Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2024 Nov 27;19(11):e0312199. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0312199

Rhizospheric soil chemical properties and microbial response to a gradient of Chromolaena odorata(L) invasion in the Mount Cameroon Region

Victor Nzengong Juru 1,2, Lawrence Monah Ndam 2,3,4,*, Blaise Nangsingnyuy Tatah 3, Beatrice Ambo Fonge 1,4
Editor: Md Mahmudul Hasan5
PMCID: PMC11602113  PMID: 39602468

Abstract

Chromolaena odorata is a noxious alien invasive weed species with an enormous impact on the terrestrial ecosystem. The allelopathic potentials of this weed have had little attention, leading to changes in soil properties and microbial communities. This study investigates the impacts of Chromolaena odorata invasion gradients on rhizospheric soil chemical properties and microbial response in the Mount Cameroon Region. Forty-eight soil samples at four different degrees of invasion (uninvaded, low degree invasion, moderate degree invasion and high degree invasion) based on species coverage within subplots in four study areas were collected and rhizospheric soil chemical properties, microbial load, phosphatases activities and secondary metabolites were evaluated. At medium-degree invasion, rhizospheric soil concentrations of P, K and Fe increased with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) colonization and phosphatases enzyme activities. Soil C, N and organic matter were significantly increased at high-degree invasion, supporting the use of the plant as a fallow crop. Acid phosphatase activity ranged from 0.69 to 0.90 mmol h-1 kg-1 and was significantly different at different degrees of invasion. AMF colonization ranged from 23.33 to 50.00%, with a strong positive correlation between AMF colonization and phosphatase activity. Soil bacterial load was high (46 × 105 CFU/g– 67 × 105 CFU/g), with mostly Staphylococcus having health concerns about its spread. The invasion situation had no significant effect on soil bacterial load, but high-degree invasion significantly increased fungal load. Low-degree invaded soils had high saponin (24.55±0.00 mg/g), flavonoid (47.7 mg/g) and tannin (28.68 mg/g) concentrations. The investigation reveals that Chromolaena odorata invasion altered rhizospheric soil properties and microbial communities significantly, thereby influencing ecosystem dynamics and soil nutrient availability. However, further studies elucidating kinds of secondary metabolites, identifying microbial communities, and monitoring soil changes influenced by C. odorata are essential for effective ecosystem management.

1. Introduction

The globalisation of human activities has caused plants to spread beyond their natural habitats, resulting in a significant change in ecosystem function and structure and a change in soil chemical composition [1,2]. This biological invasion is the second-largest threat to biodiversity after habitat destruction and is one of the top most environmental concerns [3]. The increase in invasive species and their irreversible impact on ecosystems is a major concern for conservationists worldwide [4]. The slow and subtle changes caused by invasive species such as Chromolaena odorata may be difficult to detect until they have reached their consolidated state and exert maximum negative effects [5].

Chromolaena odorata (L) R. King and H. Robinson (Asteraceae) is a perennial shrub that originated from Central and South America [6]. However, it has become an invasive weed in tropical and subtropical regions of Africa and other parts of the world, spreading rapidly in open areas such as roadsides, riverbanks, disturbed forests, and plantations [7]. The weed exhibits a high reproductive capacity and has several common names in different regions in Cameroon, such as Siam weed, devil weed, French weed, communist weed, hagonoy, co hoy, triffid weed, Bitter bush, Christmas Bush, Camphur Grass, Common Floss Flower, and achacasala [8,9].

Chromolaena odorata is one of the world’s worst invasive weeds that severely threaten agriculture, biodiversity and the environment. The plant releases allelochemicals such as flavonoids, terpenoids and alkaloids that alter nutrient fluxes and even modify soil microbial communities [10]. The weed outcompetes native plants via light competition and accumulation of soil-borne native pathogens and has a fast growth rate [11]. Although C. odorata has been used as a medicinal weed and fallow crop in the Mount Cameroon Region, studies have established that its eradication, containment, exclusion or population reduction is difficult due to the limited management interventions that tackle the general ecosystem [12]. Its proliferation in forest gaps, along riversides, roadsides and plantations results in the rapid recolonization of agricultural fields, causing significant economic losses [9].

Invasive species such as Chromolaena odorata release root exudates that stimulate soil microbial communities and increase nutrient cycling [13]. Invasive plants alter soil microbial community structure, which impacts native plant performance [14,15] by increasing pathogenic microbes and decreasing beneficial ones required for the fitness of native plants [16]. Invasive plants affect environments by altering the soil microbial community in their rhizosphere. For instance, low and high degrees of Wedelia trilobata invasion increase the richness of soil fungal communities but do not affect soil bacterial communities [17]. They can form arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal (AMF) associations or degrade local mycorrhizal fungi. This often favours the proliferation of generalist AMFs to local specialist ones [18]. Mycorrhizal fungi are crucial in optimising soil aggregation and are essential in water and nutrient uptake, including phosphorus, zinc and copper. In phosphorus-deficient tropical environments, these fungi participate in phosphorus fixation, comprising phosphorus recovery in the soil profile [19].

The rate of phosphorus mineralisation is governed by microbial activity and plant-synthesised enzymes [20]. However, some invasive plant species can boost the activity of phosphatase enzymes in rhizosphere soil due to the higher phosphorus uptake [21]. Phosphatases are a class of enzymes that break ester-phosphate bonds, resulting in the release of phosphate (P) that can be taken up by plants or microorganisms [22]. Moreover, the activities of phosphatases, including acid and alkaline phosphomonoesterases, are influenced by soil properties, soil organism interactions, plant cover, and leachate inputs [20]. Pseudomonas sp. produces phosphatase that stimulates enzyme synthesis by intact roots, releases inorganic phosphate from organic and complex inorganic materials and plays an essential role in the phosphorus cycle [23]. It also solubilises organic and inorganic phosphates, thereby supporting plant growth [24].

Proper management of the invasive species such as Chromolaena will depend on a precise evaluation of all stages of the invasion process in natural ecosystems [25]. Furthermore, more studies are necessary to evaluate the plant’s impact on below-ground biodiversity and its ecological ramifications on restoration activities in invaded ecosystems. Although previous studies have focused on the plant’s general effect on soil chemical and physical properties, more attention needs to be given to the soil and microbial interaction within the rhizosphere to establish the plant’s complete impact [26]. Finally, there is a need for more data on the allelopathic potential of C. odorata at different degrees of invasion and their effects on soil microbial communities, phosphatase activities during invasion, as noted by [10]. Understanding the effects of C. odorata invasion on soil properties and microbial communities is critical in the development of better and more effective management strategies aimed at mitigating the impacts of invasive species and maintaining the ecological health of the Mount Cameroon region. Hence, this study aimed to assess the impact of C. odorata invasion on soil chemical properties, microbial load and rhizospheric biological activities in the Mount Cameroon Region. The study specifically assessed the effects of different degrees of C. odorata invasion on soil chemical properties, soil microbial load, and phosphatase activities. It also analysed the secondary metabolites released to rhizospheric soils at different degrees of invasion.

2. Materials and methods

2.1 Site description

The Mount Cameroon Region (MCR) is found in the Southwest region of Cameroon and covers a surface area of 5695.5 km2, stretching from latitude 3°57’ to 4°28’ N and longitude 8058’ to 92°4’ E [27]. The region stretches about 20 m above sea level to a height of 4100 m, called Mount Cameroon, which is situated at 4°13’ N, and 9010’ E. This is the highest point in West and Central Africa. The climate is humid with annual rainfall ranging from 2085 mm to 10000 mm. The mean temperature is 25°C, which decreases by 0.6°C per 100 m ascent [28]. According to the Institute of National Statistics of Cameroon (2010), the population of the Southwest region is 1384300, with about 400,000 people living around the Mount Cameroon National Park area [29]. The region hosts several plantations owned by the Cameroon Development Cooperation (CDC) and small scheme holders.

This study was conducted in Buea, Bakingili, Limbe and Idenau localities around the Mount Cameroon National Park. Field surveys were done in the two major seasons between September 2019 and November 2020 from three land uses; roadsides, farmlands and forests. Accessibility, tourism, anthropogenic activities, historical facts and safety were paramount in site selection. The study investigated an invasive plant species, regarded as a weed, in publicly accessible areas of the Mount Cameroon region through non-invasive observations and experiments. As it did not involve environmental manipulation or specimen collection for commercial purposes and aimed to enhance ecological understanding and management, no formal permits were necessary under local regulations.

2.2. Experimental design

The modified Whittaker method [30] was used to lay 120 permanent plots of size 20x50 m, with 10 plots per land use (roadside, farmland and forest) and 30 per site. Along the inside border, subplots of size 2x5 m were placed systematically in alternate corners and a 5 x 20 m subplot was placed at the centre. All plots with C. odorata were tagged and noted. In April 2022, rhizospheric soil samples were collected at different degrees of invasion from the four sample areas using slightly modified methods [31]. Each sample area was divided into four sites based on the degree of C. odorata invasion, using coverage of the species within each subplot as (i) uninvaded (0%, ND), (ii) low degree (<35%, LD), (iii) medium degree (50%, MD) and (iv) high degree (>75%, HD). Forty-eight soil samples were collected at a depth of 5 cm using a soil auger around the root zone of C. odorata from the four study areas at the four different degrees of invasion. The soils were bulked based on the different treatments, air dried, kept in sealed polythene bags and stored at about 10°C. The soil samples were collected from Buea (N 04°7´52.97“/E 09°13´24.27“to N04°12´27.42“/E 09°16´20.31“) and altitude 781–971 m above.sea level), Limbe (N 03°35´59.59“/E09°15´14.28“to N04°2´10.25“/E09°5´53.25“) and altitude 63–181 m above sea level), Bakingili (N 04°4´11.89“/E 09°2´11.93”to N 04°3´3.56.99“/E 09°1´50.77“) and altitude 9–24 m above sea level and Idenau (N04°14´21.82“/E08°59´45.91”to N 04°12´13.32“/E08°59´53.95“) and altitude 9–52 m above sea level. All soil samples were collected by purposive random sampling, targeting the soils around the root zone and were homogenised based on the degree of invasion and study area (4 study areas x 4 degrees of invasion), resulting in sixteen treatments, which were taken to the laboratory for analysis after sieving with a 2 mm sieve.

2.3. Soil chemical properties

Standard methods were used to analyse soil chemical properties, including pH, moisture %, organic matter, organic C, N, Mn, P, Fe, K, Ca and Mg. The pH was measured using the Thermo-Russell pH meter following the method of Black [32], where 10 g of 2 mm soil samples were weighed into beakers, 25 mL of KCl and distilled water were added, and a soil solution was obtained. The solution was stirred and left overnight, and the pH was measured the following day by dipping the calibrated electrode into the sample. Total nitrogen was determined by colourimetry from absorbance ƛ = 650nm using a spectrophotometer. Soil samples were digested at 370°C with concentrated H2SO4 in the presence of sodium sulphate/selenium catalyst (Kjeldal method) and absorbance was used to determine total nitrogen against a standard solution [33]. Organic carbon was determined by the Walkley-Black method, where the organic carbon in the soil was oxidised with K2Cr2O3 and concentrated H2SO4 and the colourimetric readings were compared with the blank (sucrose and water) [32]. Available phosphorus in the soil was determined colourimetrically using the ammonium molybdate blue colouration method. Mg and other bases (Ca, K and Na) were extracted using ammonium acetate and determined colourimetrically on a spectrophotometer using the "Titan yellow method". The concentrations of Mn, Fe, Na+, K+ and Ca2+ were determined using the Gallenkamp flame photometer by way of Atomic Emission Spectrometers, involving the thermal excitation of free atoms.

2.4 Microbial load

2.4.1 Bacterial count

To obtain the bacterial count of soil samples, one gram of soil sample was mixed with 10mL of distilled water and serially diluted nine times (10−1 to 10−9) by adding sterile distilled water to each test tube, homogenising the preparations at each step. From the preparations, 1 mL of soil sample was mixed with 9 mL of sterile distilled water to make 9-fold serial dilutions of each preparation, and the serial dilutions were made up to 109 dilutions. A volume of 0.1 mL from the seventh (107), eighth (108), and ninth (109) dilutions were each inoculated in duplicate on a nutrient agar plate using the spread plate technique. The inoculated plates were incubated at a temperature of 37˚C for 24 hours. The same serial dilutions were made for other soil samples and they were also incubated at the same temperature and time. After incubation, the bacterial colonies formed on the nutrient agar media were counted and recorded, and the plates were labelled with the dilution number. The total number of bacteria per mL of the original soil sample was calculated by multiplying the number of colonies counted by the dilution factor (Eq 1) [34]. To calculate the colony-forming units (CFU) of bacteria per gram of soil, the number of colonies was multiplied by the reciprocal of the dilution factor (Eq 2).

TotalnumberofbacteriapermL=numberofcoloniescounted×dilutionfactor (1)
CFU/g=coloniesnumber×104 (2)

2.4.1.1. Bacteria culture, phenotypic and biochemical characteristics. The working space was cleaned and disinfected with 75% alcohol. Using a balance, 1 g of soil sample was weighed and added to a test tube containing 10 mL of sterile 0.9% NaCl. The test tube was shaken thoroughly to separate the bacteria from the soil particles. Using a micropipette and a sterile tip, 1000μL of the soil solution was transferred to the tube labelled 100 dilutions. It was vortexed for 30 seconds to mix the bacterial cells into the saline thoroughly. This was followed by 10−1, 10−2 and 10−3 serial dilutions. This procedure was done for all 4 samples. Nutrient agar was prepared by measuring 14.0 grams into 500ml of water and autoclaved at 121°C and at 15 lbs pressure per sq. in. for 15 mins. The soil sample dilutions were poured into sterile petri dishes and labelled. The agar was removed from the autoclave and allowed to cool in a water bath set at 50°C, then poured into the petri dishes containing the samples and allowed to solidify by the pour plate technique. The petri dishes were incubated at 37°C for 24 hours, after which the petri dishes were removed from the incubator, and the phenotypic characteristics were recorded. Catalase test was carried out by scraping a bacterial colony from the agar on a slide, 1 drop of hydrogen peroxide was added and results were recorded.

Gram staining was carried out using a clean, grease-free slide. A smear of suspension was placed on the clean slide with a loopful of samples. The slide was air-dried and heat-fixed. Crystal violet was added and kept for a minute and rinsed with distilled water. It was flooded with the gram’s iodine for 1 minute, washed with 95% alcohol for 20 seconds and rinsed with distilled water. Safranin dye was added for 1 minute and washed with distilled water. The preparation was air-dried blotted dry and observed under the microscope.

2.4.2. Fungal count and culturing

The workspace was cleaned and disinfected with 75% alcohol. Potato dextrose agar (PDA) was prepared by weighing 5 g of agar into 100 mL of distilled water in a 150ml conical flask. The prepared agar was autoclaved at 121°C and at 15 lbs pressure per sq.in. for 15 mins and serial dilutions were made for the 4 soil samples. The dilutions 10−3 to 10−5 were used. To calculate the colony-forming units (CFU) of fungus per gram of soil sample, the number of colonies was multiplied by the reciprocal of the dilution. The CFU/g was calculated as in Eq 2

The soil sample was measured in a 10 mL graduated cylinder and 1mL of the sample was introduced into sterile petri dishes and labelled. The agar was removed from the autoclave and allowed to cool. It was poured into the petri dishes containing the sample and left to solidify. The culture was kept in a cool, moist area for two weeks for fungal growth [35]. After two weeks the phenotypic characteristics were recorded and microscopy was done by putting a fungal sample of on the slide and stained with methylene blue then viewed under the microscope.

2.4.2.1. Determination of arbuscular mycorrhizal colonisation. Triplicate samples of fine roots of C. odorata were collected from each degree of invasion and each site, placed in sealed bags and promptly transported to the laboratory. Assessment of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) root colonization was conducted according to [36]. Segments of root samples measuring 1–2 cm were placed in a 5% KOH solution for 24 hours at room temperature, rinsed three times with water on a fine sieve, acidified in 10% HCl (v/v) for 15 minutes and stained with 0.01% (w/v) fuchsine acid for 24 hours at room temperature. Random root segments of stained samples were selected and three replicates of 10 roots per slide were assessed for the presence of AMF structures (vesicles, arbuscules and hyphae) using an optical microscope (Biological compound microscope with replaceable LED light, OMAX 40X-2500X Trinocular, Germany). The mycorrhizal frequency (F %) was obtained as the ratio of colonised root fragments to the total number of observed root fragments.

2.5. Determination of phosphatase activities

The method for quantifying rhizosphere acid phosphatase activity followed [36]. Five plants were randomly selected at each invasion degree for acid phosphatase activity assessment. A spade was used to dig approximately 5 cm around each plant at a depth of 20 cm. One gram of root-adhering soil was collected from each plant and pooled to create a composite sample of 5 g. A microcentrifuge tube was filled with 1 g of the composite sample, to which 0.5 mL of 100 mM phosphate buffer was added, followed by 10 mM of P-nitrophenyl phosphate (p-NPP) in 100 μL solution. The final reaction mixture volume was adjusted to 1 mL with distilled water and the tube was vortexed for 2 minutes at room temperature and incubated at 37°C for 1 hr with shaking (100 rpm). After incubation, the samples were centrifuged at 10,000 rpm for 5 min, and the clear supernatants were transferred to clean test tubes and treated with 2 mL 1 M NaOH. The resulting yellow-coloured filtrate was analysed using a colourimeter (Klett colourimeter, Clinical model, 800–3, 115 VAC) at λ = 430 nm. The concentration of soluble protein in the supernatant was measured using the Bradford reactive procedure [37] and the specific activity of the soil acid phosphatase was estimated in mg h-1 g-1 using the formula:

Proteincontent=(10×C17800) (3)

Where 10 = constant, C = concentration of soluble protein and 17800 is the molecular extension coefficient of phosphatase

2.6. Secondary metabolites in rhizospheric soil (Quantitative Allelochemicals)

2.6.1. Determination of total phenolic content (TPC)

The Folin-Ciocalteu colourimetric method [38] was employed to determine the total phenolic content of the aqueous soil samples. Specifically, 0.2 mL of soil sample was mixed in a test tube with 1.5 mL of Folin-Ciocalteu reagent and incubated for 5 minutes at room temperature. 1.5 mL of a 6% sodium carbonate solution was then added to the mixture, which was re-incubated for 90 minutes at room temperature. A quartz cuvette at 725 nm measured the absorbance of the resulting blue colour. Meanwhile, gallic acid standards were prepared by dissolving 0.75 mg of gallic acid in 5 mL of distilled water. Different volumes (0, 0.1, 0.2 and 0.3) of the gallic acid standard were pipetted into four labelled test tubes and distilled water was added to each to make up the volume to 0.3 mL. A 2.25 mL of Folin-Ciocalteu reagent was added to each test tube, followed by incubation for 5 minutes at room temperature. The mixture was re-incubated for 90 minutes at room temperature after adding 2.25 mL of 6% sodium carbonate solution. A quartz cuvette was used to read the absorbance of the resulting blue colour at 725 nm. This was used to plot a standard curve from which the total phenolic content of the samples was estimated. The total phenolic content of the samples was expressed as μgGAE/g soil sample (Fig 1).

Fig 1. Calibration curve of gallic acid in the determination of Phenolic content of samples.

Fig 1

2.6.2. Total flavonoid content

Specifically, 0.15 g of soil sample was homogenised with 10 mL of an extraction solvent containing methanol, distilled water, and acetic acid (in a 14:5:1 v/v ratio). The mixture was filtered using Whatman No. 1 filter paper. 0.2 mL of the sample solution was then mixed with 1.8 mL of distilled water and 1 mL of aluminium chloride reagent consisting of 133 mg of aluminium chloride crystals and 400 mg of sodium acetate dissolved in 100 mL of the extraction solvent. The resulting mixture was vortexed and the absorbance was read at 430 nm against a blank. The amount of flavonoids was calculated using a standard solution of rutin (0.1 mg/mL) and the results were expressed in milligrams of Quercetin per gram of soil sample (Fig 2).

Fig 2. Calibration curve of rutin in the determination of flavonoid content of samples.

Fig 2

2.6.3. Tannin content

To determine the tannin content in the soil samples, the spectrophotometric method involving acidified vanillin was employed. One gram of each soil sample was mixed with 15 mL of acetone (10% acetic acid) and stirred for 15 minutes before filtering and diluting 20 times with distilled water. 1 mL of the diluted mixture was then added to each test tube wrapped with aluminium foil to exclude light. Then, 3 mL of a freshly prepared solution of 4% vanillin in ethanol (w/v) was added, and the mixture was stirred. Following this, 1 mL of concentrated HCl was added to each tube and the solution was kept at room temperature for 15 minutes before reading the absorbance at 500 nm against a blank. The amount of tannins was determined using a standard solution of tannic acid (5 mg/mL) and the results were expressed in milligrams of tannic acid per gram of soil sample (Fig 3).

Fig 3. Calibration curve of tannic acid for determination of total tannins.

Fig 3

2.6.4. Saponin content

The method used in this assay was based on the oxidation of triterpene saponins using vanillin, with strong sulphuric acid as the oxidising agent to break apart the aglycone from the complex saponin molecule. The estimated total saponin content in the soil samples, was by the method described by [39], which involved reacting the saponins with a sulphuric acid-vanillin reagent. Specifically, 0.5 mL of the sample was added to a Falcon tube containing 0.5 mL of vanillin (8% w/v) and 4.0 mL of sulphuric acid (72% w/v). The mixture was incubated at 60°C for 15 minutes in a water bath and later cooled in an ice bath for 10 minutes. The absorbance of the sample was read at 560 nm, using aescin as a reference standard. The total saponin content in mg/g of soil sample was estimated using the calibration curve for aescin (Fig 4).

Fig 4. Calibration curve of vanillin in the determination of saponin content of samples.

Fig 4

2.7. Data analysis

All data sets were analysed using the statistical software package IBM SPSS Statistics 25 for Windows. The dependent variables were subjected to univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA, P<0.05) to test the effect of treatments as categorical predictors. Significantly means were separated by the Posthoc Tukey Multiple Range test (P<0.05).

3. Results

3.1. Rhizospheric soil chemical properties

Soil P concentration ranged from 66.38–107.47 mg/kg with the highest concentration recorded under low degree invasion and the highest recorded under medium degree invasion. Sites that had a low degree invasion therefore accounted for a 38. 1% increased P concentration, as compared to the uninvaded sites which were significantly different (P<0.05) across the various degrees of invasion. No significant increase was recorded in the P concentration at the uninvaded, low degree and high degree invasion sites (Table 1). The highest (3627.79 mg/kg) soil K concentration was recorded under low degree invasion by C. odorata and the lowest (2722.03 mg/kg) was recorded under high invasion, accounting for a 25% increase in K concentration, which differed significantly (P<0.05) across the various degrees of invasion. The K content for the uninvaded and that for the high invasion was statistically similar. The same observation was made for the low degree and medium degree invasion sites (Table 1). The calcium content ranged from 222.57 (low degree invasion)– 286.50 mg/kg (uninvaded) which significantly differed (P<0.05) across the various invasion degrees. However, the calcium concentration at low degree invasion was statistically similar to medium degree and that for high degree invasion was similar to the uninvaded sites (Table 1). The low degree invasion sites by C. odorata significantly increased (P<0.05) the Mg concentration, with a 57.25% increase as compared to the uninvaded sites which recorded the lowest concentration of 53.58 mg/kg. The highest Fe concentration (3728.20 mg/kg) was recorded on the uninvaded sites by C. odorata while the lowest (1671.41 mg/kg) was recorded under high degree invasion by C. odorata. Therefore, the uninvaded sites increased the Fe content by 55.2% compared to the high degree invasion (Table 1). The different levels of invasion by C. odorata did not significantly affect the rhizospheric Mn concentration.

Table 1. Chemical properties (mineral salts) of soil under different degrees of C. odorata invasion.

Invasion Degree Phosphorus (mg/kg) Potassium (mg/kg) Calcium (mg/kg) Magnesium (mg/kg) Iron (mg/kg) Manganese (mg/kg)
Uninvaded 66.57 ± 7.64b 2834.20 ± 135.49b 286.50 ± 69.96a 53.58 ± 22.45c 3728.20 ± 648.59a 0.23 ± 0.03a
Low degree 66.38 ± 10.22b 3627.79 ± 153.33a 222.00 ± 23.58b 125.34 ± 12.95a 2626.15 ± 524.05b 0.24 ± 0.01a
Medium degree 107.47 ± 14.88a 3412.12 ± 362.23a 224.57 ± 17.84b 94.01 ± 33.88b 3020.20 ± 137.37b 0.25 ± 0.02a
High degree 71.76 ± 12.14b 2722.03 ± 137.88b 254.95 ± 12.11ab 100.07 ± 12.03ab 1671.41 ± 112.77c 0.24 ± 0.01a

The values in the table are means and standard deviations of the four areas with the same degree of C. odorata invasion. Values with different letters in a column indicate significant differences (P<0.05). Units are given in mg/kg of sample.

The high degree invasion by C. odorata increased the organic carbon concentration by 29.8%, as compared to the uninvaded, which ranged from 3.36 (uninvaded)– 5.45% (high degree) and differed significantly (P<0.05) from each other. The soil organic carbon concentration for the low degree invasion sites was statistically similar to the medium degree and the high degree invasion sites (Fig 5). The nitrogen concentration ranged from 0.17 (low degree)– 0.28% (high degree). The sites with high degree of invasion by C. odorata significantly increased the nitrogen concentration by 39.3% compared to the less invaded sites. The nitrogen concentration for the uninvaded sites was statistically similar to the sites that had a low degree of invasion by C. odorata and that for the medium degree of invasion was statistically similar to the sites invaded at high degree by C. odorata. (Fig 5). The highest organic matter concentration (9.19%) was recorded in sites that were highly invaded by C. odorata and the lowest concentration (5.82%) was recorded in the uninvaded sites. Therefore, high degree invasion by C. odorata increased the organic matter concentration by 36.7%. The different levels of invasion by C. odorata did not significantly affect the rhizospheric soil pH. The same observation was made for the moisture content (Fig 5).

Fig 5. Effects of different degrees of C. odorata invasion on rhizospheric soil organic carbon concentration, nitrogen concentration, organic matter concentrations, pH and moisture content.

Fig 5

Mean values with different indicate significant differences (P<0.05).

3.2. Bacterial and fungal load

Bacterial colonies were present in rhizospheric soils of all the different invasion situations of C. odorata, with counts ranging from 46 × 104 CFU/g at uninvaded soil samples to 67 × 104 CFU/g in high degree invaded soils. The invasion of C. odorata however did not have a significant difference on the bacterial count of the rhizospheric soil samples at different invasion degrees (Fig 6A). Fungal count ranged from 103 CFU/g in uninvaded soils to 3x104 CFU/g in high-degree invaded soils. The total fungal count varied with the degree of invasion and a high degree of invasion significantly increased the fungal load in the rhizospheric soil (P<0.05) with the high degree of invasion sites by C. odorata accounting for a 96.4% increase, as compared to the uninvaded sites (Fig 6B).

Fig 6.

Fig 6

Effects of different situations of C. odorata invasion on bacterial load (a) and total fungal count (b) in rhizospheric soil samples. Mean values with different indicate significant differences (P<0.05).

Bacterial shapes were mainly round, filamentous and irregular. The form was circular, some with rhizoids and some irregular with entire, undulate, or lobate margins. The colour of the colonies was cream in uninvaded soil samples and white in all degrees of invasion. All samples tested positive for the catalase and gram tests (Table 2).

Table 2. Different bacterial colonies, their phenotypic and biochemical characterisations, shapes under the microscope and types present in rhizospheric soils at different degrees of C. odorata invasion.

Invasion situation No of colonies Shapes under the microscope Catalase test Gram test Types of Bacteria
Uninvaded 2 Cocci in clusters and chains
Streptobacillus in chains
Positive Purple Staphylococcus
Corynebacterium
Low degree 3 Cocci in chains and clusters
Streptobacilli in pairs and chains
Cocci bacilli in pairs and clusters
Positive Purple Staphylococcus
Corynebacterium
Cocci bacillus
Medium degree 1 Spore forming rods Positive Purple Bacillus
High degree 2 Spore-forming rods in chains
Cocci bacilli in clusters, pairs and single
Positive Purple Bacillus
Cocci bacillus

These various bacterial shapes were not strongly distributed based on invasion degree, meanwhile, the main types observed under the microscope were Staphylococcus, Corynebacterium, Bacillus and Cocci bacillus. Based on phenotypic characteristics, samples from all degrees of invasion had growth of fungi that spread, with very raised elevation, white hyphae, black spores, filamentous forms and translucent opacity. Under the microscope, all cultures had sexual and asexual spores, non-septate hyphae, cell walls, rhizoids, and mycelia and were mould-type. All degrees of invasion had the growth of Rhizopus nigricans fungi.

3.3. Mycorrhizal colonization

The root colonization of C. odorata by mycorrhizal ranged from 23.33 to 50.00%, with the highest Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal (AMF) colonization recorded in root samples from low-degree invasion and the lowest in samples from high-degree invasion. Root colonization by AMF varied significantly (P<0.05), with the degree of invasion (F = 5.79), with low-degree invasion resulting in a significant increase in root colonization (Fig 7).

Fig 7. Effect of different degrees of invasion on the arbuscular mycorrhiza root colonization (%) of C. odorata.

Fig 7

Data (Mean ± SD) with different letters are significantly different (Tukey’s HSD,P<0.05).

3.4. Acid phosphatase activities

The acid phosphatase activity in the rhizosphere of C. odorata ranged from 0.8952 (medium degree invaded sites) to 0.6857 mmol h-1 kg-1 (high degree invaded sites) which differed significantly from each other (P<0.05). The medium degree invaded sites increased the acid phosphatase activity by 30.5% compared to the high degree invaded sites. Also, the acid phosphatase activity of the uninvaded sites was statistically comparable to the medium degree invasion and both invasion degrees differed significantly from the low degree invasion sites (Fig 8).

Fig 8. Effect of different degrees of invasion on the acid phosphatase activity (mmol/h/kg) in the rhizosphere of C. odorata.

Fig 8

Data (Mean ± SD) with different letters are significantly different.

3.5. Correlation between AMF root colonization and acid phosphatase activity of C. odorata at different degrees of invasion

There was a positive correlation (r = 0.69, P<0.05) between Arbuscular mycorrhiza root colonization and acid phosphatase activity in the rhizospheric soil of C. odorata. The rhizospheric soils with increased mycorrhiza root colonization at varying degrees of invasion had higher acid phosphatase activity (Fig 9).

Fig 9. Correlation between acid phosphatase activities in the rhizosphere of C. odorata and arbuscular mycorrhizal root colonization at different degrees of invasion.

Fig 9

3.6. Secondary metabolites

Flavonoids concentration ranged from 0 (high degree invasion)– 55.63 Rutin/g (uninvaded sites). High degree invaded sites reduced the flavonoids concentration by 100% as compared to the uninvaded sites which was significantly different (P<0.05) across the various degrees of invasion. The highest (31.98 mg/g) saponins concentration was recorded in the uninvaded sites and the lowest (7.88 mg/g) was observed under high degree invasion. The same trend was recorded in the tannin concentration where the high invaded sites by C. odorata reduced the tannins concentration by 75.4%, which differed significantly (P<0.05) across the various degrees of invasion. The tannins concentration ranged from 20.16 (high degree invasion)– 32.66 mg/TAE/g (uninvaded). The high invaded sites by C. odorata reduced tannins concentration by 38.3% which differed significantly (P<0.05) across all the degrees of invasion. The medium degree of invasion sites recorded a significantly higher concentration of total phenols compared to the other sites, where the lowest was recorded in the sites that were less invaded by C. odorata. Therefore, medium degree invasion accounted for a 57.8% increase in total phenol concentration as compared to the low degree invaded sites (Fig 10).

Fig 10. Concentrations of secondary metabolites in rhizospheric soil samples at different degrees of C. odorata invasion.

Fig 10

Mean values with different letters indicate significant differences (P<0.05).

Significantly, very strong positive correlations were recorded between saponins, flavonoids and tannins in the rhizospheric soil of C. odorata (Table 3). Negative correlations which were not significant were recorded when the total phenolic compounds were correlated with saponins, flavonoids and tannins.

Table 3. Correlation of saponins, flavonoids, tannins and total phenols.

  Saponins Flavonoids Tannins Total Phenols
Saponins 1 .900*** .968*** -0.336
Flavonoids .900*** 1 .909*** -0.312
Tannins .968*** .909*** 1 -0.298
Total Phenols -0.336 -0.312 -0.298 1

Values are significant at

*** = P < 0.00.

4. Discussion

4.1. Response of rhizosphere soil chemical properties to C. odorata invasion gradients

Invasive plants can modify soil chemical properties and microbial communities to establish themselves in new habitats [30,40]. The degree of C. odorata invasion had significant effects on soil chemical properties, which were essential indicators of soil quality for agricultural production and ecosystem maintenance. At the medium degree of invasion, soil P significantly increased, possibly due to high root colonization by AMF at the low degree of invasion. For instance, since AMF enhances phosphorus availability, especially in nutrient poor soils, Ngosong et al. [41] indicated that AMF plays a crucial role in increasing phosphatase activity and eventually P availability in nutrient poor soils. Therefore, the interactive effect of AMF and C. odorata play a crucial role in improving soil fertility. Earlier Studies have also shown that rhizosphere microorganisms such as bacteria and other fungi interacting with AMF did not only increased P availability but also increased P uptake, stimulating root growth, or excreting phytase, which broke down phytate [42]. However, excess soil P can lower P use efficiency and cause environmental risks such as eutrophication of aquatic systems thereby highlighting the need for careful management of plant invasive weed species such as C. odorata that can alter ecosystem and nutrient dynamics [43].

At the high degree of C. odorata invasion, there was a significant drop in soil P, K and Fe, accompanied by an increase in the microbial load of the rhizospheric soil samples. High microbial load can immobilize P, inhibit root growth and reduce plant P availability, leading to a drop in soil P content [3,21]. Phosphorus is essential for photosynthesis, respiration, energy storage and transfer, cell division and seed formation, and promotes early root formation and growth, improving crop quality [44]. Therefore, reduced soil P content caused by C. odorata invasion at low-degree invasion may increase its invasiveness in the area. This is because, the complex relationship between nutrient availability and plant invasiveness reduces nutrient levels creating a condition that favours the invasive species while disfavouring native species in that particular area [45,46]. A drop in the concentration of K in rhizospheric soils can have significant implications for plant growth and water use efficiency. Also, the effects of K in stress tolerance, for instance drought, and overall plant health cannot go unnoticed [47]. These effects may be minimal within a small range but become more pronounced after several decades of C. odorata invasion in the MCR. Potassium plays a crucial role in plant growth as an enzyme activator and helps regulate the plant’s water use by controlling stomatal opening and closing [13,22]. It also maintains the balance of electrical charges at the site of ATP production, promotes the translocation of sugars for plant growth or storage in fruits or roots, is involved in protein synthesis, improves disease resistance, size of grains and seeds and quality of fruits and vegetables [1].

On the other hand, a drop in Fe concentration in rhizospheric soils can affect the activities of key enzymes such as catalase, peroxidase, cytochrome oxidase and the synthesis and maintenance of chlorophyll. Despite this being a pertinent issue, through the production of siderophores, and the release of organic acid anions by microorganisms, plant health especially in nutrient poor soils is maintained [44]. In contrast, a high degree of C. odorata invasion can significantly increase the concentration of soil Ca, which improves carbohydrate transfer and combines with anions, including organic acids, sulphates, and phosphates. This increase can also cause an elevation in soil C, N and organic matter content, which could be attributed to an increase in soil fungal load and a high bacteria count under a high invasion degree. Soil bacteria fix atmospheric nitrogen, increasing the accessible nitrogen pool available to plants in the rhizosphere [12]. Furthermore, the effect of microorganisms in the elevation of soil organic matter generally improves soil structure and fertility as discussed by Coonan et al. [48].

Interestingly, C. odorata invasion did not significantly alter soil pH and moisture content at different degrees of invasion, contrary to some earlier findings on other invasive plants. Though these findings indicated a significant fluctuation in the soil pH and moisture content, the stability of soil moisture level and pH as observed in C. ordorata invaded areas suggests that this invasive species relies more on controlling soil nutrient dynamics than some chemical and physical soil properties such as pH and soil moisture respectively [49]. Alterations in soil pH and moisture facilitate the invasiveness of some species but are detrimental to the activities of microorganisms [49,50]. The mechanisms by which C. odorata invade may thus be different from alteration of soil pH and moisture, requiring further investigations. Presumably the effects of C. odorata invasion on soil chemical properties can have significant implications for plant growth, water use efficiency, and soil quality. It is crucial to continue investigating the mechanisms by which invasive plants modify soils and the implications for ecosystem maintenance, agricultural production and human well-being.

4.2. Dynamics of phosphatase enzyme activity

At a medium degree of invasion, there was a significant increase in acid phosphatase activities, complemented by an increase in soil P content and AMF colonization, which could have been attributed to improved P cycling [51]. This improvement of P cycling emanates from the release of organic acid from plant roots that solubilise other plant nutrients including phosphorus. This often occur to a greater extent in phosphorus deficient soils. Turner and Haygarth [52], reported that other soil properties such as pH, total N, organic P, clay content, microbial count and the amount of organic material present played crucial roles in phosphorus cycling. Furthermore, the interplay of these two complexes, soil chemical properties and phosphatase activity, is critical as some soil chemical properties such as organic matter increase enzyme activities through the enhancement soil microbial activity [53]. Further studies have emphasised the contribution of phosphatase-producing Pseudomonas sp. was also noteworthy in stimulating enzyme synthesis by intact roots and releasing inorganic phosphate from organic moiety and complex inorganic materials, thereby playing an essential role in the phosphorus cycle [16]. These studies have clearly indicated that Pseudomonas sp. can increase phosphorus availability through solubilization and mineralization processes that is fuelled by phosphatase activities in the plant rhizosphere. These bacterial species also played essential roles in phosphorus cycling by solubilizing organic and inorganic phosphates into available forms that support plant growth [17].

According to Wang et al. [13], phosphatase enzymes contributed to the cleavage of organic phosphorus, hence supplying organic phosphorus to soil solution by removing a phosphate group from a protein. Phosphatase ability to liberate phosphorus from organic compounds showcases their importance in nutrient cycling, especially in phosphorus poor soils. Interestingly, acid phosphatase activity was high in all degrees of invasion, suggesting its potential as a fallow crop and for the modification of soil biochemical processes. Furthermore, C. odorata playing the dual role as an invasive species and a potential soil amender highlights the need to carefully manage invasive species in all agricultural systems. Therefore, these finding indicated that C. odorata invasion can have some benefits in terms of soil fertility management, which could be explored further. Overall, understanding the mechanisms and implications of C. odorata invasion on soil processes and plant growth is crucial for addressing the challenges of invasive species management and promoting sustainable agricultural practices.

4.3. Dynamics of bacterial and fungal load in the rhizosphere

At a high degree of invasion, it was observed that C. odorata invasion did not significantly alter bacterial load but increased fungal load. The significant predominance of fungal species could be attributed to its numerous roles in altering soil chemistry as they have the ability to decompose organic matter and recycle plant nutrient in the soil. Furthermore, though the bacterial load was quite stable in this study, the statistical fluctuation in the fungal load could signify dynamics in the nutrient cycling processes [54]. This finding was intriguing, as the abundance and diversity of microorganisms in the soil played essential roles in maintaining soil fertility [54]. Moreover, microorganisms were recognised as potential indicators of some ecological stresses such as heat, moisture, salts, heavy metals, pesticides and pollution [55]. The bacterial count was high in all samples. The presence of gram-positive bacteria that tested positive for catalase activities indicated that a majority of the bacteria were strict aerobes or facultative anaerobes such as Staphylococcus aureus. Sizar et al. [56], revealed that Staphylococcus in the rhizosphere indicated a disruption of the natural microbiome community, leading to an increase in pathogens that caused food poisoning, toxic shock syndrome, septic arthritis, skin infections, scalded skin syndrome, pneumonia, abscesses, osteomyelitis, inflammatory disease, exfoliative toxin and endocarditis. High amounts of this bacterium in rhizospheric soils of C. odorata posed serious human health concerns.

It is, therefore, reasonable to presume that at low degrees of invasion, C. odorata might induce environmental stresses that could cause a significant drop in soil fungal load as suggested by Zhang et al. [57] who indicated most invasive plant species can secrete allelopathic compounds that hinders the growth of certain microorganisms such as fungi and bacteria, leading to reduce microbial abundance and diversity. This observation by Zhang et al. [57] is in line with the findings of this studies that showed a decline in fungal populations at lower invasion levels. This observation was also consistent with earlier findings that had reported altered microbial communities and ecological processes under invasive plant species [1,58]. The disrupted microbial communities and ecological processes could negatively impact soil fertility, plant growth and ecosystem functioning. Understanding the mechanisms and implications of C. odorata invasion on soil microbial communities could aid in developing effective strategies to manage invasive species and promote sustainable agricultural practices. It could also inform the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services.

4.4. C. odorata invasion enhanced Mycorrhizal colonization

It was observed that at a low degree of invasion, mycorrhizal colonization was significantly high, and this correlated positively with enzyme phosphatase activities suggesting that C. odorata facilitated AMF association with this invasive species thereby enhancing nutrient availability [41]. This finding was noteworthy, given that several studies indicated that soil microorganisms and mycorrhizal associations played crucial roles in improving soil fertility through their activities that involves extension of the root system’s reach by the mycorrhiza arbuscules that proliferates soil aggregates increasing the feeder zone of the plant and allowing greater nutrient absorption especially in nutrient poor soils [12,59]. The symbiotic relationship between plants and mycorrhizal fungi was reported to enhance nutrient uptake and stimulate plant growth, particularly in nutrient-poor soils [8,9]. This suggested that the observed increase in mycorrhizal colonization and phosphatase activities could be attributed to the establishment of mycorrhizal fungi associations in response to the low degree of invasion. This was backed by a positive correlation between mycorrhizal root colonization and phosphatase activity that indicated an active role of AMF in mobilizing the phosphorus that emanates as a result of high phosphatase activity in the plant rhizosphere. The mechanisms and implications of mycorrhizal associations and other soil microbial communities on soil fertility management and plant growth was crucial for addressing the challenges of sustainable agriculture and invasive species management [35,40]. This was clearly discussed by Bagyaraj et al. [59] who suggested that promoting plant and AMF associations can help maintain biodiversity and improve crop productivity.

4.5. C. odorata invasion gradients on the impact of the concentrations of secondary metabolites

Observations from the study indicated that low-degree invasion of C. odorata significantly increased the concentrations of saponins, flavonoids and tannins in the soil samples. This may have been attributed to the different invasion density of C. odorata that could have affected the concentration of these secondary metabolites. Furthermore, the complex relationship between different invasion densities and secondary metabolite concentrations suggests that alien plant species such as C. odorata may be manipulating its ecological vicinity to enhance its competitiveness in a new environment. Kato et al. [60] reported that invasive plant species can produce higher levels of secondary metabolites compared to native species to increase its probability to survive. Though root exudates were shown to impact soil chemistry, microbial populations and soil processes and defended the rhizosphere and root against pathogenic microorganisms [54], the invasion density could have been the key component responsible for the variable concentration of saponins, flavonoids and tannins in the soil. The significant increase in the soil concentration of saponins at low degree invasion suggested that C. odorata had important potential for leaching remediation, microbial remediation and phytoremediation, particularly with regards to heavy metal pollutants such as Cd, Zn, Cu and Pb. The mechanism that leads to phytohormone remediation by saponins involves the ability of saponins to bind to heavy metals and soil organic pollutants [61]. High soil concentrations of saponins can remove hydrophobic organic compounds and heavy metals from contaminated soils and water [62,63].

Additionally, the significantly high concentration of flavonoids recorded at low degree invasion suggested that C. odorata root exudates had antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, anti-cancer, anti-obesity, cardio-protective and neuroprotective activities. Flavonoids are known to protect plants from biotic and abiotic stresses, act as UV filters, provide drought resistance and aid in plant acclimatization [64,65]. Furthermore, the crucial role played by flavonoids in plant defence mechanisms influences not only the health of plants but also the health of soils by promoting microbial communities that enhance nutrient cycling [66]. The increased level of tannins recorded at low degree invasion was most probably linked to allelopathic responses and poor soil quality. At high degree of invasion, there was a significant drop in the concentration of total phenolic compounds from the rhizospheric soils, which most probably increased soil nitrogen and organic matter by reducing the complexation of proteins. This finding is consistent with earlier studies that reported elevated levels of soil nitrogen and organic matter in soils supplied with phenolic compounds, thus providing an insight into the repeated use of C. odorata as a fallow crop in several agroecological ecosystems [67,68].

The positive strong correlation between the secondary metabolites (saponins, flavonoids and tannins) indicated that the different degrees of invasion had a direct effect on the concentration of these metabolites as the increase in the concentration of one of the metabolites under the various invasion degrees led to an increase in another [69]. The strong positive correlations between these metabolites might have indicated a coordinated defence mechanism, where the production of one compound triggered the production of the others [70–72]. Also, the strong positive correlation could have been attributed to the fact that plants responded to the attack by providing certain defence mechanisms that led to the increase in the concentration of one compound as a result of another [73]. Also, it was reported that tannins worked in synergy with saponins to increase their overall protective effects [69,74]. Therefore, the different plant metabolites work hand in hand suggesting a holistic interactive relationship where the presence of one metabolite enhances the synthesis and performance of the other, thereby strengthening the plant defence against threats.

5. Conclusion

The gradient of Chromolaena odorata invasion had varying effects on soil phosphorus, carbon and nitrogen in rhizospheric soils. It also altered soil fungal load and mycorrhizal colonization together with acid phosphatase enzyme activity and secondary metabolites exudates. C. odorata invaded uninvaded areas in mechanisms different from alteration of soil pH and moisture, but an interplay of changes in soil nutrients, microorganisms and release of secondary metabolites. This had varying effects on soil characteristics, with implications for soil quality and ecosystem conservation. These findings demonstrated the significant effects of C. odorata invasion on soil chemical properties, microbial communities, phosphatase activities and secondary metabolites at different gradients of the invasion process. They highlighted the importance of understanding the mechanisms by which invasive species modified soil properties and the impacted on microbial communities and plant growth to inform sustainable land management practices. The results emphasised the interdependence of different components of soil microbiota and the need for further investigation to understand the complex interactions between invasive species and soil micro-organisms. Low-degree invasion resulted in increased secretion of flavonoids, saponins and tannins, which provided insights into invasive species’ potential benefits and drawbacks on the ecosystem and underscored the importance of continuing field investigation. Further work is needed to improve our understanding of the interplay between different degrees of invasion and soil chemical properties, the changes in microbial communities and the quantification of secondary metabolites for possible medicinal and agricultural purposes. Identifying microbial communities, characterizing various secondary metabolites, and monitoring soil changes influenced by C. odorata are crucial for effective ecosystem management. Understanding these ecological dynamics allows for precise and targeted strategies to mitigate the negative impacts of C. odorata, enhancing soil health and promoting microbial biodiversity. By elucidating the interactive effect between C. odorata and soil microbiomes, we can develop precise sustainable management practices that will go a great length to preserve native ecosystems and improve agricultural productivity. This integrated holistic approach will not only address immediate ecological concerns but will also foster long-term resilience against future invasions by invasive plant species.

Supporting information

S1 Data

(XLSX)

pone.0312199.s001.xlsx (18.6KB, xlsx)

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the management bodies of the Agroecology Laboratory, University of Buea, Regional Biocontrol and Applied Microbiology Laboratory of IRAD, Yaoundé and Soil Microbiology Laboratory of the Biotechnology Centre of the University of Yaounde I, Cameroon.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Ehrenfeld JG. Ecosystem consequences of biological invasions. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics. 2010; 41(1): 59–80. 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-102209-144650. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Stewart BS, Russell AH, Philip AS, Mark JW, Wayne D. Impacts of invasive plants on animal behaviour. Ecology letters. 2021; 24(4): 891–907. doi: 10.1111/ele.13687 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Wekhanya MNN. The effect of invasive species Lantana camara on soil nutrients at Ol-Donyo Sabuk National Park, Kenya. Doctoral dissertation, Kenyatta University. 2016. http://repository.must.ac.ke/handle/123456789/449. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Pisula NL, Meiners SJ. Relative allelopathic potential of invasive plant species in a young disturbed woodland. J. Torrey Bot. Soc. 2010; 137(1): 81–87. 10.3159/09-RA-040.1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Perrings C, Dehnen-Schmutz K, Touza J, Williamson M. How to manage biological invasions under globalisation, Trends in Ecology and Evolution. 2005; 20(5): 212–215. 10.1016/j.tree.2005.02.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Ambika SR. Allelopathic plants. 5. Chromolaena odorata (L.) King and Robinson. Allelopathy J. 2002; 9(1):35–41. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Bani G. Status and management of Chromolaena odorata in congo. Proceedings of the fifth international workshop on biological control and management of Chromolaena odorata, ARC-PPRI. 2002; 71–73. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Sankaran KV, Ellison CA, Suresh TA. Major invasive alien weeds in India: biology and control. 1. Weeds–India–Control, Kerala Forest Research Institute, 632–5, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Vaisakh MN, Pandey A. The Invasive Weed with Healing Properties: A Review on Chromolaena Odorata. International Journal of Scientific Studies and Research. 2012; 3(1): 80–83. www.ijpsr.com. [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Wan F, Liu W, Guo J, Qiang S, Li B, Wang J, et al. Invasive mechanism and control strategy of Ageratina adenophora (Sprengel). Science China Life Sciences. 2010; 53(11): 1291–1298. 10.1007/s11427-010-4080-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Kone AW, Ettien FE, Jean TG, Aure´lie NA, Laurenza FE et al. Can the shrub Chromolaena odorata (Asteraceae) be considered as improving soil biology and plant nutrient availability? Agroforest Syst. 2012;85(2):233–245. 10.1007/s10457-012-9497-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.SPREP. Guidelines for invasive species management in the Pacific: a Pacific strategy for managing pests, weeds and other invasive species / compiled by Alan Tye.— Apia, Samoa 20 p.: ill; 29 cm ISBN: 978-982-04-0388-8. 2009. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Waller LP, Allen WJ, Barratt BIP, Condron LM, França FM., Hunt JE et al. Biotic interactions drive ecosystem responses to exotic plant invaders. Science 2020; 368(6494): 967–972. doi: 10.1126/science.aba2225 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Reinhart KO, Callaway RM. Soil biota and invasive plants. New Phytol. 2006; 170(3):445–457. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2006.01715.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Hawkes CV, Belnap J, D’Antonio C, Firestone MK. Arbuscular mycorrhizal assemblages in native plant roots change in the presence of exotic grasses Plant Soil. 2006; 281:369–380. 10.1007/s11104-005-4826-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Batten KM, Kate MS, Erin KE. Soil Microbial Community Associated with an Invasive Grass Differentially Impacts Native Plant Performance. Microb Ecol. 2007; 55(2):220–8. doi: 10.1007/s00248-007-9269-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Liu SC, Wang C, Wang L, Dai Z, et al. Different Degrees of Plant Invasion Significantly Affect the Richness of the Soil Fungal Community. PLoS ONE. 2013; 8(12): e85490. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0085490 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Bongard C. Fungal colonization of the invasive vine Vincetoxicum rossicum and native plants. Plant Ecology, Evolution. 2013; 146(1):45–52. 10.5091/PLECEVO.2013.739. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Sylvia DM, Fuhrmann JJ, Hartel PG, Zuberer DA. Principles and Applications of Soil Microbiology (Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Wang Y, Whalen J.K., Chen X, Cao Y, Huang, Lu C, et al. Mechanisms for altering phosphorus sorption characteristics induced by low molecular weight organic acids. Can. S. Soil Sci. 2016; 96(3):289–298. 10.1139/CJSS-2015-0068. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.George TS, Gregory PJ, Wood M, Read D, Buresh RJ. Phosphatase activity and organic acids in the rhizosphere of potential agroforestry species and maize. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2002; 34(10):1487–1494. 10.1016/S0038-0717(02)00093-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Bhaduri D, Sharmistha P, Purakayastha TJ, Chakraborty K, Yadav RS, Mohd SA. Soil Quality and Plant-Microbe Interactions in the Rhizosphere. © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015 E. Lichtfouse (ed.), Sustainable Agriculture Reviews, Sustainable Agriculture Reviews. 2015; 17, 10.1007/978-3-319-16742-8_9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Rasol N, Reshi ZA. Effect of the fungicidal Moncozed at different application rates on enzyme activities in a silt loam soil of the Kashmir Himalaya, India. Tropical Ecol. 2010; 51(2): 199–205. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Wyszkowska J, Wyszkowski M. Activity of soil dehydrogenase, urease, and acid and alkalin e phosphatases in soil polluted with petroleum. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health. A. 2010; 73(17–18): 1202–1210. 10.1080/15287394.2010.492004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Kus VJ. Invasive Alien Species and their Management Ljubljana, a training course manual, EuroNatur Foundation and Institute Symbiosis. 2021. Available at: https://savaparks.eu/sava-ties-7448. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Chaudhury J, Mandal UK, Sharma KL, Ghosh H, Mandal B. Assessing soil quality under long-term rice-based cropping system. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal. 2005; 36(9):1141–1161. 10.1081/CSS-200056885. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Kah EF, Tchindjang M, Tonye E, Talla T. Combined Supervised Classification methods in Remote Sensing for the Evaluation of forest Dynamics along the slopes of Mount Cameroon. The International Archives of Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Science 37 Part B 8. 2008. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Fraiser PL, Hall JB, Healey JR. Climate of the Mount Cameroon Region, Long and Medium-term rainfall, temperature and sunshine data. SAFS, University of Bongor MCP-LBG, Limbe1- 56 pp. 1998. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.WWF (World Wide Fund for Nature). Central African 2010 fact sheet, Mount Cameroon National Park, panda.Org. In Muambo and Pedro. An application of geographic information systems to model the habitat suitability of Pantroglodyte sellioti in Mount Cameroon National Park in the context of a changing global climate. 2010; 108 (1):63–79. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Stohlgren TJ, Falkner MB, Schell LD. A Modified-Whittaker nested vegetation sampling method. Plant Ecology. 1995; 117(2):113–121. [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Si C, Liu X, Wang C, Wang L, Dai Z, et al. (2013) Different Degrees of Plant Invasion Significantly Affect the Richness of the Soil Fungal Community. PL0S ONE 2013; 8(12): e85490. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0085490 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Black CA. Method of soil analysis. Amer. Soc. Agronomy, Agronomy No 9 part 2, Madison, Wisconsin, 1965. [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Jackson ML. Soil chemical analysis Prentice Hall, New York, 1962.
  • 34.Vaze ND, Park S, Brooks AD, Fridman A, Joshi SG. Involvement of multiple stressors induced by non-terminal plasma-charged aerosols during inactivation of air-borne bacteria. PloS ONE. 2017; 12(2): e017/1434. 10.1371/journal.pone.0171434. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Hanson B, Zhou Y. Bautista EJ, Urch B, Spek M, Silverman F, et al. (2016). Characterisation of the bacterial and fungal microbiome in indoor dust and outdoor air samples a pilot study. Environ Sci Process Impacts. 2016; 18(6): 713–24. 10.1039/c5em00639b. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Begoude DAB, Sarr PS, Mpon TLY, Owona DA, Kapeua MN, Araki S. Composition of Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi associated with cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) cultivars as influenced by chemical fertilization and tillage in Cameroon. Journal of Applied Biosciences. 2016; 98: 9270–9283. [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Van DC, Van der Putten WH, Peters BAM. Plant specific soil-borne diseases contribute to succession in foredune vegetation Nature. 1993; 362(6415):53–56. 10.1038/362053a0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Bradford MM. A rapid and sensitive method for quantification of microorganism quantities of proteins utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Analytical Biochemistry. 1976; 72 (1–2):248–254. 10.1016/0003-2697(76)90527-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Chlopicka J, Pawel P, Shela G, Aneta J, Pawel Z. Total Phenolic and Flavonoid content, antioxidant activity and sensory evaluation of Pseudocereal breads. LWT-Food Science and Technology. 2012; 46(2):548–555. 10.1016/j.lwt.2011.11.009. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Yun-Fang T, Wu H, Zhu L. A two-stage estimation method for Random Coefficient Equation Models with Application to Longitudinal HIV Dynamic Data. Statistica Sinica. 2011; 21(3): 1145–1170. 10.5705/ss.2009.156. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Ngosong C, Tatah BN, Olougou MNE, Suh C, Nkongho RN, Ngone MA, et al. Inoculating plant growth-promoting bacteria and arbuscular mycorrhiza fungi modulates rhizosphere acid phosphatase and nodulation activities and enhance the productivity of soybean (Glycine max). Frontiers in Plant Science. 2022; 13: 934339. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2022.934339 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Zubek S, Marta LM, Janusz B, Anna M, Stefa nowicz, MN, Pawel K. Invasive plants affect arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi abundance and species richness as well as the perfo.rmance of native plants grown in invaded soils. Biol Fertil Soils. Springer. 2016; 52(6):879–893 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00374-016-1127-3. [Google Scholar]
  • 43.George TS, Simpson RJ, Gregory PJ, Richardson AE. Differential interaction of Aspergillus niger and Peniophora lycii phytases with soil particles affects the hydrolysis of inositol phosphates. Soil Biology & Biochemistry. 2007; 39(3):793–803. 10.1016/j.soilbio.2006.09.029. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Zhang T, Page T, Heathwaite L, Beven K, Oliver D, Haygarth P. Estimating phosphorus delivery with its mitigation measures from soil to stream using fuzzy rules. Soil Use and Management. 2013; 29(s1):187–198. 10.1111/j.1475-2743.2012.00433.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Knauf AE, Litton CM, Cole RJ, Sparks JP, Giardina CP, Gerow KG, et al. Nutrient-use strategy and not competition determines native and invasive species response to changes in soil nutrient availability. Journal of Ecology. 2021; 109(3): 1234–1245. [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Broadbent A, Stevens CJ, Peltzer DA, et al. Belowground competition drives invasive plant impact on native species regardless of nitrogen availability. Oecologia. 2018; 186: 577–587. doi: 10.1007/s00442-017-4039-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Hossen MS. Potassium in plants: Growth regulation, signaling, and environmental stress tolerance. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 2022; 172: 56–69. doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2022.01.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Coonan EC, Kirkby CA, Kirkegaard JA, Amidy MR, Strong CL, Richardson AE. Microorganisms and nutrient stoichiometry as mediators of soil organic matter dynamics. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems. 2020; 117: 273–298. doi: 10.1007/s10705-020-10076-8 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Mullins G., Phosphorus Agriculture and the Environment. Virginia Cooperative Extension, Virginia Tech, Publication 424–029 www.ext.vt.edu, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Neilands JB. Siderophores of bacteria and fungi. Microbiological Sciences. 1984; 1: 9–14. . [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Yelenik SG, Stock WD, Richardson DM. Ecosystem level impacts of invasive Acacia saligna in the South African Fynbos. Restor. Ecol. 2004;12(1):44–51. 10.1111/j.1061-2971.2004.00289.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Kuebbing SE, Classen AT, Simberloff D. Two co-occurring invasive woody shrubs alter soil properties and promote subdominant invasive species. J Appl Ecol. 2014; 51:124–133 10.1111/1365-2664.12161. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Makoi J, Ndakidemi P (2008) Selected soil enzymes: examples of their potential roles in the ecosystem. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 7(3):181–191. doi: 10.5897/AJB07.590 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Zhang S, Hu W, Xu Y, Zhong H, Kong Z, Wu L. Linking bacterial and fungal assemblages to soil nutrient cycling within different aggregate sizes in agroecosystem. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2022; 13: 1038536. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2022.1038536 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Turner B, Haygarth P. Phosphatase activity in temperate pasture soils: potential regulation of labile organic phosphorous turnover by phosphodiesterase activity. Sci Total Environ. 2005; 344(1–3):27–36. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2005.02.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Nielsen JS, Joner EJ, Declerck S, Olsson S, Jacobsen I. Phospho-imaging as a tool for visualisation and non-invasive measurement of P transport dynamics in arbuscular mycorrhiza. New Phytol. 2002; 154(2):809–819. 10.1046/j.1469-8137.2002.00412.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Bhaduri D, Sharmistha P, Purakayastha TJ, Chakraborty K et al. Soil Quality and Plant-Microbe Interactions in the Rhizosphere. Sustainable Agriculture Reviews. 2015; 17. 10.1007/978-3-319-16742-8_9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Zhang M, Li W, Liu W, Zheng Y. Rhizosphere microbial community construction during the latitudinal spread of the invader Chromolaena odorata. BMC Microbiology. 2024; 24: 294. doi: 10.1186/s12866-024-03450-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Sizar O, Leslie SW, Unakal CG. Gram-Positive Bacteria. 2023 May 30. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024. Jan. . [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Bagyaraj DJ, Sridhar KR, Revanna A. Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi Influence Crop Productivity, Plant Diversity, and Ecosystem Services. In Fungal Diversity, Ecology, and Control Management. 2022; (pp. 345–362). Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-981-16-8877-5_16 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Kato-Noguchi H, Kato M. Evolution of the Secondary Metabolites in Invasive Plant Species Chromolaena odorata for the Defense and Allelopathic Functions. Plants. 2023; 12(3): 521. doi: 10.3390/plants12030521 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Zhang Y, Yang C, Liu S, Xie Z, Chang H, Wu T. Phytohormones-mediated strategies for mitigation of heavy metals toxicity in plants focused on sustainable production. Plant Cell Reports. 2024; 43: 99. doi: 10.1007/s00299-024-03189-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Kourtev PS, Ehrenfeld JG, Haggblom M. Exotic plant species alter the microbial community structure and function in the soil Ecology. 2002; 83:3152–3166. 10.2307/3071850. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Barbosa MAM, Da Silva L, Viana MDG, Coelho NNK, et al. Root contribution to water relations and shoot in two contrasting Vigna unguiculata cultivars subjected to water deficit and inoculation. Romanian Agricultural Research. 2013;30: 155–162. www.incda-fundulea.ro. [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Drishty K. Rhizosphere: Hotspot of Soil- Microbes-Plant Interaction. Just Agriculture. 2022; 2(12): e-ISSN: 2582-8223. 10.1007/978-981-13-7264-3_2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Zhifeng L, Zhigang Li, Itua Z, Guangming Z, Yunshan L, Mina C et al. Recent advances in the environmental applications of biosurfactant saponins. Journal of environmental chemical engineering. 2017; 5(6):6030–6038. 10.1016/j.jece.2017.11.021. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Wang L, Chen M, Lam PY, Dini-Andreote F, Dai L, Wei Z. Multifaceted roles of flavonoids mediating plant-microbe interactions. Microbiome. 2022; 10: 233. doi: 10.1186/s40168-022-01420-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Xiao-Lan Y, Yong H. Tea saponins: effective natural surfactants beneficial for soil remediation from preparation to application. RSC advances. 2018;8(43):24312–24321. doi: 10.1039/c8ra02859a [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Chaves N, Sosa T, Escudero JC. Plant growth inhibiting flavonoids in exudates of Cistus ladanifer and in associated soil. Journal of Chemical Ecology. 2001; 27(3): 623–631. 10.1023/a:1010388905923. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Amalesh S, Gouranga D, Sanjoy KD. Roles of flavonoids in plants. Carbon. 2011;100 (6):12–35. [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Djurdjevic L, Pavle P, Mitrovic M. The effect of phenolic compounds on soil properties. J-Soil phenols ER, 31–62, 2009. https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_ibiss_3744. [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Misra D, Writuparma D, Gaurave J, Puja R. Interactions and regulatory functions of phenolics in soil-plant-climate Nexus. Agronomy. 2023; 13:280. 10.13140/RG.2.2.14693.06881. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Daben J, Dashak D, Lohdip A. Quantitative evaluation of alkaloids, flavonoids, saponins, steroids and tannins contents from the successive solvent extracts of Crinum zeylanicum Bulb. Journal of Chemical Society of Nigeria. 2021; 46(5). 10.46602/jcsn.v46i5.666. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Neumann N, Honke M, Povydysh M, Guenther S, Schulze C. Evaluating Tannins and Flavonoids from Traditionally Used Medicinal Plants with Biofilm Inhibitory Effects against MRGN E. coli. Molecules. 2022; 27: 2284. 10.3390/molecules27072284. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Md Mahmudul Hasan

24 Jul 2024

PONE-D-24-20731Rhizospheric Soil Physicochemical Properties and Microbial Response to a Gradient of Chromolaena odorata Invasion in the Mount Cameroon RegionPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Ndam,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Sep 07 2024 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Md. Mahmudul Hasan, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements:

1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf.

2. In your Methods section, please provide additional information regarding the permits you obtained for the work. Please ensure you have included the full name of the authority that approved the field site access and, if no permits were required, a brief statement explaining why.

3. We suggest you thoroughly copyedit your manuscript for language usage, spelling, and grammar. If you do not know anyone who can help you do this, you may wish to consider employing a professional scientific editing service. 

The American Journal Experts (AJE) (https://www.aje.com/) is one such service that has extensive experience helping authors meet PLOS guidelines and can provide language editing, translation, manuscript formatting, and figure formatting to ensure your manuscript meets our submission guidelines. Please note that having the manuscript copyedited by AJE or any other editing services does not guarantee selection for peer review or acceptance for publication. 

Upon resubmission, please provide the following:

The name of the colleague or the details of the professional service that edited your manuscript

A copy of your manuscript showing your changes by either highlighting them or using track changes (uploaded as a *supporting information* file)

A clean copy of the edited manuscript (uploaded as the new *manuscript* file).

4. We note that your Data Availability Statement is currently as follows: [All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files]

Please confirm at this time whether or not your submission contains all raw data required to replicate the results of your study. Authors must share the “minimal data set” for their submission. PLOS defines the minimal data set to consist of the data required to replicate all study findings reported in the article, as well as related metadata and methods (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-minimal-data-set-definition).

For example, authors should submit the following data:

- The values behind the means, standard deviations and other measures reported;

- The values used to build graphs;

- The points extracted from images for analysis.

Authors do not need to submit their entire data set if only a portion of the data was used in the reported study.

If your submission does not contain these data, please either upload them as Supporting Information files or deposit them to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of recommended repositories, please see https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/recommended-repositories.

If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially sensitive information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent. If data are owned by a third party, please indicate how others may request data access.

5. We note that Figure(s) 2 and 10 in your submission contain copyrighted images. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

a. You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure(s) 2 and 10  to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license. 

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an ""Other"" file with your submission. 

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

b. If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: No

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The author kept saying physicochemical properties of rhizospheric soil in the manuscript but only chemical properties were determined and of course biochemical and microbiological properties of the rhizosphere soil. For your manuscript to qualify as "physicochemical", physical properties of soil have to be included. Such properties as bulk density, infiltration, particle density, mean weight diameter, porosity, aggregate stability, particle size distributions e.t.c. have to be included. I suggest therefore, the word "Physicochemical" should not be used as suggested in the reviewed manuscript uploaded herewith.

Reviewer #2: Review comments: PONE-D-24-20731

This study determined the effects of gradient densities of plant invasion on the soil properties, enzyme activities and population differences of microbial communities in field. The study showed many data of soil properties, enzyme activities, secondary metabolites and the bacterial and fungal population densities. These data analyzed in this manuscript are interesting. However, there were several shortcomings of the manuscript written in this style. I suggest this manuscript a major revision before publication.

General comments:

Introduction: paragraph 4 and 5 (line 71-88) could be rewritten before paragraph 2 (……Invasive species release root exudates……).

Methods

Line 136 to 138, soil samples collected with 5 cm of C. odorata rhizosphere from the four study areas. I think these samples are bulk soils but not rhizosphere soils (mm). Please check and improve.

Line 256, The phenolic components and flavonoids from soils collected were determined. Therefore, these could not be referred as root exudates in this study. Different invasion density of this plant could affect the composition contents of soil secondary metabolites. But whether these secondary metabolites were secreted by C. odorata were not determined.

Results

The photos were poorly generated by Excel. Please improve.

The results of contents of secondary metabolites affected by the gradient of plant invasion density were interesting. Correlation between them could be analyzed and improved in the discussion section.

Specific comments:

The calibration curves of secondary metabolites (Fig.3 to 6) could be listed in the supplied materials.

Some words were misspelled such as pH, nitrogen, organic matter, in Fig.7. Please check and improve.

Reviewer #3: Comments for Author,

Thank you for your submission. Even the paper is interessting, there are some issue to improve this paper.

Please obtained results are unclear. Please add your future recommandation end of conclusion remark.

Discussion is superficial. Please reconsider all obtained results and support with data analyses.

Best regards

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Ibrahim A Aliyu (PhD)

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Rhizospheric_Reviewed.doc

pone.0312199.s002.doc (11.9MB, doc)
PLoS One. 2024 Nov 27;19(11):e0312199. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0312199.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


14 Sep 2024

Ndam Lawrence Monah

Department of Agronomic and Applied molecular Sciences

Faculty of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine

University of Buea

4th September, 2024

The editor-in-chief,

PLOS ONE

Dear Sir,

Responses to Reviewers` Concerns

our manuscript No. [PONE-D-24-20731] - [EMID:b56eabaefbd680fb] entitled " Rhizospheric Soil Physicochemical Properties and Microbial Response to a Gradient of Chromolaena odorata (L) Invasion in the Mount Cameroon Region" refers. We thank you for the review of our article and the highlighted points to improve on its quality. The reviewers recommended a number of issues to be addressed for clarity and quality. Accordingly, we have addressed the points raised, revised the manuscript and made some rebuttal and clarifications where necessary. It is our hope that these revisions are satisfactory, and we look forward to your publication of the article.

Meanwhile, the responses to reviewers’ comments are attached here below for your appraisal.

Sincerely,

Ndam Lawrence Monah

Corresponding author

Responses to Reviewers’ comments

Journal requirements:

1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf.

Response:

Thank you for this comment. The manuscript has been edited and tailored to meet the PLOS ONE's style requirements.

2. In your Methods section, please provide additional information regarding the permits you obtained for the work. Please ensure you have included the full name of the authority that approved the field site access and, if no permits were required, a brief statement explaining why.

Response:

Thank you for this observation. We have included a statement in the method section that reads as follows:

The study investigated an invasive plant species, regarded as a weed, in publicly accessible areas of Mount Cameroon through non-invasive observations and experiments. As it did not involve environmental manipulation or specimen collection for commercial purposes and aimed to enhance ecological understanding and management, no formal permits were necessary under local regulations.

3. We suggest you thoroughly copyedit your manuscript for language usage, spelling, and grammar. If you do not know anyone who can help you do this, you may wish to consider employing a professional scientific editing service.

The American Journal Experts (AJE) (https://www.aje.com/) is one such service that has extensive experience helping authors meet PLOS guidelines and can provide language editing, translation, manuscript formatting, and figure formatting to ensure your manuscript meets our submission guidelines. Please note that having the manuscript copyedited by AJE or any other editing services does not guarantee selection for peer review or acceptance for publication. Upon resubmission, please provide the following:

The name of the colleague or the details of the professional service that edited your manuscript

A copy of your manuscript showing your changes by either highlighting them or using track changes (uploaded as a *supporting information* file)

A clean copy of the edited manuscript (uploaded as the new *manuscript* file).

Response

The manuscript has been read again by all authors and the right language was used, and all spelling and grammatical mistakes corrected. Additionally, Prof. Njock Thomas Eku and Dr Ewane Divine of the University of Buea read and edited the manuscript for anomalies with regards to the right language, and all spelling and grammatical errors. A copy of the manuscript showing track changes of all the corrections has been provided. A copy of the clean manuscript has also been provided.

4. We note that your Data Availability Statement is currently as follows: [All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files]

Please confirm at this time whether or not your submission contains all raw data required to replicate the results of your study. Authors must share the “minimal data set” for their submission. PLOS defines the minimal data set to consist of the data required to replicate all study findings reported in the article, as well as related metadata and methods (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-minimal-data-set-definition).

For example, authors should submit the following data:

- The values behind the means, standard deviations and other measures reported;

- The values used to build graphs;

- The points extracted from images for analysis.

Authors do not need to submit their entire data set if only a portion of the data was used in the reported study.

If your submission does not contain these data, please either upload them as Supporting Information files or deposit them to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of recommended repositories, please see https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/recommended-repositories.

If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially sensitive information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent. If data are owned by a third party, please indicate how others may request data access.

Response

The data used in this research is part of the data collected by a PhD student (Juru Victor, first author of the MS) pending the defense of his thesis. It is a tradition of the institution (University of Buea) that data be shared upon request, after a student has effectively defended his/her PhD thesis and submitted a copy of the thesis to the Library. Attached is a document from the institution on data sharing.

5. We note that Figure(s) 2 and 10 in your submission contain copyrighted images. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

a. You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure(s) 2 and 10 to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license.

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an ""Other"" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

b. If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

Response

Thank you for this comment. Figures 2 and 10 have been removed from the manuscript.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FROM JOURNAL AFTER FIRST RESUBMISSION

IMPORTANT: PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL

If you are unable to complete any points that are requested in this email, please explain why in the 'Enter Comments' tab of the online submission form prior to re-submitting your manuscript. This will let us quickly assess your response and send your manuscript to an Academic Editor as soon as possible.

=============================================

PONE-D-24-20731R1

Rhizospheric Soil Chemical Properties and Microbial Response to a Gradient of Chromolaena odorata(L) Invasion in the Mount Cameroon Region

Dr Lawrence Monah Ndam

Dear Dr. Ndam,

We've checked your submission and before we can proceed, we need you to address the following issues:

1. In the online submission form, you indicated that "The data used in this research is part of the data collected by a PhD student (Juru Victor, first author of the MS) pending the defense of his thesis. It is a tradition of the institution (University of Buea) that data be shared upon request, after a student has effectively defended his/her PhD thesis and submitted a copy of the thesis to the library. Attached is a document from the institution on data sharing."

All PLOS journals now require all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript to be freely available to other researchers, either

1. In a public repository,

2. Within the manuscript itself, or

3. Uploaded as supplementary information.

This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If your data cannot be made publicly available for ethical or legal reasons (e.g., public availability would compromise patient privacy), please explain your reasons on resubmission and your exemption request will be escalated for approval.

Response

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

2. We note that Figure 1 in your submission contain copyrighted images. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

Response

Thank you for this comment. Figure 1 has been removed from the manuscript.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: No

________________________________________

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

________________________________________

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

________________________________________

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

________________________________________

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The author kept saying physicochemical properties of rhizospheric soil in the manuscript but only chemical properties were determined and of course biochemical and microbiological properties of the rhizosphere soil. For your manuscript to qualify as "physicochemical", physical properties of soil have to be included. Such properties as bulk density, infiltration, particle density, mean weight diameter, porosity, aggregate stability, particle size distributions e.t.c. have to be included. I suggest therefore, the word "Physicochemical" should not be used as suggested in the reviewed manuscript uploaded herewith.

Response

Thank you for this keen observation. The word “Physicochemical” properties have been rephrased to “Chemical” Properties through out the manuscript as requested.

Reviewer #2: Review comments: PONE-D-24-20731

This study determined the effects of gradient densities of plant invasion on the soil properties, enzyme activities and population differences of microbial communities in field. The study showed many data of soil properties, enzyme activities, secondary metabolites and the bacterial and fungal population densities. These data analyzed in this manuscript are interesting. However, there were several shortcomings of the manuscript written in this style. I suggest this manuscript a major revision before publication.

General comments:

Introduction: paragraph 4 and 5 (line 71-88) could be rewritten before paragraph 2 (……Invasive species release root exudates……).

Response

Thank you for this key comment to make the introduction better. In the introduction, paragraph 4 and 5 (line 71-88) have been rewritten before paragraph 2 as requested.

Methods

Line 136 to 138, soil samples collected with 5 cm of C. odorata rhizosphere from the four study areas. I think these samples are bulk soils but not rhizosphere soils (mm). Please check and improve.

Response

Thank you for your observation. This has been revised as suggested for easy understanding by the readers and the word “rhizosphere” has been changed to “around the root zone of C. odorata” as that is the exact position where the soil was collected.

Line 256, The phenolic components and flavonoids from soils collected were determined. Therefore, these could not be referred as root exudates in this study. Different invasion density of this plant could affect the composition contents of soil secondary metabolites. But whether t

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

pone.0312199.s003.docx (31.1KB, docx)

Decision Letter 1

Md Mahmudul Hasan

3 Oct 2024

Rhizospheric Soil Chemical Properties and Microbial Response to a Gradient of Chromolaena odorata(L) Invasion in the Mount Cameroon Region

PONE-D-24-20731R1

Dear Dr. Lawrence Monah Ndam,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Md. Mahmudul Hasan

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #3: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: No

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #2: This study determined the effects of gradient densities of plant invasion on the soil

properties, enzyme activities and population differences of microbial communities in

field. This study was revised according to previous comments/suggestion. Although the photo generated by Excel was not perfect, this article could be accepted.

Reviewer #3: Author improved paper carefully, now the paper could be accepted for the publication. In addition to this, the authors addresed all.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

**********

Acceptance letter

Md Mahmudul Hasan

16 Oct 2024

PONE-D-24-20731R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Ndam,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Md. Mahmudul Hasan

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Data

    (XLSX)

    pone.0312199.s001.xlsx (18.6KB, xlsx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Rhizospheric_Reviewed.doc

    pone.0312199.s002.doc (11.9MB, doc)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

    pone.0312199.s003.docx (31.1KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES