پیامد کاربرد گونه های قارچ مایکوریزا بومی خوزستان بر غلظت برخی ترکیبات و عناصر ریزمغذی در گیاه ذرت کشت شده در خاک شور

نوع مقاله : مقاله کامل علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری علوم خاک، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز، اهواز، ایران.

2 دانشیار، گروه علوم خاک، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز، اهواز، ایران

3 دانشیار، گروه زیست‌شناسی، دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز، اهواز، ایران.

4 استاد، گروه علوم و مهندسی خاک، دانشگاه تبریز، تبریز، ایران.

چکیده

سابقه و هدف: شوری خاک یک مشکل روزافزون خاک‌های کشاورزی است که باعث کاهش سرعت رشد و تولید محصول مخصوصاً در مناطق خشک و نیمه‌خشک می‌شود. یکی از مهمترین نقش‌های قارچ مایکوریزا، افزایش عملکرد گیاهان زراعی خصوصاً در خاک‌هایی با حاصلخیزی پایین می‌باشد؛ که به دلیل افزایش سطح جذب ریشه گیاه از طریق گسترش میسلیوم قارچ در خاک ایجاد میشود. این پژوهش به منظور بررسی تأثیر قارچ مایکوریزا آربوسکولار بر محتوای پرولین، مقادیر شاخص کلروفیل و جذب مواد غذایی در خاک شور و غیرشور روی گیاه ذرت انجام شد.
مواد و روش‌ها: آزمایش به صورت فاکتوریل در قالب طرح کاملا تصادفی با عامل‌های مایه‌زنی با قارچ مایکوریزا Funneliformis mosseae (در سه سطح بدون مایه‌زنی، مایه‌زنی با سویه A1 (جدا شده از خاک غیر شور) و مایه‌زنی با سویه A2(جداشده از خاک شور)) و شوری (در دو سطح؛ خاک شور EC= 7 dS m-1 و غیرشور EC= 2 dS m-1) با سه تکرار و با کشت گیاه ذرت تحت شرایط گلخانه ای اجرا گردید. گلدان‌ها به مدت 3 ماه با رطوبت 70 درصد ظرفیت مزرعه ی خاک نگهداری شدند. پس از برداشت گیاه، وزن خشک ریشه و اندام هوایی، غلظت فسفر در ریشه و اندام هوایی و غلظت برخی عناصر مانند مس، روی، آهن، منگنز، پتاسیم و سدیم در اندام هوایی اندازه‌گیری شد. همچنین محتوای کلروفیل و پرولین برگ اندازه‌گیری شد. برخی ویژگی‌های بیولوژیک خاک (تنفس پایه، کربن زیتوده میکروبی و ضریب متابولیک خاک) و فسفر اولسن خاک نیز اندازه‌گیری شد.
یافته‌ها: نتایج نشان داد در اثر تنش شوری، برخی صفات گیاهی و خاک اندازه‌گیری شده کاهش یافت. به طوری که شاخص کلروفیل برگ، وزن خشک ریشه و اندام هوایی، فسفر ریشه و اندام هوایی، فسفر اولسن، کربن زیتوده و کلونیزاسیون (به ترتیب 12/3، 2/12، 1/7، 75/43، 6/3، 30، 5/28 و 1/10 درصد) کاهش یافتند. مایه‌زنی با قارچ‌های مایکوریزای سویه A1 و سویه A2سبب بهبود اکثر ویژگی‌های اندازه‌گیری شده گردید. همچنین اثر متقابل شوری و قارچ مایکوریزا نشان داد که در تیمارهای غیر شور و مایه‌زنی شده با قارچ نسبت به شاهد، کلروفیل برگ، وزن خشک ریشه و اندام هوایی، فسفر ریشه و اندام هوایی، فسفر اولسن، کربن زیتوده و کلونیزاسیون و پتاسیم، مس، منگنز، آهن و روی (به ترتیب 1/8، 2/42، 9/15، 50،5/28، 4/68، 38/64، 1/92، 5/40، 7/44، 7/232، 3/87 و 125/28 درصد) افزایش یافتند.
نتیجه گیری: به طور کلی، کاربرد قارچ مایکوریزا نقش موثری در جذب عناصر غذایی و افزایش مقاومت گیاهان در تنش شوری ایفا می‌نماید. سویه A2 در بسیاری از موارد بهتر از سویه A1 عمل نمود که نشان دهنده تفاوت دو سویه و سازگاری سویه‌ها با شرایط محیطی می‌باشد. کاربرد قارچ‌های مایکوریزا مخصوصاً گونه ی مقاوم به شوری می‌تواند سبب بهبود رشد بهتر گیاه در شرایط خاک شور شده و غلظت عناصر در گیاه را نسبت به حالت عدم مصرف قارچ مایکوریزا افزایش داد. بنابراین، گیاهان با افزایش جذب مواد مغذی به واسطه‌ی میکروارگانیسم‌های همزیست، می‌توانند به کودهای شیمیایی کمتری نیاز داشته باشند که می‌تواند مزایای زیست‌محیطی داشته باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

The effect of using native mycorrhizal fungal species of Khuzestan on the concentration of some compounds and micronutrients in Zea mays plants grown in saline soil

نویسندگان [English]

  • Marzieh Kolahkaj 1
  • Roya Zalaghi 2
  • Gholamreza Ghezelbash 3
  • Nasser Aliasgharzad 4
1 . Ph.D. Student of Soil Science, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran
2 Associate Prof., Dept. of Soil Science, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran
3 Associate Prof., Dept. of Biology, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran
4 . Professor, Dept. of Soil Science and Engineering, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran
چکیده [English]

Background and Objective: Soil salinity is a growing issue in agricultural soils, especially in arid and semi-arid regions, which leads to reduced growth and crop production. Mycorrhizal fungi play a significant role in enhancing the yield of agricultural plants, especially in soils with low fertility, due to increased root surface area through the spreading of fungal mycelia in the soil. This study aimed to investigate the effect of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on proline content, chlorophyll levels, and nutrient uptake in Zea mays plants grown in saline and non-saline soils.
Materials and Methods: This experiment was conducted as a factorial experiment in a completely randomized design with two factors: inoculation with mycorrhizal fungi (Funneliformis mosseae strains A1 and A2) and salinity levels (saline soil with EC = 7 dS m-1 and non-saline soil with EC = 2 dS m-1). The experiment was conducted in a greenhouse with three replicates. The pots were maintained at 70% of field capacity for three months. After harvesting, various plant and soil properties were measured.
Findings: The results showed that salinity stress significantly reduced several measured plant and soil traits. Parameters such as leaf chlorophyll index, roots and shoot dry weight, phosphorus concentration in roots and shoots, Olsen phosphorus, microbial carbon, and colonization were reduced (by 12.3%, 12.2%, 7.1%, 43.75%, 3.6%, 30%, 28.5%, and 10.1%, respectively). Inoculation with A1 and A2 strains of mycorrhizal fungi improved most of the measured characteristics. The interaction effects of salinity and mycorrhizal fungi showed that for treatments that was inoculated with fungi, in non-saline condition, leaf chlorophyll, dry weight of roots and shoots, phosphorus in roots and shoots, Olsen phosphorus, microbial carbon, colonization, potassium, copper, manganese, iron, and zinc were significantly increased (by 1.8%, 42.2%, 15.9%, 50%, 28.5%, 68.4%, 64.38%, 92.1%, 40.5%, 44.7%, 232.7%, 87.3%, and 28.125%, respectively).
Conclusion: Overall, the use of mycorrhizal fungi plays a significant role in the absorption of nutrients and in increasing the resistance of plants (especially Zea mays plants) to salinity stress. Strain A2 performed better than strain A1 in many cases, which indicates the difference between these two strains and their adaptation to environmental conditions. The use of mycorrhizal fungi, especially salt-tolerant strains, can improve plant growth in saline soils and increase the concentration of nutrients in the inoculated plants compared to non-inoculated conditions. Therefore, plants can reduce their reliance on chemical fertilizers by improving nutrient absorption through symbiotic microorganisms, which can have significant environmental benefits.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Mycorrhiza
  • Phosphatase
  • Phosphorus
  • Proline
  • Salinity

مراجع

1.Shahzad, H., Ullah, S., Iqbal, M., Bilal, H. M., Shah, G. M., Ahmad, S., Zakir, A., Ditta, A., Farooqi, M. A., & Ahmad, I. (2024). Salinity types and level-based effects on the growth, physiology and nutrient contents of maize (Zea mays). Turk Tarim ve Ormancilik Dergisi/ Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 48(3), 332-343. https://doi.org/ 10.55730/1300-011X.3185.
2.Khan, M. I. R., & Farooq, M. (2020). Salinity stress in plants: A review on mechanisms of tolerance and physiological adaptations. Plants, 9(11), 1574. https://doi.org/10.3390/ plants9111574.
3.Sade, N., Yaish, M. W., & Kafkafi, U. (2020). The role of mycorrhizal fungi in alleviating salinity stress in plants:
A review. Frontiers in Plant Science, 11, 170. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls. 2020.00170.
4.Shahbaz, M., & Ashraf, M. (2020). Salinity stress in plants: Causes, effects, and remedies. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 178, 104159. https:// doi.org/ 10.1016/ j.envexpbot. 2020.104159.
5.Zhang, H., Wang, Y., & Liu, C. (2021). Salinity affects chlorophyll content and photosynthetic performance in maize. Journal of Plant Physiology, 258, 153358. https:// doi.org/ 10.1016/ j.jplph.2020. 153358.
6.Wang, Y., Ma, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2022). The role of proline in plant responses to salinity stress: A review. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, 175, 28-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2022.03.012.
7.Kumar, V., & Singh, S. (2023). Mycorrhizae and their role in alleviating salt stress in plants: Current status and future perspectives. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 23(2), 123-137. https:// doi.org/ 10.1007/ s42729-022-00745-8.
8.Raza, A., & Khan, M. I. R. (2022). The impact of salinity on the physiological traits of crops: A review. Agricultural Sciences, 13(4), 451-469. https://doi.org/10.4236/as.2022.134031.
9.Shi, A. D., Li, Q., Huang, J. G., & Yuan, L. (2013). Influence of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on growth, mineral nutrition and chlorogenic acid content of Lonicera confusa seedlings under field conditions. Pedosphere, 23(3), 333-339. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1002-0160(13) 60024-3.
10.Zhao, D., Wu, C., Wang, Y., Zhang, X., & Liu, L. (2015). Effects of salinity on chloroplast structure and function.
Plant Cell Reports, 34(11), 1951-1960. https:// doi.org/ 10.1007/ s00299-015-1858-9.
11.Ashraf, M., & Harris, P. J. C. (2004). Abiotic stress tolerance in plants: An overview. Biotechnology Advances, 22(1-2), 1-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.biotechadv.2003.08.001.
12.Bates, G. W., Baird, L. M., & Barlow, P. (2006). The role of osmotic adjustment in salinity stress. Plant Stress,
1(1), 23-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. plnst.2006.06.001.
13.Sah, S. K., Joshi, S. K., & Mishra, P. (2016). Lipid peroxidation and membrane stability in response to salinity. Journal of Plant Physiology, 197, 38-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jplph.2016.01.014.
14.Smith, S. E., & Read, D. J. (2008). Mycorrhizal Symbiosis. Academic Press.
15.Yang, Y., He, J., Zhang, Y., & Wang, S. (2016). Proline accumulation and its role in salinity stress in plants. Plant Growth Regulation, 78, 1-9. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s10725-015-0075-5.
16.Zhang, Z., Zhu, Y., Zhang, X., Li, J., & Wang, M. (2018). The role of soluble sugars in stress tolerance. Plant Cell Reports, 37(4), 565-573. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s00299-018-2248-5.
17.Aminifard, M. H., Zare, M., & Hoshmand, S. (2016). The effect of mycorrhizal fungi on chlorophyll content in plants under salinity stress. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 16, 557-558. https://doi.org/ 10.4067/S0718-95162016005000006.
18.Zhu, Y., Zhang, H., Zhang, W., Wang, Y., & Zhang, J. (2020). Effects of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on plant growth and nutrient uptake under saline conditions. Agriculture, 10(3), 62. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture10030062.
19.Thomas, G. W. (1996). Soil pH and soil acidity. In D. L. Sparks (Ed.), Methods of soil analysis: Part 3. Chemical methods (pp. 475-491). Soil Science Society of America.
20.Walkley, A., & Black, I. A. (1934). An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Science, 37(1), 29-38. https://doi.org/10.1097/ 00010694-193401000-00003.
21.Olsen, S. R., Cole, C. V., Watanabe, F. S., & Dean, L. A. (1954). Estimation of available phosphorus in soils by extraction with sodium bicarbonate. U.S. Department of Agriculture Circular, 939, 1-19.
22.Kjeldahl, J. A. (1883). Neue Methode zur Bestimmung des Stickstoffs in organischen Körpern. Zeitschrift für analytische Chemie, 22(1), 366-382. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01338151.
23.Daniel, G. E. (Ed.). (2018). Methods of Soil Analysis. Soil Science Society of America.
24.Gerwing, J., & Gelderman, R. (2019). Fertilizer recommendation guide (Annual Report EC750). U.S. Department of Agriculture, South Dakota State University.
25.Bhattarai, B. D. B. H. (2019). Nutrient management for sustainable agriculture: A global perspective. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94794-5.
26.Giovannetti, M., & Mosse, B. (1980). An evaluation of techniques for measuring vesicular arbuscular mycorrhizal infection in roots. New Phytologist, 84(3), 489-500. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1469-8137.1980.tb04556.x.
27.Sivakumar, N. (2012). Effect of edaphic factors and seasonal variation on spore density and root colonization of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in sugarcane fields. Annals of Microbiology, 63(1), 151-160. https://doi. org/10.1007/s13213-012-0455-2.
28.Chapman, H. D., & Pratt, D. F. (1961). Methods of analysis for soil, plant, and water. University of California Division of Agricultural Sciences.
29.Bates, L. S., Waldren, R. P. & Teare, I. D. (1973). Rapid determination of free proline for water-stress studies. Plant and Soil, 39, 205-207. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/BF00018060.
30.Hasegawa, P. M., Bressan, R. A., Zhu, J. K., & Bohnert, H. J. (2000). Plant cellular and molecular responses to high salinity. Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology, 51(1), 463-499. https://doi.org/ 10.1146/annurev.arplant.51.1.463.
31.Zhang, H., & Yang, Y. (2020). Role of mycorrhizal fungi in alleviating salt stress in plants: A review. Biology,
9(8), 178. https://doi.org/10.3390/ biology9080178.
32.Munns, R., & Gilliham, M. (2015). Salinity tolerance of plants: An overview of the mechanisms and strategies. Plant Physiology, 167(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.114.249853.
33.Shabala, S., & Mackay, A. (2019). Plant stress signaling: Salinity stress. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, 20(9), 563-578. https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41580-019-0160-8.
34.Kumar, S. (2012). Assay guided comparison for enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidant activities with special reference to medicinal plants. Antioxidant Enzyme, 14, 382-400. https://doi.org/10.5772/5078252.
35.Björn, L. O., Papageorgiou, G. C., Blankenship, R. E., & Govindjee. (2009). A viewpoint: Why chlorophyll a? Photosynthesis Research, 99(2), 85-98. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11120-008-9395-x.
36.Augé, R. M. (2001). Water relations, drought and vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis. Mycorrhiza, 11(1), 3-42. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s005720100097.
37.Tang, M., Chen, H., Huang, J. C., & Tian, Z. Q. (2009). Arbuscular mycorrhiza fungi effects on the growth and physiology of Zea mays L. seedlings under diesel stress. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 41, 936-940. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2009.01.005.
38.Nakhzari Moghadam, A., SamSami, N., Rahimi Karizaki, A., & Gholi Nejad, I. (2020). The effect of drought stress on the physiological traits and seed yield of soybean influenced by inoculation and non-inoculation with mycorrhizal fungi and Rhizobium bacteria. Environmental Stresses in Agricultural Sciences, 13(2), 413-423. https://doi.org/10. 22077/escs.2019.2131.1531. [In Persian]
39.McDonald, A. J., & Baird, J. (2017). The impact of fungicides on soil health and crop production. Agriculture,
7(3), 27.
40.Amanifar, S., Aliasgharzad, N., Najafi, N., Esteki, M., Oustan, S. H., & Bolandnazar, S. (2019). Evaluation of the effects of mycorrhizal inoculation on lead (Pb) uptake and growth of alfalfa in Pb-contaminated soil. Iran Agricultural Research, 38(1), 75-86. https://doi.org/ 10.22099/iar.2019.5318.
41.Bilalis, D., Karkanis, A., Angelopoulou, F., Travlos, I., Antoniadis, A., Ntatsi, G., Lazaridi, E., & Savvas, D. (2015). Effect of organic and mineral fertilization on root growth and mycorrhizal colonization of pea crops (Pisum sativum L.). Bulletin UASVM Horticulture, 72(2), 288-294. https:// doi.org/ 10.15835/ buasvmcn-hort:11497.
 42.Hosseinzadeh, M. H., Ghalavand, A., Mashhadi Akbar Boojar, M., Modarres-Sanavy, S. A. M., & Mokhtassi-Bidgoli, A. (2020). Effect of deficit irrigation, mycorrhiza and nitrogen nutrition system on some chemical properties of soil, oil content and biological yield of purslane (Portulaca oleracea L.). Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science, 51(2), 29-48. https://doi.org/10.22059/ ijfcs.2019.267828.654535.
43.Khamadi, F., Mesgarbashi, M., Hasibi, P., Farzaneh, M., & Enayatzamir, N. (2015). Influence of crop residue and nitrogen levels on nutrient content in grain wheat. Applied Field Crops Research, 28(4), 158-166. https://doi. org/10.22092/aj.2016.106753.
44.Fitter, A. H., Helgason, T., & Hodge, A. (2011). Nutritional exchanges in the arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis: Implications for sustainable agriculture. Fungal Biology Reviews, 25(1), 68-72. https:// doi.org/ 10.1016/ j.fbr.2011.01. 002.
45.Marizadeh, A., Bolandnazar, S., Hajilou, J., & Lotfollahy, A. (2021). The effect of commercial rootstocks and inoculation with two species of mycorrhizal fungi on some element uptake and qualitative traits of greenhouse cucumber. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production, 31(1), 145-161. https:// doi.org/ 10.22034/ saps.2021. 12793. [In Persian]
46.Oraei, M., Tabatabaei, S. J., Fallahi, E., & Imani, A. (2009). The effects of salinity stress and rootstock on the growth, photosynthetic rate, nutrient and sodium concentrations of almond. Journal of Horticulture Science and Biotechnology, 23, 131-140. https://doi. org/ 10.22067/ jhorts4.v1388i2.2596.  [In Persian]
47.Seleiman, M. F., Aslam, M. T., Alhammad, B. A., Hassan, M. U., Maqbool, R., Chattha, M. U., Khan,
I., Gitari, H. I., Uslu, O. S., Roy, R.,
& Battaglia, M. L. (2022). Salinity stress in wheat: Effects, mechanisms and management strategies. Phyton,
91(2), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.32604/ phyton.2022.017365.
48.Basyal, B. (2024). Plant-arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi association under drought stress. Chapter in: Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi in Sustainable Agriculture: Nutrient and Crop Management (pp. 211–221). https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-0300-5_10.
49.Khalilpour, M., Mozafari, V., & Abbaszadeh-Dahaji, P. (2021). Tolerance to salinity and drought stresses in pistachio (Pistacia vera L.) seedlings inoculated with indigenous stress-tolerant PGPR isolates. Scientia Horticulturae, 276, 110440. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.scienta.2021.110440.
50.Sayyad-Amin, P., Borzouei, A., & Jahansooz, M. R. (2015). Biochemical responses of sorghum cultivars under salinity at vegetative and reproductive stages. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology, 20(4), 324-332. https://doi. org/10.1007/s40502-015-0180-5.
51.Shavalikohshori, O., Zalaghi, R., Sorkheh, K., & Enayatizamir, N. (2020). The effect of the application of Pseudomonas bacteria on wheat growth and some biological characteristics of a soil affected by salinity and
cadmium concentrations. Soil Biology, 8(2), 209-221. https://doi.org/20.1001. 1.23452536.1399.8.2.9.6. [In Persian]
52.Giri, B., Kapoor, R., & Mukerji, K. G. (2007). Improved tolerance of Acacia nilotica to salt stress by arbuscular mycorrhiza, Glomus fasciculatum, may be partly related to elevated K/Na ratios in root and shoot tissues. Microbial Ecology, 54(4), 753-760. https://doi. org/10.1007/s00248-007-9239-9.
53.Jafari, S., Chorom, M., Enayatizamir, N., & Motamedi, H. (2013). Evaluating the effects of Bacillus subtilis and Corynebacterium glutamicum on soil microbial indexes at different levels of salinity. Agricultural Engineering, 35(2), 55-70. https://doi.org/10.22067/ jsw.v0i0.25651. [In Persian]
مجله مدیریت خاک و تولید پایدار
دوره 16، شماره 2
تیر 1405
صفحه 79-98

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار