencing results After basal quality control, a total of 219,848 16S rRNA and 217,508 ITS sequences were obtained for all soil samples. The number of high-quality sequences per sample varied from 21,050 to 27,853 for bacteria and from 17,901 to 30,385 for fungi. Moreover, at the 97% simi- larity cut-off level, 315 bacterial and 582 fungal OTUs were obtained. Shifts in microbial community richness and diversity Bacterial and fungal observed richness (Sobs) and diversity (Shannon) indices were calculated based on the rarefied sequences (Fig 2). No significant difference was observed for Sobs, regardless of bacteria and fungi composition (Fig 2a and 2c). Furthermore, a significantly lower diversity (Shannon) of bacteria was noted for the treatment sprayed with liquid biologi- cal fertilizer (AA9) with the letter b in the above of the column (P < 0.05) (Fig 2b), while for fungi, no significant difference was observed (Fig 2d). Fig 2. Bacterial and fungalα diversity. Bacterial and fungal richness (Sobs) and diversity (Shannon) indices in different treatments corresponding to different fertilization treatments. CF, treatment sprayed with chemical fertilizer; AA, treatment sprayed with amino acids liquid fertilizer; AA9, treatment sprayed with liquid biological fertilizer. Different letters in the same line indicate significant differences as defined by Duncan’s test (P < 0.05). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048.g002 PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 6 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota Fig 3. Bacterial and fungal composition. NMDS result showed the bacterial (a, with Bacillus; c, without Bacillus) and fungal (b) microbial community compositions of the different treatments. CF, treatment sprayed with chemical fertilizer; AA, treatment sprayed with amino acids liquid fertilizer; AA9, treatment sprayed with liquid biological fertilizer. The P value was calculated through AMOVA. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048.g003 Shifts in microbial community composition NMDS and AMOVA analyses indicated that bacterial (P = 0.029) (Fig 3a) community composition significantly differed but the result of fungi showed none significant difference (P = 0.213) (Fig 3b). The bacterial community structures in the AA9 treatment differed from those in the AA and CF treatments. Interestingly, after removing the OTUs belonging to Bacil- lus, no significant differences in bacterial community structures were also observed (P = 0.382) for bacteria, suggesting that the inoculation of functional microbes resulted in the difference (Fig 3c). Driving factor connected to yield enhancement As shown by the Pearson correlation analysis, amino acid liquid fertilizer significantly corre- lated with the crop yield (r = 0.868, p = 0.002), while functional strain SQR9 (r = 0.550, p = 0.125), bacterial Sobs (r = -0.523, p = 0.149) and Shannon (r = -0.642, p = 0.062) and fungal Sob (r = -0.122, p = 0.755) and Shannon (r = -0.267, p = 0.488) showed no significant relation- ship (Table 1). Moreover, amino acid liquid fertilizer, functional strain SQR9, and their inter- action explained 50.0%, -2.4% and 22.3%, respectively, of the observed variation, leaving 30.2% of the variation unexplained for yield enhancement, as revealed by VPA analysis (Fig 4a). Our multivariate causal model linking amino acid liquid fertilizer, functional strain SQR9, bacterial composition, fungal composition and yield was supported by the data (χ = 1.884, df = 1, P = 0.170; Fig 4). The exploratory SEM explained 77.8% of the variation in the yield. As shown in the model (Fig 4), consistent with the Pearson correlation analysis and VPA analysis, Table 1. Pearson correlation analysis between different indicators and crop yields. AA SQR-9 Bacteria Fungi Sobs Shannon Sobs Shannon r 0.868 0.550 -0.523 -0.642 -0.122 -0.267 p 0.002 0.125 0.149 0.062 0.755 0.488 Note: AA, amino acids fertilizer; SQR9, functional PGPR strain SQR9. The index was constructed by 0 when the factor was inexistence and 1 when the factor was positive. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048.t001 PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 7 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota Fig 4. Mechanism of crop yield promotion. Variance partitioning analysis (VPA) map of the effects of amino acids, SQR9 and their interactions on the crop yields (a) and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) analysis of a hypothesized network of linkages among amino acids, SQR9, bacterial composition, fungal composition and crop yield. AA, amino acids fertilizer; SQR9, functional PGPR strain SQR9 (b). The index was constructed by 0 when the factor was inexistence and 1 when the factor was positive. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048.g004 amino acid liquid fertilizer played a crucial role in yield enhancement, while functional strain SQR9 drove the bacterial composition. Microbial composition variation induced by liquid biological fertilizer At the genus level (Fig 5), the abundance of Bacillus in treatments with liquid biological fertil- izer (AA9) was significantly higher than that in treatments applied with amino acid liquid fer- tilizer (AA) and chemical fertilizer (CF). In contrast, the abundances of Methylobacterium, Frondihabitans, and Streptophyta were significantly lower in AA9 than in other treatments. Moreover, the values of Clavibacter and Plesiocystis were significantly lower in AA9 than in AA. Discussion In our previous study, we observed that compared to non-treated plants (CK1) and plants treated with equal volume water (CK2), spray of amino acid liquid fertilizer (AA) significantly increased Cowpea yield [8]. Thus, the chemical fertilizer treatment as control to test the effects of foliar application of an amino acid liquid fertilizer, with or without PGPR strain SQR9, on PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 8 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota Fig 5. Microbial composition variation. Square root of the relative abundances (Mean ± SD, n = 3) of different genera with significant differences in different treatments. CF, treatment sprayed with chemical fertilizer; AA, treatment sprayed with amino acids liquid fertilizer; AA9, treatment sprayed with liquid biological fertilizer. Different letters in the same line indicate significant differences as defined by Duncan’s test (P < 0.05). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048.g005 the yield enhancement of cowpea in a two-season field experiment. Compared to chemical fer- tilizer, a significant yield enhancement effect was observed with the spraying of amino acid liq- uid fertilizer and liquid biological fertilizer treatments. These results were in agreement with the reports of other researchers who evaluated the effects of amino acids on the yield and/or growth of common bean, two wheat cultivars and Urtica pilulifera plants and suggested that foliar application of amino acid liquid fertilizer showed pleasant results [6, 10, 11]. However, these previously reported amino acid liquid fertilizers were produced by one or a solution composed of different amino acids, whereas the amino acids used in the present study were created from animal hairs resulted from the slaughterhouse. Due to the improvement of Chi- nese living standards, the increasing development of animal husbandry was induced [24, 29], especially for the scale and consumption of pork causing a huge amount of animal hair waste in the slaughterhouse that can generate a great risk to the environment. Thus, this study pro- vides an effective and ecological leaf fertilization method based on amino acids created from dead animals that will not only enhance crop yield but also make full use of animal hairs to protect the environment. In addition, additional yield enhancement has also been achieved, and the results were in agreement with previous reports that PGPR strain SQR9 promoted crop growth [13, 14]. However, no significant difference was observed between foliar applica- tion of amino acid liquid fertilizer with or without PGPR strain SQR9, which may be due to the masking effect induced by amino acids, which showed impressive yield enhancement. Moreover, application of strain SQR9 showed significant lower plant height compared to none application, this may be due to that part of the nutrients in the liquid biological fertilizer is used by the bacteria and nutrient competition between plants and microbes have already been reported [30]. PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 9 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota No significant differences in bacterial and fungal richness (Sobs), diversity (Shannon) and composition (NMDS) were identified between spraying amino acid liquid fertilizer and chemi- cal fertilizer. Richness (Sobs), diversity (Shannon) and composition were the three key factors to describe the general microbiota characteristics [31], and the function of microbiome in the leaf surface have already been reported [32]; however, few reports to our knowledge focused on the leaf microbiota alteration via amino acid fertilization. Therefore, our findings here sug- gest that amino acid liquid fertilizer application induced less variation of leaf microbial diver- sity and composition. In the liquid biological fertilizer treatment application, significantly lower bacterial diversity (Shannon) and differences in bacterial composition (NMDS) were observed than in the other treatments, which may be due to the amendment of functional bac- terial cells, which disturbed the leaf microbial community through colonization and was also supported by the NMDS analysis based on the data when Bacillus was removed. A similar phe- nomenon was observed in different environments in which one microbe invasion affected the indigenous microbiome [24, 33], suggesting that inoculation of PGPR strain Bacillus amyloli- quefaciens SQR9 can also alter leaf microbial composition which can also be supported by the genus level results (Fig 5). Pearson correlation analysis, VPA analysis, and SEM all showed that amino acid liquid fer- tilizer application, but not the functional strain and altered microbiota, was direct driver of yield enhancement. This result is supported by previous reports that showed the efficiency of amino acid uptake by plants [34, 35]. The results are also in accordance with the results of yield enhancement in this study and in previous studies [6, 10, 11] and with the general finding that amino acid liquid fertilizer treatments showed no significant effect on microbial composi- tion and general microbiota characteristics. Moreover, in accordance with the results from NMDS and genera-level analysis, a significantly higher abundance of Bacillus was observed in the treatment sprayed with liquid biological fertilizer (AA9) than in the other two treatments, suggesting that Bacillus amyloliquefaciens SQR9 drove the bacterial composition. We have done the further analysis using taxonomic tree to do the key OTUs identification, and the OTUs belonging to Bacillus were selected. However, after using the Illumina sequencing primer pairs to search the matched segment from the whole genome of strain SQR9 which was download from Genebank, we found the matched segment wasn’t located in the 16S rRNA but in another place; thus the matched segment and 16s rRNA of SQR9 were included in the tree together (S1 Fig, the tree was built by maximum likelihood method including 10 more 16S rRNA sequences of type Bacillus species). From the tree, we found that one OUT (OTU4) was most similar to SQR9, and then we deduced that the functional PGPR strain SQR9 could effi- ciently colonize the leaf and alter the leaf microbial community. Although we did not identify the disease suppression ability and find significantly additional yield enhancement in this study, the colonization of functional microbes was still speculated to have positive functions on crop productivity. This is due to that in addition to some studies which showed disease sup- pression abilities of different bacteria isolated from rhizosphere when they were sprayed on the leaves [21, 36, 37] and observed varied effectiveness in causing localized disease inhibition when applied to leaves [38], plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) sprayed on plant leaves were also found to directly promote plant growth [22, 23]. However, this issue should be investigated in the future to test the direct plant growth promotion by avoid the masking effect from other nutrients. Conclusion In the present study, leaves sprayed with amino acid liquid fertilizer (AA) and liquid biological fertilizer (AA9) experienced significantly enhanced cowpea yields compared to treatments PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 10 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota with chemical fertilizer. Functional PGPR strain SQR9 was observed to efficiently colonize the leaf and alter the leaf microbial community, while amino acid liquid fertilizer treatment did not significantly alter the leaf microbiota. Of greatest interest is that amino acid liquid fertilizer resulted in the great degree of yield enhancement. Moreover, we speculate that foliar sprayed PGPR may have positive function due to the colonization of the beneficial microbe; however, more work should be done to make the effect of PGPR clear. Supporting information S1 Fig. Classification of OTU4. Taxonomic tree of OTU4 built by maximum likelihood method including 10 more 16S rRNA sequences (GQ360077.1) of type Bacillus species and matched segment (CP0068901.1) from the whole genome of strain SQR9. a, taxonomic tree; b, matched segment from the whole genome and 16S rRNA sequence of strain SQR9. (DOCX) Acknowledgments This research was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2018YFD0500201), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (KYZ201871), the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu (BK20160710), the Priority Aca- demic Program Development of the Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (PAPD), the 111 project (B12009), and Top-notch Academic Programs Project of Jiangsu Higher Education Institution (PPZY2015A061). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Author Contributions Conceptualization: Rong Li, Qirong Shen. Data curation: Xuhui Deng. Formal analysis: Dongsheng Wang, Xuhui Deng, Bei Wang, Na Zhang, Chengzhi Zhu, Zix- uan Jiao, Rong Li, Qirong Shen. Investigation: Dongsheng Wang, Bei Wang, Na Zhang, Rong Li. Methodology: Dongsheng Wang, Xuhui Deng, Na Zhang, Chengzhi Zhu, Zixuan Jiao. Writing – original draft: Dongsheng Wang, Xuhui Deng, Rong Li, Qirong Shen. Writing – review & editing: Dongsheng Wang, Xuhui Deng, Rong Li, Qirong Shen. References 1. Tilman D. Global environmental impacts of agricultural expansion: the need for sustainable and efficient practices. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1999, 96: 5995–6000. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.96.11.5995 PMID: 10339530 2. Godfray HCJ, Beddington JR, Crute IR, Haddad L, Lawrence D, Muir JF, et al. Food security: the chal- lenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science, 2010, 327: 812–818. https://doi.org/10.1126/science. 1185383 PMID: 20110467 3. Matson PA, Parton WJ, Power AG, Swift MJ. Agricultural intensification and ecosystem properties. Sci- ence, 1997, 277: 504–509. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.277.5325.504 PMID: 20662149 4. Hartman K, van der Heijden MGA, Wittwer RA, Banerjee S, Walser JC, Schlaeppi K. Cropping practices manipulate abundance patterns of root and soil microbiome members paving the way to smart farming. Microbiome, 2018, 6: 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40168-017-0389-9 PMID: 29338764 5. Fageria NK. 2009. The use of nutrients in crop plants. Boca Raton, Florida/New York, USA: CRC Press. PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 11 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota 6. Moreira A, Moraes LAC. Yield, nutritional status and soil fertility cultivated with common bean in response to amino-acids foliar application. J Plant Nutr, 2017, 40(3): 344–351. 7. Girma K, Martin KL, Freeman KW, Mosali J, Teal RK, Raun WR, et al. Determination of optimum rate and growth for foliar applied phosphorus in corn. Commun Soil Sci Plant. 2007, 38: 1137–1154. 8. Wang B, Gao X, Wang T, Wang D, Xie Y, Gong Z, et al. Effects of foliar spraying of water soluble fertil- izer containing amino acids on growth of pepper and cowpea. Soils (in Chinese with English abstract), 2017, 49(4): 692–698 9. Cao XC, Chen XY, Li XY, Yuan L, Wu LH, Zhu YH. Rice uptake of soil adsorbed amino acids under ster- ilized environment. Soil Biol Biochem. 2013, 62: 13–21. 10. El-Said MAA, Mahdy AY. Response of two wheat cultivars to foliar application with amino acids under low levels of nitrogen fertilization. Middle East Journal of Agriculture Research. 2016, 5(4): 462–472. 11. Wahba HE, Motawe HM, Ibrahim AY. Growth and chemical composition of Urtica pilulifera L. plant as influenced by foliar application of some amino acids. J Mater Environ Sci, 2015, 6 (2): 499–506. 12. Phillips SB, Mullins GL. Foliar Burn and Wheat Grain Yield Responses Following Topdress-Applied Nitrogen and Sulfur Fertilizers. J. Plant Nutr. 2004, 27, 921–930. 13. Huang Y, Sun L, Zhao J, Huang R, Li R, Shen Q. Utilization of different waste proteins to create a novel PGPR-containing bio-organic fertilizer. Sci Rep-UK, 2015, 5: 7766. 14. Zhang M, Li R, Cao L, Shi J, Liu H, Huang Y, et al. Algal sludge from Taihu Lake can be utilized to create novel PGPR-containing bio-organic fertilizers. J Environ Manage, 2014, 132: 230–236. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.10.031 PMID: 24321283 15. Fu L, Penton CR, Ruan Y, Shen Z, Xue C, Li R, et al. Inducing the rhizosphere microbiome by biofertili- zer application to suppress banana Fusarium wilt disease. Soil Biol Biochem, 2017, 104: 39–48. 16. Lee KH, Koh RH, Song HG. Enhancement of growth and yield of tomato by Rhodopseudomonas sp under greenhouse conditions. J Microbiol, 2008, 46(6): 641–646. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12275-008- 0159-2 PMID: 19107392 17. Xu J, Feng Y, Wang Y, Luo X, Tang J, Lin X. The foliar spray of Rhodopseudomonas palustris grown under Stevia residue extract promotes plant growth via changing soil microbial community. J Soils Sedi- ments, 2016, 16: 916–923. 18. Pandey N, Gupta B, Pathak GC. Enhanced yield and nutritional enrichment of seeds of Pisum sativum L. through foliar application of zinc. Sci Hortic, 2013, 164: 474–483. 19. Preininger C, Sauer U, Bejarano A, Berninger T. Concepts and applications of foliar spray for microbial inoculants. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2018, 102 (17), 7265–7282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253- 018-9173-4 PMID: 29961100 20. Bhattacharyya PN, Jha DK. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR): emergence in agriculture. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 28, 2012, 1327–1350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11274-011-0979-9 PMID: 22805914 21. Raupach GS, Kloepper JW. Mixtures of Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria enhance biological con- trol of multiple cucumber pathogens. Phytopathology, 1998, 88: 1158–1164. https://doi.org/10.1094/ PHYTO.1998.88.11.1158 PMID: 18944848 22. Esitken A, Karlidag H, Ercisli S, Sahin F. Effects of foliar application of Bacillus substilis Osu-142 on the yield, growth and control of shot-hole disease (Coryneum blight) of apricot. Gartenbauwissenschaft, 2002, 67: 139–142. 23. Esitken A, Karlidag H, Ercisli S, Turan M, Sahin F. The effect of spraying a growth promoting bacterium on the yield, growth and nutrient element composition of leaves of apricot (Prunus armeniaca L. cv. Hacihaliloglu). Aus J Agric Res, 2003, 54: 377–380. 24. Liu H, Chen D, Zhang R, Hang X, Li R, Shen Q. Amino acids hydrolyzed from animal carcasses are a good additive for the production of bio-organic fertilizer. Front Microbiol, 2016, 7: 1290. https://doi.org/ 10.3389/fmicb.2016.01290 PMID: 27574521 25. Maignien L, DeForce EA, Chafee ME, Eren AM, Simmons SL. Ecological succession and stochastic variation in the assembly of Arabidopsis thaliana phyllosphere communities. mBio, 2014, 5: e00682- 13. https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.00682-13 PMID: 24449749 26. Gargallo-Garriga A, Sardans J, Pe ´ rez-Trujillo M, Guenther A, Llusià J, Rico L, et al. Shifts in plant foliar and floral metabolomes in response to the suppression of the associated microbiota. BMC Plant Biol, 2016, 16: 78. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-016-0767-7 PMID: 27048394 27. Morris CE, Kinkel LL, Lindow SE, Hecht-Poinar EI, Elliott VJ. Fifty years of phyllosphere microbiology: significant contributions to research in related fields, p 365–375. In Lindow SE, Hecht-Poinar EI, Elliott VJ (ed), Phyllosphere microbiology. APS Publishing, St. Paul, MN. 2002. PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 12 / 13 Foliar fertilization improved crop yield and altered leaf microbiota 28. Liu H, Xiong W, Zhang R, Hang X, Wang D, Li R, et al. Continuous application of different organic addi- tives can suppress tomato disease by inducing the healthy rhizospheric microbiota through alterations to the bulk soil microflora. Plant Soil, 2018, 423: 229–240. 29. Wei YQ, Zhao Y, Xi BD, Wei ZM, Li X, Cao ZY. Changes in phosphorus fractions during organic wastes composting from different sources. Bioresour Technol, 2015, 189: 349–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. biortech.2015.04.031 PMID: 25912971 30. Zhu Q, Riley WJ, Tang J, Koven CD. Multiple soil nutrient competition between plants, microbes, and mineral surfaces: model development, parameterization, and example applications in several tropical forests. Biogeosciences. 2016, 13, 341–363. 31. Wittebolle L, Marzorati M, Clement L, Balloi A, Daffonchio D, Heylen K, et al. Initial community evenness favours functionality under selective stress. Nature, 2009, 458: 623–626 https://doi.org/10.1038/ nature07840 PMID: 19270679 32. Ritpitakphong U, Falquet L, Vimoltust A, Berger A, Me ´ traux JP, L’Haridon F. The microbiome of the leaf surface of Arabidopsis protects against a fungal pathogen. New Phytol. 2016, 210 (3), 1033–1043. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.13808 PMID: 26725246 33. You C, Zhang C, Kong F, Feng C, Wang J. Comparison of the effects of biocontrol agent Bacillus subti- lis and fungicide metalaxyl–mancozeb on bacterial communities in tobacco rhizospheric soil. Ecol Eng, 2016, 91:119–125. 34. Persson J, Ho ¨ gberg P, Ekblad A, Ho ¨ gberg MN, Nordgren A, Na ¨ sholm T. Nitrogen acquisition from inor- ganic and organic sources by boreal forest plants in the field. Oecologia, 2003, 137: 252–257. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s00442-003-1334-0 PMID: 12883986 35. Gioseffi E, de Neergaard A, Schjoerring JK. Interactions between uptake of amino acids and inorganic nitrogen in wheat plants. Biogeosciences, 2012, 9: 1509–1518. 36. Radja Commare R, Nandakumar R, Kandan A, Suresh S, Bharathi M, Raguchander T, et al. Pseudo- monas fluorescens based bio-formulation for the management of sheath blight disease and leaffolder insect in rice. Crop Prot, 2002, 21: 671–677. 37. Vidhyasekaran P, Muthamilan M. Evaluation of a powder formulation of Pseudomonas fluorescens Pf1 for control of rice sheath blight. Biocontrol Sci Techn, 1999, 9: 67–74. 38. Kilic-Ekici O, Yuen GY. Comparison of strains of Lysobacter enzymogenes and PGPR for induction of resistance against Bipolaris sorokiniana in tall fescue. Biol Control, 2004, 30: 446–455. PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222048 September 4, 2019 13 / 13

Journal

PLoS ONE – Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journal

Published: Sep 4, 2019

There are no references for this article.