Coinoculation impact on plant growth promotion: a review and meta-analysis on coinoculation of rhizobia and plant growth-promoting bacilli in grain legumes

Glaciela Kaschuk; André Carlos Auler; Crislaine Emidio Vieira; Felix Dapore Dakora; Sanjay K Jaiswal; Sonia Purin da Cruz

doi:10.1007/s42770-022-00800-7

. 2022 Jul 28;53(4):2027–2037. doi: 10.1007/s42770-022-00800-7

Coinoculation impact on plant growth promotion: a review and meta-analysis on coinoculation of rhizobia and plant growth-promoting bacilli in grain legumes

Glaciela Kaschuk ^1,^✉, André Carlos Auler ¹, Crislaine Emidio Vieira ¹, Felix Dapore Dakora ², Sanjay K Jaiswal ², Sonia Purin da Cruz ³

PMCID: PMC9679103 PMID: 35896777

Abstract

Coinoculation of symbiotic N₂-fixing rhizobia and plant growth-promoting Bacillus on legume seeds can increase crop productivity. We collected highly resolved data on coinoculation of rhizobia and bacilli on 11 grain legume crops: chickpea, common bean, cowpea, faba bean, groundnut, lentil, mung bean, pea, pigeon pea, soybean, and urad bean to verify the magnitude of additive effects of coinoculation in relation to single inoculation of rhizobia on plant growth and yield of grain legumes. Coinoculation of rhizobia and bacilli on legume seeds and/or soil during sowing significantly increased nodulation, nitrogenase activity, plant N and P contents, and shoot and root biomass, as well as the grain yield of most grain legumes studied. There were however a few instances where coinoculation decreased plant growth parameters. Therefore, coinoculation of rhizobia and Bacillus has the potential to increase the growth and productivity of grain legumes, and can be recommended as an environmental-friendly agricultural practice for increased crop yields.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42770-022-00800-7.

Keywords: Root growth, Plant nutrient content, Grain yield, Biological nitrogen fixation, Nodule

Introduction

Grain legumes play an important role in the diets of billions of people worldwide in both temperate and tropical regions, but are not always represented by high yields (Table 1). Most of them are either consumed directly as food by humans, or processed for use as fodder, biofuel, and other industrial purposes [1]. Legumes are highly valued crops because their seeds contain high levels of protein, fibre, mineral nutrients, lipids, and antioxidants due to their N₂-fixing ability, which supports high photosynthetic capacity [2, 3]. Additionally, the N-rich residues of legumes can improve soil fertility, thus contributing to increased food production in subsequent cropping cycles [1].

Table 1.

Production of grain legume and cereal crops in the world during 2019

Grain legume	Production (million tonnes)	Area harvested (million ha)	Yield (kg ha⁻¹)	Major producers
Chickpea	14.2	13.7	1038	India, 70%; Turkey, Russia, and Myanmar: 4% each
Common bean	28.9	33.1	874	India, 38%; Myanmar, 10%; Brazil, 8%
Cowpea	8.9	14.4	616	Nigeria, 40%; Niger, 27%; Burkina Faso, 7%
Faba bean	5.4	2.6	2108	China, 32%; Ethiopia, 19%; UK, 10%
Groundnut	48.8	29.6	1647	China, 36%; India, 14%; Nigeria, 9%
Lentil	5.7	4.8	1195	Canada, 38%; India, 21%; Australia, 9%
Mung bean	5.3	7.3	730	India, 30%; Myanmar, 30%; China, 16%
Pea	14.2	7.2	1979	Canada, 30%; Russia, 17%; China, 10%
Pigeon pea	4.4	5.6	788	India, 75%; Malawi, 10%; Myanmar, 8%
Soybean	333.7	120.5	2769	Brazil, 34%, USA, 29%; Argentina, 17%
Urad bean	n.e	n.e	909	India, 70%; Myanmar, Pakistan
Total legumes	469.9	238.8	n.e

Open in a new tab

Data recalculated from FAO [4], except for mung bean, which was taken from World Vegetable Center [5]

n.e., not estimated

Legume species: chickpea, Cicer arietinum; common bean, Phaseolus vulgaris; cowpea, Vigna unguiculata; faba bean, Vicia faba; groundnut, Arachis hypogaea; lentil, Lens culinaris; mung bean, Vigna radiata; pea, Pisum sativum; pigeon pea, Cajanus cajan; soybean, Glycine max; urad bean, Vigna mungo

Legumes meet part of their N demand through N uptake from soil solution, and the other from symbiosis with rhizobia, which are gram-negative bacteria that elicit the formation of root nodules inside which bacteroids reduce N₂ to NH₃ in a process called biological N fixation (BNF) [6]. Although BNF can meet the full N requirements in legumes, it is often hampered by environmental conditions such drought, high temperatures, soil N, low efficiencies of rhizobial strains, and the type of plant species/cultivar [7, 8]. The efficiency of BNF in legumes has been shown to increase with inoculation of efficient and competitive rhizobia that infect root hairs before indigenous soil rhizobia, which may be low N₂-fixers [6]. Inoculation of rhizobia at sowing allows bacteria to be present right at the beginning of root growth, thus favouring early nodule formation. In addition, seed inoculation promotes the formation of larger nodules, closer to the crown of the plant, resulting in nodular characteristics that provide greater symbiotic efficiency [6, 9].

Rhizobial inoculation is a common and highly recommended practice to improve crop yield, harvest index, and the protein content in grain legumes [3, 10, 11]. In many situations, efficient rhizobial inoculation meets all the legume’s N requirements, and supports high grain yields [8, 12, 13]. However, BNF efficiency could be improved by coinoculation of rhizobia with plant growth-promoting bacteria (PGPB), which enhance rhizobial symbiosis by complementary mechanisms in plant growth promotion [10, 13, 14].

Among PGPB, gram-positive bacteria of the Bacillus genus caught the attention of researchers to the various mechanisms by which they promote plant growth [11, 15, 16], as well as their resilience through the formation of endospores, which increases their chance of success as bacterial inoculants [17]. Bacillus and other related genera are potential PGPB due to their ability to produce phytohormones such as gibberellic acid (GA) and indole-3-acetic acid (IAA) [11, 15, 16, 18–20]. In addition, Bacillus strains are also considered phosphate-solubilizing bacteria due to their ability to release large amounts of siderophores (which solubilizes Fe from the inorganic mineral FePO₄), organic acids (which decrease soil solution pH, and dissolve more labile inorganic phosphate), and phosphatases (which mineralize organic phosphates present in soil organic matter) [11, 15, 16, 19, 21, 22]. Some Bacillus strains produce potent toxins which act as antifungal and antibiotic compounds that control growth of antagonistic microorganisms, or induce plant resistance against pathogens [15, 16, 23–30]. Bacillus strains also release ACC deaminase, an enzyme that degrades the precursor of ethylene, a phytohormone that induces plant senescence [16] and alleviates drought stress [31]. Due to these traits, there are several inoculant products based on Bacillus species which are available in the market and can be used for agricultural crops [15, 17]. These inoculants (rhizobia and bacilli) can be coinoculated in grain legumes to increase the symbiotic efficiency of rhizobia through complementary mechanisms of plant growth promotion [11, 32, 33]. That way, coinoculation could also increase the symbiotic efficiency of rhizobia, legume N content, plant size, and grain yields. The main objective of this study was to assess the magnitude of additive effects of coinoculation of rhizobia and bacilli relative to single inoculation of rhizobia on plant growth and yield of grain legumes.

Materials and methods

Data collection

Data were acquired from a library search of peer-reviewed articles in the platforms “Web of Science” and “Google Scholar”, using the keywords: “coinoculation”, “rhizobium” or “rhizobia” and “bacillus” or “bacilli”, associated with one of the grain legumes listed below in pots or field experiments. The outcome of the library search (Supplementary Material) for each grain legume in this meta-analysis included chickpea (Cicer arietinum) [22, 34–49]; common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) [18, 23, 24, 30, 31, 50–65]; cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) [66–72]; faba bean (Vicia faba) [21, 73–76]; groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) [25, 27, 28, 77–79]; lentil (Lens culinaris) [26, 80–84]; mung bean (Vigna radiata) [85–91]; pea (Pisum sativum) [65, 83, 92]; pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) [93–96]; soybean (Glycine max) [20, 51, 65, 84, 97–115]; and urad bean (Vigna mungo) [14, 116].

In the meta-analysis, plants or plots inoculated only with one rhizobial strain were considered as “control”, and coinoculation with at least one rhizobium and one bacillus strain as “treatment”. Paenibacillus, Brevibacillus, and Lysinibacillus, which have been recognized as plant growth-promoting Bacillus bacteria, were used by some researchers in their experiments.

Statistical parameters such as the mean, standard deviation, and number of replications of each experimental unit were obtained for the following variables: nodules (number and/or dry matter), biological nitrogen fixation (BNF; nitrogenase activity or N-derived from BNF by N¹⁵), N accumulated in the plant (N concentration or total mass in the plant, or in the shoot), P accumulated in the plant (P concentration or total mass in the plant, grain, or in the shoot), root size (length or dry matter), shoot size (height or dry matter), and grain yield (dry matter of grains). Studies with less than three replications were excluded from the meta-analysis. When standard deviation was not presented in articles, it was calculated based on coefficient of variation or standard error. If none of these indicators were presented, we first calculated coefficient of variation with the means available in each experiment and then obtained standard deviation values.

Effect size was calculated using the log response ratios (lr) and the total variability in the response ratios, from control to experimental groups, with equations proposed by Hedges et al. [117] and Gurevitch and Hedges [118]. Analyses were done at R platform version 4.0.1 (R Core Team, 2020) using metaphor package [119]; script for run is presented as Supplementary Material.

Results

Overall, the meta-analysis indicated that coinoculation of rhizobia and bacilli promoted plant growth of different grain legumes relative to single rhizobia inoculation. Nodulation (or nodule) was the most responsive variable to coinoculation, but other plant variables were also highly increased. In pot experiments, coinoculation significantly increased nodulation of chickpea, common bean, groundnut, lentil, pea, and soybean, while in field experiments, it increased nodulation of chickpea, cowpea, mung bean, and soybean (Table 2). In field-grown cowpea, coinoculation decreased the number and mass of nodules (Table 2). In the other legumes, the coinoculation of rhizobia and bacilli did not change nodulation (Table 2).

Table 2.

Log response ratio of nodule and biological N fixation due to the coinoculation of rhizobia and plant growth-promoting bacilli in grain legumes

Grain legume	Exp. condition	Nodulation				Nitrogenase activity
Grain legume	Exp. condition	n	lr	95% C.I	p	n	lr	95% C.I	p
Chickpea	Pot	97	0.131	0.071; 0.192	< 0.0001	50	0.146	0.039; 0.253	0.0074
	Field	94	0.260	0.220; 0.299	< 0.0001	4	0.134	0.050; 0.214	< 0.0001
Common bean	Pot	152	0.092	0.033; 0.151	0.0023	33	0.197	0.099; 0.294	< 0.0001
	Field	18	0.020	− 0.046; 0.085	0.5546	4	0.139	− 0.296; 0.574	0.5321
Cowpea	Pot	159	0.013	− 0.032; 0.057	0.5749
	Field	4	− 0.337	− 0.609; − 0.064	0.0154
Faba bean	Field	138	0.029	− 0.020; 0.077	0.2457	21	0.299	0.164; 0.433	< 0.0001
Groundnut	Pot	27	0.594	0.454; 0.734	< 0.0001	7	0.099	− 0.052; 0.251	0.1961
Lentil	Pot	12	0.301	0.2165; 0.385	< 0.0001	1	− 0.569	− 0.997; − 0.142	0.0090
	Field	8	0.095	0.021; 0.169	0.0121	2	0.475	0.331; 0.619	< 0.0001
Mung bean	Pot	72	0.006	− 0.064; 0.077	0.8651	48	− 0.211	− 0.322; − 0.102	0.0002
	Field	30	0.199	0.165; 0.232	< 0.0001
Pea	Pot	8	0.226	0.002; 0.452	0.0485	2	− 0.376	− 0.758; 0.005	0.0532
Pigeon pea	Pot	25	0.100	− 0.111; 0.311	0.3520	1	0.291	0.139; 0.442	0.0002
	Field	21	0.223	− 0.158; 0.611	0.2483
Soybean	Pot	96	0.213	0.142; 0.283	< 0.0001	47	0.045	− 0.156; 0.246	< 0.0001
	Field	89	0.400	0.300; 0.501	< 0.0001	4	− 0.114	− 0.723; 0.495	0.7129
Urad bean	Pot	6	0.036	− 0.072; 0.144	0.5100

Open in a new tab

n is the number of observations; lr is the log response ratio obtained by dividing treatment value (rhizobia + bacilli) per control (rhizobia); 95% C.I. are the lower and upper confidence intervals at p < 0.95

Interpretation: Negative values of lr indicated that coinoculation of rhizobia and bacilli decreases the variable values, and positive values of lr indicated that coinoculation promoted increases in the variable values. When the value of lr is negative and both confidence intervals are negative, the effects are significantly negative. When the value of lr is positive and both confidence intervals are positive, the effects are significantly positive

Legume species: chickpea, Cicer arietinum; common bean, Phaseolus vulgaris; cowpea, Vigna unguiculata; faba bean, Vicia faba; groundnut, Arachis hypogaea; lentil, Lens culinaris; mung bean, Vigna radiata; Pea, Pisum sativum; pigeon pea, Cajanus cajan; soybean, Glycine max; urad bean, Vigna mungo

Database and the “R” script for the meta-analysis are presented in the Supplementary Material

Nitrogenase activity (indicator of BNF) was stimulated by coinoculation in chickpea, common bean, and pigeon pea in pot experiments, and in faba bean and lentil in field experiments. However, it was decreased in lentil (n = number of data points = 1) and mung bean (n = 48) in pot experiments (Table 2). Biological N fixation of other grain legumes was not affected by coinoculation of rhizobia with bacilli (Table 2).

Most grain legumes accumulated more N in the plant when coinoculated, i.e., chickpea (pot and field), common bean (field), faba bean (field), mung bean (pot and field), pigeon pea (pot), and soybeans (pot). On the other hand, the plant N content of soybean and cowpea in the field was negatively affected by coinoculation (Table 3). Likewise, coinoculation promoted higher uptake of P in the chickpea (pot and field), lentil (field), and urad bean (pot) (Table 3).

Table 3.

Log response ratio of the coinoculation of rhizobia and plant growth-promoting bacilli in grain legumes

Grain legume	Exp. condition	Plant N				Plant P
Grain legume	Exp. condition	n	lr	95% C.I	p	n	lr	95% C.I	p
Chickpea	Pot	28	0.311	0.185; 0.436	< 0.0001	12	0.165	0.112; 0.218	< 0.0001
	Field	23	0.051	0.012; 0.089	0.0095	26	0.222	0.168; 0.277	< 0.0001
Common bean	Pot	20	0.041	− 0.105; 0.187	0.5825
	Field	7	0.179	0.103; 0.255	< 0.0001
Cowpea	Pot	90	− 0.185	− 0.228; − 0.143	< 0.0001
	Field	2	− 0.055	− 0.255; 0.144	0.5877
Faba bean	Field	24	0.072	0.011; 0.132	0.0200	18	0.050	− 0.002; 0.102	0.0604
Groundnut	Pot	2	− 0.077	− 0.587; 0.435	0.7691	6	− 0.022	− 0.059; 0.015	0.2458
Lentil	Field					2	0.244	0.054; 0.435	0.0120
Mung bean	Pot	72	0.215	0.177; 0.253	< 0.0001
	Field	12	0.136	0.071; 0.202	< 0.0001
Pea	Pot	4	0.030	− 0.051; 0.119	0.4326
Pigeon pea	Pot	1	0.117	0.043; 0.190	0.0019
	Field	10	− 0.003	− 0.120; 0.113	0.9555
Soybean	Pot	5	0.458	0.032; 0.883	0.0349
	Field	50	− 0.046	− 0.082; − 0.011	0.0097	2	0.000	− 0.015; 0.015	0.9900
Urad bean	Pot	2	0.019	− 0.008; 0.047	0.1739	4	0.091	0.058; 0.124	< 0.0001

Open in a new tab

Database and the “R” script for the meta-analysis are presented in the Supplementary Material

Coinoculation promoted shoot and root growth of most grain legumes. Chickpea (pot and field), faba bean (field), groundnut (pot), lentil (pot), and soybean (pot and field) had larger roots, while only common bean (field) had smaller roots because of coinoculation (Table 4). In addition, there were significant increases in shoot size of chickpea (pot and field), common bean (pot and field), faba bean (field) groundnut (pot), lentil (pot), mung beans (pot and field), soybean (pot and field), and urad bean (pot), and only decreased in cowpea (pot) (Table 4).

Table 4.

Log response ratio of the coinoculation of rhizobia and plant growth-promoting bacilli in grain legumes

Grain legume	Exp. condition	Root size				Shoot size
Grain legume	Exp. condition	n	Log R	95% C.I	p	n	Log R	95% C.I	p
Chickpea	Pot	33	0.341	0.156; 0.523	0.0003	67	0.312	0.182; 0.440	< 0.0001
	Field	16	0.179	0.120; 0.238	< 0.0001	71	0.184	0.123; 0.244	< 0.0001
Common bean	Pot	38	0.007	− 0.039; 0.053	0.7604	122	0.054	0.005; 0.103	0.0312
	Field	6	− 0.097	− 0.192; − 0.003	0.0442	20	0.071	0.025; 0.118	0.0025
Cowpea	Pot	158	− 0.015	− 0.050; 0.021	0.4127	116	− 0.070	− 0.097; − 0.043	< 0.0001
	Field					2	− 0.034	− 0.239; 0.171	0.7455
Faba bean	Pot					4	0.033	− 0.032; 0.097	0.3213
	Field	80	0.094	0.043; 0.145	0.0003	104	0.034	0.006; 0.062	0.0167
Groundnut	Pot	37	0.177	0.123; 0.230	< 0.0001	72	0.119	0.057; 0.181	0.0002
Lentil	Pot	8	0.170	0.111; 0.229	< 0.0001	20	0.031	0.020; 0.042	< 0.0001
	Field					5	0.056	− 0.0201; 0.132	0.1494
Mung bean	Pot	18	0.206	− 0.009; 0.421	0.0605	80	0.151	0.065; 0.237	0.0006
	Field					24	0.129	0.072; 0.186	< 0.0001
Pea	Pot	12	0.040	− 0.017; 0.097	0.1716	13	0.043	− 0.019; 0.105	0.1729
Pigeon pea	Pot	1	0.388	− 0.145; 0.920	0.1533	17	0.095	− 0.052; 0.242	0.2043
	Field	11	0.006	− 0.105; 0.117	0.9202	15	0.065	− 0.039; 0.170	0.2217
Soybean	Pot	42	0.237	0.161; 0.314	< 0.0001	58	0.181	0.122; 0.240	< 0.0001
	Field	19	0.198	0.131; 0.264	< 0.0001	45	0.055	0.032; 0.077	< 0.0001
Urad bean	Pot	7	0.058	− 0.019; 0.136	0.1416	8	0.063	0.002; 0.123	0.0427

Open in a new tab

Database and the “R” script for the meta-analysis are presented in the Supplementary Material

Finally, coinoculation had positive effects on grain yield of chickpea (pot and field), cowpea (pot), faba bean (field), lentil (field), mung bean (field), and soybean (pot) (Table 5). Nevertheless, negative effects were observed on lentil grown in pot (n = 1) (Table 5).

Table 5.

Log response ratio of the coinoculation of rhizobia and plant growth-promoting bacilli in grain legumes

Grain legume	Exp. condition	Grain yield
Grain legume	Exp. condition	n	Log R	95% C.I	p
Chickpea	Pot	2	0.161	0.007; 0.316	0.0405
	Field	34	0.159	0.096; 0.221	< 0.0001
Common bean	Pot	1	− 0.215	− 0.712; 0.282	0.3963
	Field	20	0.060	− 0.027; 0.146	0.1756
Cowpea	Pot	3	0.261	0.210; 0.313	< 0.0001
Faba bean	Field	53	0.058	0.014; 0.103	0.0105
	Pot	1	0.237	− 0.980; 1.454	0.7028
Lentil	Pot	1	− 0.150	− 0.236; − 0.036	0.0007
	Field	3	0.079	0.015; 0.144	0.0164
Mung bean	Pot	18	− 0.113	− 0.308; 0.083	0.2591
	Field	9	0.181	0.109; 0.252	< 0.0001
Pigeon pea	Pot	1	− 0.259	− 0.972; 0.454	0.4760
Soybean	Pot	3	0.119	0.064; 0.174	< 0.0001
	Field	52	− 0.005	− 0.026; 0.017	0.6643
Urad bean	Pot	2	0.033	− 0.064; 0.130	0.5082

Open in a new tab

Database and the “R” script for the meta-analysis are presented in the Supplementary Material

Discussion

During several decades, researchers have hypothesized that inoculation of more than one type of microorganism can increase the population of microorganisms that act in plant ecophysiology by complementary beneficial mechanisms [10, 11, 32, 33]. In the present meta-analysis of data regarding coinoculation of rhizobia with bacilli in 11 grain legume crops, we produced information that corroborates to the above said hypothesis. Our findings expand the current knowledge of inoculation techniques to the other legumes that were previously applied for soybean only [13, 14]. This is the first study worldwide on meta-analysis related to coinoculation of grain legumes with rhizobia and bacilli, and it emphasizes the role of several strains of the Bacillus genus to improve rhizobial symbiosis performance, and increase growth and yields of grain legumes in different parts of the world (cf. Supplementary Material).

Our meta-analysis confirmed that coinoculation of rhizobia and bacilli enhances the root nodule number, accumulates more N and P, increases root and shoot growth, and finally results in higher grain yields (Tables 2, 3, 4, and 5). Higher nodulation and increased root growth may have been consequence of increased phytohormone production, such as gibberellic acid (GA) and indole-3-acetic acid (IAA), which stimulate plant cell division and elongation [120]. In fact, many studies that compose the database of this meta-analysis have indicated that Bacillus strains produce IAA and other plant growth-promoting substances [18–20, 44–47, 49, 56, 79, 84–86, 88, 98, 108].

Coinoculated legumes accumulated more N in relation to control (plants inoculated only with rhizobia) (Table 3). Higher N content may have been consequence of higher nodulation since nodule dry mass and BNF were positively highly correlated (e.g., [14]). However, it is interesting to mention that although coinoculation increased plant N content in the majority of grain legumes, it did not necessarily increase nitrogenase activity of rhizobial nodules (Table 2). It could be that increased N accumulation in legume plants was related to increased root growth and as increased root growth ensures that plants were supplied with more nutrients [121]. Therefore, high N uptake (Table 3) was probably the result of both increased nodule N fixation capacity (Table 2) and the ability of bacilli to promote root growth (Table 4).

Moreover, coinoculation of rhizobia and bacilli in grain legumes also enhanced the level of P accumulation in the plants (Table 3), the result of the combined effect of high root growth and P solubilization activity of Bacillus spp. [15, 92, 100, 121]. Many reports which were used in this meta-analysis confirmed the capacity of Bacillus strains to solubilize P in growth media and in soil used for the cultivation of inoculated legumes [19, 34, 38, 44, 49, 78, 79, 91]. In addition to the above results, shoot and root biomasses of chickpeas and soybeans were increased by the rhizobia-bacilli coinoculation and suggested that root growth provides more resources for shoot growth (Table 3).

Additionally, increases in root size can also be very beneficial under stressful conditions because higher root systems can uptake more water and nutrients [85, 122, 123]. For example, coinoculation of Rhizobium tropici with Paenibacillus polymyxa alleviated the negative effects of severe drought stress on common beans under greenhouse conditions [31]. Likewise, coinoculation of Mesorhizobium ciceri with Bacillus sp. increased chickpea growth and grain yields in P-deficient soil in dry areas of a Mediterranean region [22]. The results in Table 5 are consistent with this proposition, as several legume crops produced more grains when they were coinoculated.

Some legumes had more pronounced responses than others. For example, the most consistent positive results were obtained with chickpea and soybean, whereas cowpea had some negative responses, particularly in the plant N contents (Table 2) and shoot size (Table 3). Regarding chickpea and soybean, increase in shoot size (Table 4) resulted in high grain yields (Table 5). However, in cowpea, coinoculation decreased shoot growth (negative lr for shoot size) but increased grain yield (positive lr for grain yield). Results corroborate with the fact that the benefits of coinoculation were not related to increased shoot growth proportionally with grain yield, but probably to changes in the source-sink relationships and in the harvest index of these legume crops [3].

In soils, both rhizobia and bacilli biofilms consume recently produced photosynthates. Rhizobia symbiosis may consume as much as 14% of recent photosynthates [2] while rhizospheric and soil microorganisms may absorb 6 to 10% of photosynthates exuded through roots [124]. This amount should not compromise plant growth because photosynthetic rates are likely to increase due to C sink stimulation [2, 3, 125]. On the contrary, complementary characteristics of rhizobia-bacilli-legume tripartite association should result in higher plant growth and grain yield. In addition to the plant growth-promoting mechanisms related to phytohormone up-regulation and P solubilization, Bacillus spp. also play an important role on the biological control of phytopathogen fungi and invertebrate plagues. Indeed, many studies used for this meta-analysis were designed to test the efficacy of Bacillus strains to control plagues and diseases that affect grain legume growth [25–28, 30, 60, 76, 80, 92].

Coinoculation of rhizobia and bacilli is possibly a step forward in the “Green Revolution” headed by microbial inoculants [126]. In this meta-analysis, we gathered results involving several different bacilli and rhizobia strains in many legume crops worldwide. The results confirmed that coinoculation of rhizobia and bacilli strains was a general strategy to increase biological nitrogen fixation, plant growth, and nutrient acquisition of nearly all grain legumes tested. Therefore, this meta-analysis shows that coinoculation could be considered a viable technology for grain legumes in general, which suggests that more studies involving the best combinations of rhizobia and bacilli in each grain legume crop should be pursued.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 16.4 KB)^{(16.4KB, docx)}

Supplementary file2 (XLSX 326 KB)^{(326.4KB, xlsx)}

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge support from the Federal University of Paraná Graduate Support Program (UFPR/PROAP, Curitiba, Brazil) and scholarships for Crislaine Emidio Vieira from the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES, Brazil, No. 40001016014P4).

Author contribution

Glaciela Kaschuk and Crislaine Emidio Vieira compiled the data; André Carlos Auler performed the statistical analyses; all authors contributed to the interpretation of the data and writing and editing the manuscript; all authors have approved the version to be published, and have agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Funding

This study was supported by the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES, Brazil) and by the Graduate Support Program of the Federal University of Paraná (UFPR/PROAP), Curitiba, Brazil.

Declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Footnotes

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Contributor Information

Glaciela Kaschuk, Email: glaciela.kaschuk@ufpr.br.

André Carlos Auler, Email: auler@ufpr.br.

Crislaine Emidio Vieira, Email: crislaine_emidio@hotmail.com.

Felix Dapore Dakora, Email: dakorafd@tut.ac.za.

Sanjay K. Jaiswal, Email: sanjaysiswa@gmail.com

Sonia Purin da Cruz, Email: s.purin@ufsc.br.

References

1.Rawal V, Navarro DK. The global economy of pulses. Rome: FAO; 2019. [Google Scholar]
2.Kaschuk G, Kuyper TW, Leffelaar PA, Hungria M, Giller KE. Are the rates of photosynthesis stimulated by the carbon sink strength of rhizobial and arbuscular mycorrhizal symbioses? Soil Biol Biochem. 2009;41:1233–1244. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2009.03.005. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
3.Kaschuk G, Leffelaar PA, Giller KE, Alberton O, Hungria M, Kuyper TW. Responses of legumes to rhizobia and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi: a meta-analysis of potential photosynthate limitation of symbioses. Soil Biol Biochem. 2010;42:125–127. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2009.10.017. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
4.FAOSTAT (2021) Retrieved from Database. http://faostat.fao.org/beta/en/#data). Available on 15 July 2021
5.World Vegetable Center - WVC, International mungbean improvement network, 2021. Retrieved from https://avrdc.org/intl-mungbean-network/. Available on 15 July 2021
6.Kaschuk G, Hungria M (2017) Diversity and importance of diazotrophic bacteria to agricultural sustainability in the tropics. In: Diversity and benefits of microorganisms from the tropics. Springer, Cham. p. 269–292. 10.1007/978-3-319-55804-2_12
7.Dwivedi SL, Sahrawat KL, Upadhyaya HD, Mengoni A, Galardini M, Bazzicalupo M, Biondi EG, Hungría M, Kaschuk G, Blair MW, Ortiz R. Advances in host plant and rhizobium genomics to enhance symbiotic nitrogen fixation in grain legumes. Adv Agron. 2015;129:1–116. doi: 10.1016/bs.agron.2014.09.001. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
8.Peoples MB, Giller KE, Jensen ES, Herridge DF. Quantifying country-to-global scale nitrogen fixation for grain legumes: I. Reliance on nitrogen fixation of soybean, groundnut and pulses. Plant Soil. 2021 doi: 10.1007/s11104-021-05167-6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
9.Cardoso JD, Gomes DF, Goes KCGP, Fonseca NS, Dorigo OF, Hungria M, Andrade DS. Relationship between total nodulation and nodulation at the root crown of peanut, soybean and common bean plants. Soil Biol Biochem. 2009;41:1760–1763. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2009.05.008. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
10.Menéndez E, Paço A. Is the application of plant probiotic bacterial consortia always beneficial for plants? Exploring synergies between rhizobial and non-rhizobial bacteria and their effects on agro-economically valuable crops. Life. 2020;10:24. doi: 10.3390/life10030024. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
11.Janati W, Benmrid B, Elhaissoufi W, Zeroual Y, Nasielski J, Bargaz A. Will phosphate bio-solubilization stimulate biological nitrogen fixation in grain legumes? Front Agron. 2021;3:637196. doi: 10.3389/fagro.2021.637196. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
12.Kaschuk G, Nogueira MA, De Luca MJ, Hungria M. Response of determinate and indeterminate soybean cultivars to basal and topdressing N fertilization compared to sole inoculation with Bradyrhizobium. Field Crop Res. 2016;195:21–27. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2016.05.010. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
13.Zeffa DM, Fantin LH, Koltun A, de Oliveira ALM, Nunes MPBA, Canteri MG, Gonçalves LSA. Effects of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria on coinoculation with Bradyrhizobium in soybean crop: a meta-analysis of studies from 1987 to 2018. PeerJ. 2020;8:e7905. doi: 10.7717/peerj.7905. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
14.Barbosa JZ, Hungria M, Sena JVS, Poggere G, dos Reis AR, Corrêa RS. Meta-analysis reveals benefits of coinoculation of soybean with Azospirillum brasilense and Bradyrhizobium spp. in Brazil. Appl Soil Ecol. 2021;163:103913. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2021.103913. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
15.Aloo BN, Makumba BA, Mbega ER. The potential of Bacilli rhizobacteria for sustainable crop production and environmental sustainability. Microbiol Res. 2019;219:26–39. doi: 10.1016/j.micres.2018.10.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
16.Tiwari S, Prasad V, Lata C. Bacillus: plant growth promoting bacteria for sustainable agriculture and environment. In: Singh JS, Singh DP, editors. New and future developments in microbial biotechnology and bioengineering. London: Elsevier; 2019. pp. 43–55. [Google Scholar]
17.Sousa SM, Oliveira CA, Andrade DL, Carvalho CG, Ribeiro VP, Pastina MM, Marriel IE, Lana UHP, Gomes EA. Tropical Bacillus strains inoculation enhances maize root surface area, dry weight, nutrient uptake and grain yield. J Plant Growth Reg. 2021;40:867–877. doi: 10.1007/s00344-020-10146-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
18.Srinivasan M, Holl FB, Petersen DJ. Influence of indoleacetic-acid-producing Bacillus isolates on the nodulation of Phaseolus vulgaris by Rhizobium etli under gnotobiotic conditions. Can J Microbiol. 1996;42:1006–1014. doi: 10.1139/m96-129. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
19.Qureshi MA, Iqbal A, Akhtar N, Shakir MA, Khan A. Coinoculation of phosphate solubilizing bacteria and rhizobia in the presence of L-tryptophan for the promotion of mash bean (Vigna mungo L.) Soil Environm. 2012;31:47–54. [Google Scholar]
20.Aung TT, Buranabanyat B, Piromyou P, Longtonglang A, Tittabutr P, Boonkerd N, Teaumroong N. Enhanced soybean biomass by coinoculation of Bradyrhizobium japonicum and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria and its effects on microbial community structures. Afr J Microbiol Res. 2013;7:3858–3873. doi: 10.5897/AJMR2013.5917. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
21.Massoud AM, Abou-Zeid MY, Hassan ESA, El-Fiki SF. Influence of phosphate dissolving and nitrogen fixing bacteria on faba bean under different levels of phosphorus fertilization. J Agric Sci Mansoura Univ. 2008;33:7991–8007. [Google Scholar]
22.Benjelloun I, Alami IT, El Khadir M, Douira A, Udupa SM. Coinoculation of Mesorhizobium ciceri with either Bacillus sp. or Enterobacter aerogenes on chickpea improves growth and productivity in phosphate-deficient soils in dry areas of a Mediterranean Region. Plant. 2021;10:571. doi: 10.3390/plants10030571. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
23.de Jensen CE, Percich JA, Graham PH. Integrated management strategies of bean root rot with Bacillus subtilis and Rhizobium in Minnesota. Field Crop Res. 2002;74:107–115. doi: 10.1016/S0378-4290(01)00200-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
24.de Jensen CE, Percich JA, Graham PH. The effect of Bacillus subtilis and Rhizobium inoculation of dry bean seed on root rot severity and yield in Minnesota. Annu Rep Bean Improv Coop. 2002;45:98–99. [Google Scholar]
25.Abd-Allah EF, El-Didamony G. Effect of seed treatment of Arachis hypogaea with Bacillus subtilis on nodulation in biocontrol of southern blight (Sclerotium rolfsii) disease. Phytoparasitica. 2007;35:8–12. doi: 10.1007/BF02981055. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
26.Siddiqui ZA, Baghel G, Akhtar MS. Biocontrol of Meloidogyne javanica by Rhizobium and plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria on lentil. World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2007;23:435–441. doi: 10.1007/s11274-006-9244-z. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
27.Yuttavanichakul W, Lawongsa P, Wongkaew S, Teaumroong N, Boonkerd N, Nomura N, Tittabutr P. Improvement of peanut rhizobial inoculant by incorporation of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) as biocontrol against the seed borne fungus, Aspergillus niger. Biol Control. 2012;63:87–97. doi: 10.1016/j.biocontrol.2012.06.008. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
28.Figueredo MS, Tonelli ML, Taurian T, Angelini J, Ibañez F, Valetti L, Muñoz V, Anzuay MS, Ludueña L, Fabra A. Interrelationships between Bacillus sp. CHEP5 and Bradyrhizobium sp. SEMIA 6144 in the induced systemic resistance against Sclerotium rolfsii and symbiosis on peanut plants. J Biosci. 2014;39:877–885. doi: 10.1007/s12038-014-9470-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
29.Fira D, Dimkić I, Berić T, Lozo J, Stanković S. Biological control of plant pathogens by Bacillus species. J Biotechnol. 2018;285:44–55. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2018.07.044. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
30.Ferreira LDVM, Carvalho F, Andrade JFC, Oliveira DP, Medeiros FHV, Moreira FMDS. Coinoculation of selected nodule endophytic rhizobacterial strains with Rhizobium tropici promotes plant growth and controls damping off in common bean. Pedosphere. 2020;30:98–108. doi: 10.1016/S1002-0160(19)60825-8. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
31.Figueiredo MVB, Burity HA, Martinez CR, Chanway CP. Alleviation of water stress effects in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L) by coi-noculation Paenibacillus X Rhizobium tropici. Appl Soil Ecol. 2008;40:182–188. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-21921-w. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
32.Alemneh AA, Zhou Y, Ryder MH, Denton MD. Mechanisms in plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria that enhance legume–rhizobial symbioses. J Appl Microbiol. 2020;129:1133–1156. doi: 10.1111/jam.14754. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
33.Santoyo G, Guzmán-Guzmán P, Parra-Cota FI, Santos-Villalobos Sdl, Orozco-Mosqueda MdC, Glick BR. Plant growth stimulation by microbial consortia. Agronomy. 2021;11(2):219. doi: 10.3390/agronomy11020219. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
34.Alagawadi AR, Gaur AC. Associative effect of Rhizobium and phosphate-solubilizing bacteria on the yield and nutrient uptake of chickpea. Plant Soil. 1988;105:241–246. doi: 10.1007/BF02376788. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
35.Elkoca E, Kantar F, Sahin F. Influence of nitrogen fixing and phosphorus solubilizing bacteria on the nodulation, plant growth, and yield of chickpea. J Plant Nutr. 2007;31:157–171. doi: 10.1080/01904160701742097. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
36.Parmar N, Dadarwal KR. Stimulation of nitrogen fixation and induction of flavonoid-like compounds by rhizobacteria. J App Microbiol. 1999;86:36–44. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2672.1999.00634.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
37.Qureshi MA, Shakir MA, Naveed M, Ahmad MJ. Growth and yield response of chickpea to coinoculation with Mesorhizobium ciceri and Bacillus megaterium. J Anim Plant Sci. 2009;19:205–211. [Google Scholar]
38.Rana M, Chandra R, Pareek N. Coinoculation effect of endophytic bacteria with Mesorhizobium sp. in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) on nodulation, yields, nutrient uptake and soil biological properties. J Indian Soc Soil Sci. 2015;63:429–435. doi: 10.5958/0974-0228.2015.00057.2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
39.Saini R, Dudeja SS, Giri R, Kumar V. Isolation, characterization, and evaluation of bacterial root and nodule endophytes from chickpea cultivated in Northern India. J Basic Microbiol. 2015;55:74–81. doi: 10.1002/jobm.201300173. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
40.Singh G, Sekhon HS, Sharma P. Effect of irrigation and biofertilizer on water use, nodulation, growth and yield of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Arch Agronomy Soil Sci. 2011;57:715–726. doi: 10.1080/03650340.2010.493880. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
41.Singh N, Singh G, Aggarwal N. Economic analysis of application of phosphorus, single and dual inoculation of Rhizobium and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria in lentil (Lens culinaris Medikus) J Appl Nat Sci. 2017;9:1008–1011. doi: 10.31018/jans.v9i2.1312. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
42.Singh Z, Singh G, Aggarwal N, Virk HK. Sharma P (2021) Symbiotic efficiency vis-à-vis chickpea performance as affected by seed inoculation with Mesorhizobium, phosphorus-solubilizing bacteria, and phosphorus application. J Plant Nutr. 2021 doi: 10.1080/01904167.2021.1943435. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
43.Sivaramaiah N, Malik DK, Sindhu S. Improvement in symbiotic efficiency of chickpea (Cicer arietinum) by coinoculation of Bacillus strains with Mesorhizobium sp. cicer. Indian J Microbiol. 2007;47:51–56. doi: 10.1007/s12088-007-0010-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
44.Verma J, Yadav J. Implication of microbial consortium on biomass and yield of chickpea under sustainable agriculture. Environ Eng Manag J. 2018;17:513–522. doi: 10.30638/eemj.2018.051. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
45.Verma JP, Yadav J, Tiwari KN. Application of Rhizobium sp. BHURC01 and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on nodulation, plant biomass and yields of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Int J Agric Res. 2010;5:148–156. doi: 10.3923/ijar.2010.148.156. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
46.Verma JP, Yadav J, Tiwari KN. Enhancement of nodulation and yield of chickpea by coinoculation of indigenous Mesorhizobium spp. and plant growth–promoting rhizobacteria in Eastern Uttar Pradesh. Comm Soil Sci Plant Anal. 2012;43:605–621. doi: 10.1080/00103624.2012.639110. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
47.Wani P, Khan M, Zaidi A. Coinoculation of nitrogen-fixing and phosphate-solubilizing bacteria to promote growth, yield and nutrient uptake in chickpea. Acta Agron Hung. 2007;55:315–323. doi: 10.1556/AAgr.55.2007.3.7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
48.Wani PA, Khan MS, Zaidi A. Synergistic effects of the inoculation with nitrogen-fixing and phosphate-solubilizing rhizobacteria on the performance of field-grown chickpea. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr. 2007;170:283–287. doi: 10.1002/jpln.200620602. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
49.Yadav J, Verma JP. Effect of seed inoculation with indigenous Rhizobium and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on nutrients uptake and yields of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Eur J Soil Biol. 2014;63:70–77. doi: 10.1016/j.ejsobi.2014.05.001. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
50.Armenta-Bojórquez AD, Roblero-Ramírez HR, Camacho-Báez JR, Mundo-Ocampo M, Garcia-Gutierrez C, Armenta-Medina A. Organic versus synthetic fertilisation of beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) in Mexico. Exp Agric. 2016;52:154–162. doi: 10.1017/s0014479715000010. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
51.Camacho M, Santamaria C, Temprano F, Rodriguez-Navarro DN, Daza A. Coinoculation with Bacillus sp. CECT 450 improves nodulation in Phaseolus vulgaris L. Can J Microbiol. 2001;47:1058–1062. doi: 10.1139/w01-107. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
52.Elkoca E, Turan M, Donmez MF. Effects of single, dual and triple inoculations with Bacillus subtilis, Bacillus megaterium and Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. phaseoli on nodulation, nutrient uptake, yield and yield parameters of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris l. cv. ‘elkoca-05’) J Plant Nutr. 2010;33:2104–2119. doi: 10.1080/01904167.2010.519084. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
53.Ferreira LDVM, Carvalho FD, Andrade JFC, Moreira FMDS. Growth promotion of common bean and genetic diversity of bacteria from Amazon pastureland. Sci Agric. 2018;75:461–469. doi: 10.1590/1678-992X-2017-0049. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
54.Figueiredo MVB, Martinez CR, Burity HA, Chanway CP. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria for improving nodulation and nitrogen fixation in the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2008;24:1187–1193. doi: 10.1007/s11274-007-9591-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
55.Gabre VV, Venancio WS, Moraes BA, Furmam FG, Galvão CW, Gonçalves DRP, Etto RM. Multiple effect of different plant growth promoting microorganisms on beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) crop. Braz Arch Biol Technol. 2020;63:e20190493. doi: 10.1590/1678-4324-solo-2020190493. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
56.Gharib AA, Shahein MM, Ragab AA. Influence of Rhizobium inoculation combined with Azotobacter chrococcum and Bacillus megaterium var phosphaticum on growth, nodulation, yield and quality of two snap been (Phaseolus vulgaris l.) cultivars. Ann Agric Sci. 2015;53:249–261. doi: 10.21608/assjm.2015.109816. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
57.Hafez ASEE, Werner HAD. Genetic biodiversity of common bean nodulating rhizobia and studying their symbiotic effectiveness combined with strains of genus Azotobacter, Bacillus or Pseudomonas in Egypt. Res J Agric Biol Sci. 2007;3:184–194. [Google Scholar]
58.Karanja N, Mutua G, Kimenju J. Evaluating the effect of Bacillus and Rhizobium bi-inoculant on nodulation and nematode control in Phaseolus vulgaris L. In: Bationo A, Waswa B, Kihara J, Kimetu J, editors. Advances in integrated soil fertility management in sub-Saharan Africa: challenges and opportunities. Dordrecht: Springer; 2007. [Google Scholar]
59.Korir H, Mungai NW, Thuita M, Hamba Y, Masso C. Coinoculation effect of rhizobia and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on common bean growth in a low phosphorus soil. Front Plant Sci. 2017;8:141. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2017.00141. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
60.Kumar P, Pandey P, Dubey RC, Maheshwari DK. Bacteria consortium optimization improves nutrient uptake, nodulation, disease suppression and growth of the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) in both pot and field studies. Rhizosphere. 2016;2:13–23. doi: 10.1016/j.rhisph.2016.09.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
61.Remans R, Croonenborghs A, Gutierrez RT, Michiels J, Vanderleyden J. Effects of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria on nodulation of Phaseolus vulgaris L. are dependent on plant P nutrition. Eur J Plant Pathol. 2007;119:341–351. doi: 10.1007/s10658-007-9154-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
62.Shamseldin A, Hafez EE, Abdelsalam H, Werner D. Genetic biodiversity of common bean nodulating rhizobia and studying their symbiotic effectiveness combined with strains of genus Azotobacter, Bacillus or Pseudomonas in Egypt. Res J Agric Biol Sci. 2007;3:184–194. [Google Scholar]
63.Srinivasan M, Holl FB, Petersen DJ. Nodulation of Phaseolus vulgaris by Rhizobium etli is enhanced by the presence of Bacillus. Can J Microbiol. 1997;43:1–8. doi: 10.1139/m97-001. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
64.Stajković O, Delić D, Jošić D, Kuzmanović D, Rasulić N, Knežević-Vukčević J. Improvement of common bean growth by coinoculation with Rhizobium and plant growth-promoting bacteria. Rom Biotechnol Lett. 2011;16:5919–5926. [Google Scholar]
65.Vessey JK, Buss TJ. Bacillus cereus UW85 inoculation effects on growth, nodulation, and N accumulation in grain legumes: controlled-environment studies. Can J Plant Sci. 2002;82:282–290. doi: 10.4141/P01-047. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
66.Araújo ASF, Carneiro RFV, Bezerra AAC, Araújo FF. Co-inoculação rizóbio e Bacillus subtilis em feijão-caupi e leucena: efeito sobre a nodulação, a fixação de N2 e o crescimento das plantas. Ciênc Rural. 2010;40:182–185. doi: 10.1590/S0103-84782009005000249. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
67.Araújo F, Araújo A, Souza M. Inoculação do feijão-caupi com rizobactérias promotoras de crescimento e desempenho na produção de biomassa. Pesq Agropec Pernambucana. 2012;17:53–58. doi: 10.12661/pap.2012.010. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
68.Silva VN, Figueiredo MDVB. Atuação de rizóbios com rizobactéria promotora de crescimento em plantas na cultura do caupi (Vigna unguiculata [L.] Walp.) Acta Sci Agron. 2006;28:407–412. doi: 10.4025/actasciagron.v28i3.964. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
69.Silva VN, Silva LESF, Martínez CR, Burity HA, Figueiredo MVB. Estirpes de Paenibacillus promotoras de nodulação específica na simbiose em Bradyrhizobium em caupi. Acta Sci Agron. 2007;29:331–338. doi: 10.4025/actasciagron.v29i3.277. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
70.Lima ASTD, Barreto MDCS, Araújo JM, Seldin L, Burity HA, Figueiredo MDVB. Sinergismo Bacillus, Brevibacillus e, ou, Paenibacillus na simbiose Bradyrhizobium-caupi. Rev Bras Ciênc Solo. 2011;35:713–721. doi: 10.1590/S0100-06832011000300006. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
71.Rodrigues AC, Antunes JEL, Medeiros VV, Barros BGF, Figueiredo MVB. Resposta da co-inoculação de bactérias promotoras de crescimento em plantas e Bradyrhizobium sp. em caupi. BioSci J. 2012;28:196–202. [Google Scholar]
72.Rodrigues AC, Antunes JEL, Costa AF, Oliveira JP, Figueiredo MVB. Interrelationship of Bradyrhizobium sp. and plant growth-promoting bacteria in cowpea: survival and symbiotic performance. J Microbiol. 2013;51:49–55. doi: 10.1007/s12275-013-2335-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
73.Abbas M, Haroun S, Mowfy A, Agha M. Coinoculation effect of rhizobia and endophytic bacteria on Vicia faba growth and metabolism. J Plant Prod. 2018;9:269–272. doi: 10.21608/jpp.2018.35470. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
74.El-Howeity MA, Abdalla AA, Abo-Kora HA, El-Shinnawi MM. Response of faba bean plants to inoculation with Rhizobium leguminosarium and other rhizobacteria under three nitrogen leves in newly reclaimed soil. J Soil Sci Agric Eng. 2009;34:7325–7345. doi: 10.21608/jssae.2009.103835. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
75.Rugheim AME, Abdelgani ME. Effects of Rhizobium and Bacillus megaterium var. phosphaticum strains and chemical fertilizers on symbiotic properties and yield of faba bean (Vicia faba L.) Adv Environ Biol. 2009;3:337–346. [Google Scholar]
76.Abd-El-Khair H, Haggag KH, El-Nasr HIS. Field application of Trichoderma harzianum and Bacillus subtilis combined with Rhizobium for controlling Fusarium root rot in faba bean in organic farming. Middle East J Appl Sci. 2018;8:865–873. [Google Scholar]
77.Mahakavi T, Baskaran L, Rajesh M, Ganesh KS. Efficient of biofertilizers on growth and yield characteristics of groundnut Arachis hypogaea L. J Environm Treat Techn. 2014;2:158–161. [Google Scholar]
78.Mathivanan S, Chidambaram AA, Sundramoorthy P, Baskaran L, Kalaikandhan R. Effect of combined inoculations of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) on the growth and yield of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2014;3:1010–1020. [Google Scholar]
79.Preyanga R, Anandham R, Krishnamoorthy R, Senthilkumar M, Gopal NO, Vellaikumar A, Meena S. Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) nodule Rhizobium and passenger endophytic bacterial cultivable diversity and their impact on plant growth promotion. Rhizosphere. 2021;17:100309. doi: 10.1016/j.rhisph.2021.100309. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
80.Akhtar MS, Shakeel U, Siddiqui ZA. Biocontrol of Fusarium wilt by Bacillus pumilus, Pseudomonas alcaligenes and Rhizobium sp. on lentil. Turk J Biol. 2010;34:1–7. doi: 10.3906/biy-0809-12. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
81.Kumar R, Chandra R. Influence of PGPR and PSB on Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. viciae strain competition and symbiotic performance in lentil. World J Agric Sci. 2008;4:297–301. [Google Scholar]
82.Kumar A, Jha MN, Singh D, Pathak D, Rajawat MVS. Prospecting catabolic diversity of microbial strains for developing microbial consortia and their synergistic effect on Lentil (Lens esculenta) growth, yield and iron biofortification. Arch Microbiol. 2021;203:4913–4928. doi: 10.1007/s00203-021-02446-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
83.Mishra PK, Mishra S, Selvakumar G, Bisht JK, Kundu S, Gupta HS. Coinoculation of Bacillus thuringeinsis-KR1 with Rhizobium leguminosarum enhances plant growth and nodulation of pea (Pisum sativum L.) and lentil (Lens culinaris L.) World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2009;25:753–761. doi: 10.1007/s11274-009-9963-z. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
84.Tsigie A, Tilak KVBR, Saxena AK. Field response of legumes to inoculation with plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria. Biol Fert Soil. 2011;47:971–974. doi: 10.1007/s00374-011-0573-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
85.Abdel-Fattah I, El-Nahrawy S, El-Mansoury MA. Interaction effect of skipping irrigation and coinoculation with Bradyrhizobium and some strains of Bacillus bacteria on growth dynamics of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.) its yield and water productivity. Egypt J Soil Sci. 2020;60:167–181. doi: 10.21608/ejss.2020.24792.1344. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
86.Gangaraddi V, Brahmaprakash G. Evaluation of selected microbial consortium formulations on growth of green gram (Vigna radiata L.) Int J Chem Stud. 2018;6:1909–1913. doi: 10.20546/ijcmas.2019.810.061. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
87.Gupta A, Saxena AK, Gopal M, Tilak KVBR. Effects of coinoculation of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria and Bradyrhizobium sp.(vigna) on growth and yield of green gram [Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek] Trop Agric-London Then Trinidad. 2003;80:28–35. [Google Scholar]
88.Pandya M, Rajput M, Rajkumar S. Exploring plant growth promoting potential of non rhizobial root nodules endophytes of Vigna radiata. Microbiol. 2015;84:80–89. doi: 10.1134/S0026261715010105. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
89.Qureshi MA, Shakir MA, Iqbal A, Akhtar N, Khan A. Coinoculation of phosphate solubilizing bacteria and rhizobia for improving growth and yield of mungbean (Vigna radiata L.) J Anim Plant Sci. 2011;21:491–497. [Google Scholar]
90.Sindhu SS, Gupta SK, Suneja S, Dadarwal KR. Enhancement of green gram nodulation and growth by Bacillus species. Biol Plant. 2002;45:117–120. doi: 10.1023/A:1015117027863. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
91.Tariq M, Hameed S, Yasmeen T, Ali A. Non-rhizobial bacteria for improved nodulation and grain yield of mung bean [Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek] Afr J Biotec. 2012;11:15012–15019. doi: 10.5897/AJB11.3438. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
92.Schwartz AR, Ortiz I, Maymon M, Herbold CW, Fujishige NA, Vijanderan JA, Villella W, Hanamoto K, Diener A, Sanders ER, Mason DA, Hirsch AM. Bacillus simplex—A little known PGPB with anti-fungal activity—alters pea legume root architecture and nodule morphology when coinoculated with Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. viciae. Agron. 2013;3:595–620. doi: 10.3390/agronomy3040595. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
93.Dutta S, Morang P, Kumar N, Kumar BD. Two rhizobacterial strains, individually and in interactions with Rhizobium sp., enhance fusarial wilt control, growth, and yield in pigeon pea. J Microbiol. 2014;52:778–784. doi: 10.1007/s12275-014-3496-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
94.Osman AG, Rugheim AME, Elsoni EM. Effects of biofertilization on nodulation, nitrogen and phosphorus content and yield of pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) Adv Environ Biol. 2011;5:2742–2749. [Google Scholar]
95.Rajendran G, Sing F, Desai AJ, Archana G. Enhanced growth and nodulation of pigeon pea by coinoculation of Bacillus strains with Rhizobium spp. Bioresour Technol. 2008;99:4544–4550. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2007.06.057. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
96.Tilak KVBR, Ranganayaki N, Manoharachari C. Synergistic effects of plant-growth promoting rhizobacteria and Rhizobium on nodulation and nitrogen fixation by pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan) Eur J Soil Sci. 2006;57:67–71. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2389.2006.00771.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
97.Alves-Neto AJ, Lana MC, Lorenzetti E, Henkemeier NP, Schimiloski S, Ritter G. Conventional inoculants and biological protector, coinoculation and nitrogen fertilization in soybean. Sci Agrar. 2020;19:187–195. doi: 10.18188/sap.v19i2.23522. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
98.Annapurna K, Ramadoss D, Bose P, Vithalkumar L. In situ localization of Paenibacillus polymyxa HKA-15 in roots and root nodules of soybean (Glycine max. L.) Plant Soil. 2013;373:641–648. doi: 10.1007/s11104-013-1825-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
99.Araújo FFD, Hungria M. Nodulação e rendimento de soja co-infectada com Bacillus subtilis e Bradyrhizobium japonicum/Bradyrhizobium elkanii. Pesq Agropec Bras. 1999;34:1633–1643. doi: 10.1590/S0100-204X1999000900014. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
100.Araújo FF, Bonifácio A, Bavaresco LG, Mendes LW, Araújo ASF. Bacillus subtilis changes the root architecture of soybean grown on nutrient-poor substrate. Rhizosphere. 2021;18:100348. doi: 10.1016/j.rhisph.2021.100348. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
101.Atieno M, Herrmann L, Okalebo R, Lesueur D. Efficiency of different formulations of Bradyrhizobium japonicum and effect of coinoculation of Bacillus subtilis with two different strains of Bradyrhizobium japonicum. World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2012;28:2541–2550. doi: 10.1007/s11274-012-1062-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
102.Bai Y, Zhou X, Smith DL. Enhanced soybean plant growth resulting from coinoculation of Bacillus strains with Bradyrhizobium japonicum. Crop Sci. 2003;43:1774–1781. doi: 10.2135/cropsci2003.1774. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
103.Braga-Junior GM, Chagas LFB, Amaral LRO, Miller LO, Junior AFC. Eficiência da inoculação por Bacillus subtilis sobre biomassa e produtividade de soja. Rev Bras Ciênc Agrár. 2018;13:5571. doi: 10.5039/agraria.v13i4a5571. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
104.Bullied WJ, Buss TJ, Vessey JK. Bacillus cereus UW85 inoculation effects on growth, nodulation, and N accumulation in grain legumes: field studies. Can J Plant Sci. 2002;82:291–298. doi: 10.4141/P01-048. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
105.Iličić RM, Pivić RN, Dinić ZS, Latković DS, Vlajić SA, Jošić DLJ. The enhancement of soybean growth and yield in a field trial through introduction of mixtures of Bradyrhizobium japonicum, Bacillus sp. and Pseudomonas chlororaphis. Not Sci Biol. 2017;9:274–279. doi: 10.15835/nsb9210081. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
106.Li DM, Alexander M. Coinoculation with antibiotic-producing bacteria to increase colonization and nodulation by rhizobia. Plant Soil. 1988;108:211–219. doi: 10.1007/BF02375651. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
107.Marinković J, Bjelić D, Tintor B, Miladinović J, Đurić V, Đordević V. Effects of soybean coinoculation with plant growth promoting rhizobacteria in field trial. Rom Biotechnol Lett. 2018;23:13401–13408. [Google Scholar]
108.Masciarelli O, Llanes A, Luna V. A new PGPR co-inoculated with Bradyrhizobium japonicum enhances soybean nodulation. Microbiol Res. 2014;169:609–615. doi: 10.1016/j.micres.2013.10.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
109.Mel'nikova NN, Bulavenko LV, Kurdish IK, Titova LV, Kots' SYa, Formation and function of the Legume-Rhizobium symbiosis of soybean plants while introducing bacterial strains from the genera Azotobacter and Bacillus. Appl Biochem Microbiol. 2002;38:368–372. doi: 10.1023/A:1016291207590. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
110.Moretti LG, Crusciol CAC, Bossolani JW, Momesso JW, Garcia A, Kuramae EE, Hungria M. Bacterial consortium and microbial metabolites increase grain quality and soybean yield. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr. 2020;20:1923–1934. doi: 10.1007/s42729-020-00263-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
111.Oliveira LBG, Teixeira-Filho MCM, Galindo FS, Nogueira TAR, Barco-Neto M, Buzetti S. Forms and types of coinoculation in the soybean crop in Cerrado region. Rev Ciênc Agrar. 2019;42:924–932. doi: 10.19084/rca.15828. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
112.Pacentchuk F, Gomes JM, Lima VA, Mendes MC, Sandini IE, Jadoski SO. Effect of coinoculation of plant growth promoting bacteria on soybean crop. Res Soc Dev. 2020;9:e39291211360. doi: 10.33448/rsd-v9i12.11360. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
113.Pankaj K, Mishra S, Mishra G, Selvakumar SK, Gupta HS. Enhanced soybean (Glycine max L.) plant growth and nodulation by Bradyrhizobium japonicum-SB1 in presence of Bacillus thuringiensis-KR1. Acta Agric Scand B Soil Plant Sci. 2009;59:189–196. doi: 10.1080/09064710802040558. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
114.Sibponkrung S, Kondo T, Tanaka K, Tittabutr P, Boonkerd N, Yoshida K, Teaumroong N. Coinoculation of Bacillus velezensis strain S141 and Bradyrhizobium strains promotes nodule growth and nitrogen fixation. Microorganisms. 2020;8:678. doi: 10.3390/microorganismos8050678. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
115.Subramanian P, Kim K, Krishnamoorthy R, Sundaram S, Sa T. Endophytic bacteria improve nodule function and plant nitrogen in soybean on coinoculation with Bradyrhizobium japonicum MN110. Plant Growth Regul. 2015;76:327–332. doi: 10.1007/s10725-014-9993-x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
116.Poonguzhali P, Selvaraj S, Madhaiyan M, Thangaraju M, Ryu J, Chung K, Sa T. Effects of co-cultures, containing N-fixer and P-solubilizer, on the growth and yield of pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.) and blackgram (Vigna mungo L.) J Microbiol Biotec. 2005;15:903–908. [Google Scholar]
117.Hedges LV, Gurevitch J, Curtis PS. The meta-analysis of response ratios in experimental ecology. Ecol. 1999;80:1150–1156. doi: 10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080[1150:TMAORR]2.0.CO;2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
118.Gurevitch J, Hedges LV. Meta-analysis: combining the results of independent experiments. In: Scheneir SM, Gurevitch J, editors. Designs and analysis of ecological experiments. 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2001. pp. 347–369. [Google Scholar]
119.Viechtbauer W. Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. J Statist Software. 2010;36:1–48. doi: 10.18637/jss.v036.i03. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
120.Buhian WP, Bensmihen S. Mini-review: nod factor regulation of phytohormone signaling and homeostasis during rhizobia-legume symbiosis. Front Plant Sci. 2018;9:1247. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2018.01247. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
121.Dayoub E, Naudin C, Piva G, Shirtliffe SJ, Fustec J, Corre-Hellou G. Traits affecting early season nitrogen uptake in nine legume species. Heliyon. 2017;3:e00244. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2017.e00244. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
122.Barnawal D, Maji D, Bharti N, Chanotiya CS, Kalra A. ACC Deaminase-containing Bacillus subtilis reduces stress ethylene-induced damage and improves mycorrhizal colonization and rhizobial nodulation in Trigonella foenum-graecum under drought stress. J Plant Growth Regul. 2013;32:809–822. doi: 10.1007/s00344-013-9347-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
123.Radhakrishnan R, Hashem A, Abd-Allah EF. Bacillus: a biological tool for crop improvement through bio-molecular changes in adverse environments. Front Physiol. 2017;8:667. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2017.00667. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
124.Kuzyakov Y, Domanski G. Carbon input by plants into the soil. Review. J Plant Nutr Soil Sc. 2000;163:421–431. doi: 10.1002/1522-2624(200008)163:4<421::AID-JPLN421>3.0.CO;2-RLal,2017. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
125.Kaschuk G, Yin X, Hungria M, Leffelaar PA, Giller KE, Kuyper TW. Photosynthetic adaptation of soybean due to varying effectiveness of N2 fixation by two distinct Bradyrhizobium japonicum strains. Environm Exp Bot. 2012;76:1–6. doi: 10.1016/j.envexpbot.2011.10.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
126.Backer R, Rokem JS, Ilangumaran G, Lamont J, Praslickova D, Ricci E, Subramanian S, Smith DL. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria: context, mechanisms of action, and roadmap to commercialization of biostimulants for sustainable agriculture. Front Plant Sci. 2018;9:1473. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2018.01473. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

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

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 16.4 KB)^{(16.4KB, docx)}

Supplementary file2 (XLSX 326 KB)^{(326.4KB, xlsx)}

[CR1] 1.Rawal V, Navarro DK. The global economy of pulses. Rome: FAO; 2019. [Google Scholar]

[CR2] 2.Kaschuk G, Kuyper TW, Leffelaar PA, Hungria M, Giller KE. Are the rates of photosynthesis stimulated by the carbon sink strength of rhizobial and arbuscular mycorrhizal symbioses? Soil Biol Biochem. 2009;41:1233–1244. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2009.03.005. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR3] 3.Kaschuk G, Leffelaar PA, Giller KE, Alberton O, Hungria M, Kuyper TW. Responses of legumes to rhizobia and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi: a meta-analysis of potential photosynthate limitation of symbioses. Soil Biol Biochem. 2010;42:125–127. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2009.10.017. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR4] 4.FAOSTAT (2021) Retrieved from Database. http://faostat.fao.org/beta/en/#data). Available on 15 July 2021

[CR5] 5.World Vegetable Center - WVC, International mungbean improvement network, 2021. Retrieved from https://avrdc.org/intl-mungbean-network/. Available on 15 July 2021

[CR6] 6.Kaschuk G, Hungria M (2017) Diversity and importance of diazotrophic bacteria to agricultural sustainability in the tropics. In: Diversity and benefits of microorganisms from the tropics. Springer, Cham. p. 269–292. 10.1007/978-3-319-55804-2_12

[CR7] 7.Dwivedi SL, Sahrawat KL, Upadhyaya HD, Mengoni A, Galardini M, Bazzicalupo M, Biondi EG, Hungría M, Kaschuk G, Blair MW, Ortiz R. Advances in host plant and rhizobium genomics to enhance symbiotic nitrogen fixation in grain legumes. Adv Agron. 2015;129:1–116. doi: 10.1016/bs.agron.2014.09.001. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR8] 8.Peoples MB, Giller KE, Jensen ES, Herridge DF. Quantifying country-to-global scale nitrogen fixation for grain legumes: I. Reliance on nitrogen fixation of soybean, groundnut and pulses. Plant Soil. 2021 doi: 10.1007/s11104-021-05167-6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR9] 9.Cardoso JD, Gomes DF, Goes KCGP, Fonseca NS, Dorigo OF, Hungria M, Andrade DS. Relationship between total nodulation and nodulation at the root crown of peanut, soybean and common bean plants. Soil Biol Biochem. 2009;41:1760–1763. doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2009.05.008. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR10] 10.Menéndez E, Paço A. Is the application of plant probiotic bacterial consortia always beneficial for plants? Exploring synergies between rhizobial and non-rhizobial bacteria and their effects on agro-economically valuable crops. Life. 2020;10:24. doi: 10.3390/life10030024. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR11] 11.Janati W, Benmrid B, Elhaissoufi W, Zeroual Y, Nasielski J, Bargaz A. Will phosphate bio-solubilization stimulate biological nitrogen fixation in grain legumes? Front Agron. 2021;3:637196. doi: 10.3389/fagro.2021.637196. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR12] 12.Kaschuk G, Nogueira MA, De Luca MJ, Hungria M. Response of determinate and indeterminate soybean cultivars to basal and topdressing N fertilization compared to sole inoculation with Bradyrhizobium. Field Crop Res. 2016;195:21–27. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2016.05.010. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR13] 13.Zeffa DM, Fantin LH, Koltun A, de Oliveira ALM, Nunes MPBA, Canteri MG, Gonçalves LSA. Effects of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria on coinoculation with Bradyrhizobium in soybean crop: a meta-analysis of studies from 1987 to 2018. PeerJ. 2020;8:e7905. doi: 10.7717/peerj.7905. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR14] 14.Barbosa JZ, Hungria M, Sena JVS, Poggere G, dos Reis AR, Corrêa RS. Meta-analysis reveals benefits of coinoculation of soybean with Azospirillum brasilense and Bradyrhizobium spp. in Brazil. Appl Soil Ecol. 2021;163:103913. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2021.103913. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR15] 15.Aloo BN, Makumba BA, Mbega ER. The potential of Bacilli rhizobacteria for sustainable crop production and environmental sustainability. Microbiol Res. 2019;219:26–39. doi: 10.1016/j.micres.2018.10.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR16] 16.Tiwari S, Prasad V, Lata C. Bacillus: plant growth promoting bacteria for sustainable agriculture and environment. In: Singh JS, Singh DP, editors. New and future developments in microbial biotechnology and bioengineering. London: Elsevier; 2019. pp. 43–55. [Google Scholar]

[CR17] 17.Sousa SM, Oliveira CA, Andrade DL, Carvalho CG, Ribeiro VP, Pastina MM, Marriel IE, Lana UHP, Gomes EA. Tropical Bacillus strains inoculation enhances maize root surface area, dry weight, nutrient uptake and grain yield. J Plant Growth Reg. 2021;40:867–877. doi: 10.1007/s00344-020-10146-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR18] 18.Srinivasan M, Holl FB, Petersen DJ. Influence of indoleacetic-acid-producing Bacillus isolates on the nodulation of Phaseolus vulgaris by Rhizobium etli under gnotobiotic conditions. Can J Microbiol. 1996;42:1006–1014. doi: 10.1139/m96-129. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR19] 19.Qureshi MA, Iqbal A, Akhtar N, Shakir MA, Khan A. Coinoculation of phosphate solubilizing bacteria and rhizobia in the presence of L-tryptophan for the promotion of mash bean (Vigna mungo L.) Soil Environm. 2012;31:47–54. [Google Scholar]

[CR20] 20.Aung TT, Buranabanyat B, Piromyou P, Longtonglang A, Tittabutr P, Boonkerd N, Teaumroong N. Enhanced soybean biomass by coinoculation of Bradyrhizobium japonicum and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria and its effects on microbial community structures. Afr J Microbiol Res. 2013;7:3858–3873. doi: 10.5897/AJMR2013.5917. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR21] 21.Massoud AM, Abou-Zeid MY, Hassan ESA, El-Fiki SF. Influence of phosphate dissolving and nitrogen fixing bacteria on faba bean under different levels of phosphorus fertilization. J Agric Sci Mansoura Univ. 2008;33:7991–8007. [Google Scholar]

[CR22] 22.Benjelloun I, Alami IT, El Khadir M, Douira A, Udupa SM. Coinoculation of Mesorhizobium ciceri with either Bacillus sp. or Enterobacter aerogenes on chickpea improves growth and productivity in phosphate-deficient soils in dry areas of a Mediterranean Region. Plant. 2021;10:571. doi: 10.3390/plants10030571. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR23] 23.de Jensen CE, Percich JA, Graham PH. Integrated management strategies of bean root rot with Bacillus subtilis and Rhizobium in Minnesota. Field Crop Res. 2002;74:107–115. doi: 10.1016/S0378-4290(01)00200-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR24] 24.de Jensen CE, Percich JA, Graham PH. The effect of Bacillus subtilis and Rhizobium inoculation of dry bean seed on root rot severity and yield in Minnesota. Annu Rep Bean Improv Coop. 2002;45:98–99. [Google Scholar]

[CR25] 25.Abd-Allah EF, El-Didamony G. Effect of seed treatment of Arachis hypogaea with Bacillus subtilis on nodulation in biocontrol of southern blight (Sclerotium rolfsii) disease. Phytoparasitica. 2007;35:8–12. doi: 10.1007/BF02981055. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR26] 26.Siddiqui ZA, Baghel G, Akhtar MS. Biocontrol of Meloidogyne javanica by Rhizobium and plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria on lentil. World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2007;23:435–441. doi: 10.1007/s11274-006-9244-z. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR27] 27.Yuttavanichakul W, Lawongsa P, Wongkaew S, Teaumroong N, Boonkerd N, Nomura N, Tittabutr P. Improvement of peanut rhizobial inoculant by incorporation of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) as biocontrol against the seed borne fungus, Aspergillus niger. Biol Control. 2012;63:87–97. doi: 10.1016/j.biocontrol.2012.06.008. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR28] 28.Figueredo MS, Tonelli ML, Taurian T, Angelini J, Ibañez F, Valetti L, Muñoz V, Anzuay MS, Ludueña L, Fabra A. Interrelationships between Bacillus sp. CHEP5 and Bradyrhizobium sp. SEMIA 6144 in the induced systemic resistance against Sclerotium rolfsii and symbiosis on peanut plants. J Biosci. 2014;39:877–885. doi: 10.1007/s12038-014-9470-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR29] 29.Fira D, Dimkić I, Berić T, Lozo J, Stanković S. Biological control of plant pathogens by Bacillus species. J Biotechnol. 2018;285:44–55. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2018.07.044. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR30] 30.Ferreira LDVM, Carvalho F, Andrade JFC, Oliveira DP, Medeiros FHV, Moreira FMDS. Coinoculation of selected nodule endophytic rhizobacterial strains with Rhizobium tropici promotes plant growth and controls damping off in common bean. Pedosphere. 2020;30:98–108. doi: 10.1016/S1002-0160(19)60825-8. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR31] 31.Figueiredo MVB, Burity HA, Martinez CR, Chanway CP. Alleviation of water stress effects in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L) by coi-noculation Paenibacillus X Rhizobium tropici. Appl Soil Ecol. 2008;40:182–188. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-21921-w. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR32] 32.Alemneh AA, Zhou Y, Ryder MH, Denton MD. Mechanisms in plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria that enhance legume–rhizobial symbioses. J Appl Microbiol. 2020;129:1133–1156. doi: 10.1111/jam.14754. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR33] 33.Santoyo G, Guzmán-Guzmán P, Parra-Cota FI, Santos-Villalobos Sdl, Orozco-Mosqueda MdC, Glick BR. Plant growth stimulation by microbial consortia. Agronomy. 2021;11(2):219. doi: 10.3390/agronomy11020219. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR34] 34.Alagawadi AR, Gaur AC. Associative effect of Rhizobium and phosphate-solubilizing bacteria on the yield and nutrient uptake of chickpea. Plant Soil. 1988;105:241–246. doi: 10.1007/BF02376788. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR35] 35.Elkoca E, Kantar F, Sahin F. Influence of nitrogen fixing and phosphorus solubilizing bacteria on the nodulation, plant growth, and yield of chickpea. J Plant Nutr. 2007;31:157–171. doi: 10.1080/01904160701742097. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR36] 36.Parmar N, Dadarwal KR. Stimulation of nitrogen fixation and induction of flavonoid-like compounds by rhizobacteria. J App Microbiol. 1999;86:36–44. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2672.1999.00634.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR37] 37.Qureshi MA, Shakir MA, Naveed M, Ahmad MJ. Growth and yield response of chickpea to coinoculation with Mesorhizobium ciceri and Bacillus megaterium. J Anim Plant Sci. 2009;19:205–211. [Google Scholar]

[CR38] 38.Rana M, Chandra R, Pareek N. Coinoculation effect of endophytic bacteria with Mesorhizobium sp. in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) on nodulation, yields, nutrient uptake and soil biological properties. J Indian Soc Soil Sci. 2015;63:429–435. doi: 10.5958/0974-0228.2015.00057.2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR39] 39.Saini R, Dudeja SS, Giri R, Kumar V. Isolation, characterization, and evaluation of bacterial root and nodule endophytes from chickpea cultivated in Northern India. J Basic Microbiol. 2015;55:74–81. doi: 10.1002/jobm.201300173. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR40] 40.Singh G, Sekhon HS, Sharma P. Effect of irrigation and biofertilizer on water use, nodulation, growth and yield of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Arch Agronomy Soil Sci. 2011;57:715–726. doi: 10.1080/03650340.2010.493880. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR41] 41.Singh N, Singh G, Aggarwal N. Economic analysis of application of phosphorus, single and dual inoculation of Rhizobium and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria in lentil (Lens culinaris Medikus) J Appl Nat Sci. 2017;9:1008–1011. doi: 10.31018/jans.v9i2.1312. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR42] 42.Singh Z, Singh G, Aggarwal N, Virk HK. Sharma P (2021) Symbiotic efficiency vis-à-vis chickpea performance as affected by seed inoculation with Mesorhizobium, phosphorus-solubilizing bacteria, and phosphorus application. J Plant Nutr. 2021 doi: 10.1080/01904167.2021.1943435. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR43] 43.Sivaramaiah N, Malik DK, Sindhu S. Improvement in symbiotic efficiency of chickpea (Cicer arietinum) by coinoculation of Bacillus strains with Mesorhizobium sp. cicer. Indian J Microbiol. 2007;47:51–56. doi: 10.1007/s12088-007-0010-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR44] 44.Verma J, Yadav J. Implication of microbial consortium on biomass and yield of chickpea under sustainable agriculture. Environ Eng Manag J. 2018;17:513–522. doi: 10.30638/eemj.2018.051. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR45] 45.Verma JP, Yadav J, Tiwari KN. Application of Rhizobium sp. BHURC01 and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on nodulation, plant biomass and yields of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Int J Agric Res. 2010;5:148–156. doi: 10.3923/ijar.2010.148.156. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR46] 46.Verma JP, Yadav J, Tiwari KN. Enhancement of nodulation and yield of chickpea by coinoculation of indigenous Mesorhizobium spp. and plant growth–promoting rhizobacteria in Eastern Uttar Pradesh. Comm Soil Sci Plant Anal. 2012;43:605–621. doi: 10.1080/00103624.2012.639110. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR47] 47.Wani P, Khan M, Zaidi A. Coinoculation of nitrogen-fixing and phosphate-solubilizing bacteria to promote growth, yield and nutrient uptake in chickpea. Acta Agron Hung. 2007;55:315–323. doi: 10.1556/AAgr.55.2007.3.7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR48] 48.Wani PA, Khan MS, Zaidi A. Synergistic effects of the inoculation with nitrogen-fixing and phosphate-solubilizing rhizobacteria on the performance of field-grown chickpea. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr. 2007;170:283–287. doi: 10.1002/jpln.200620602. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR49] 49.Yadav J, Verma JP. Effect of seed inoculation with indigenous Rhizobium and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on nutrients uptake and yields of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Eur J Soil Biol. 2014;63:70–77. doi: 10.1016/j.ejsobi.2014.05.001. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR50] 50.Armenta-Bojórquez AD, Roblero-Ramírez HR, Camacho-Báez JR, Mundo-Ocampo M, Garcia-Gutierrez C, Armenta-Medina A. Organic versus synthetic fertilisation of beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) in Mexico. Exp Agric. 2016;52:154–162. doi: 10.1017/s0014479715000010. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR51] 51.Camacho M, Santamaria C, Temprano F, Rodriguez-Navarro DN, Daza A. Coinoculation with Bacillus sp. CECT 450 improves nodulation in Phaseolus vulgaris L. Can J Microbiol. 2001;47:1058–1062. doi: 10.1139/w01-107. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR52] 52.Elkoca E, Turan M, Donmez MF. Effects of single, dual and triple inoculations with Bacillus subtilis, Bacillus megaterium and Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. phaseoli on nodulation, nutrient uptake, yield and yield parameters of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris l. cv. ‘elkoca-05’) J Plant Nutr. 2010;33:2104–2119. doi: 10.1080/01904167.2010.519084. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR53] 53.Ferreira LDVM, Carvalho FD, Andrade JFC, Moreira FMDS. Growth promotion of common bean and genetic diversity of bacteria from Amazon pastureland. Sci Agric. 2018;75:461–469. doi: 10.1590/1678-992X-2017-0049. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR54] 54.Figueiredo MVB, Martinez CR, Burity HA, Chanway CP. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria for improving nodulation and nitrogen fixation in the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2008;24:1187–1193. doi: 10.1007/s11274-007-9591-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR55] 55.Gabre VV, Venancio WS, Moraes BA, Furmam FG, Galvão CW, Gonçalves DRP, Etto RM. Multiple effect of different plant growth promoting microorganisms on beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) crop. Braz Arch Biol Technol. 2020;63:e20190493. doi: 10.1590/1678-4324-solo-2020190493. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR56] 56.Gharib AA, Shahein MM, Ragab AA. Influence of Rhizobium inoculation combined with Azotobacter chrococcum and Bacillus megaterium var phosphaticum on growth, nodulation, yield and quality of two snap been (Phaseolus vulgaris l.) cultivars. Ann Agric Sci. 2015;53:249–261. doi: 10.21608/assjm.2015.109816. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR57] 57.Hafez ASEE, Werner HAD. Genetic biodiversity of common bean nodulating rhizobia and studying their symbiotic effectiveness combined with strains of genus Azotobacter, Bacillus or Pseudomonas in Egypt. Res J Agric Biol Sci. 2007;3:184–194. [Google Scholar]

[CR58] 58.Karanja N, Mutua G, Kimenju J. Evaluating the effect of Bacillus and Rhizobium bi-inoculant on nodulation and nematode control in Phaseolus vulgaris L. In: Bationo A, Waswa B, Kihara J, Kimetu J, editors. Advances in integrated soil fertility management in sub-Saharan Africa: challenges and opportunities. Dordrecht: Springer; 2007. [Google Scholar]

[CR59] 59.Korir H, Mungai NW, Thuita M, Hamba Y, Masso C. Coinoculation effect of rhizobia and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on common bean growth in a low phosphorus soil. Front Plant Sci. 2017;8:141. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2017.00141. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR60] 60.Kumar P, Pandey P, Dubey RC, Maheshwari DK. Bacteria consortium optimization improves nutrient uptake, nodulation, disease suppression and growth of the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) in both pot and field studies. Rhizosphere. 2016;2:13–23. doi: 10.1016/j.rhisph.2016.09.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR61] 61.Remans R, Croonenborghs A, Gutierrez RT, Michiels J, Vanderleyden J. Effects of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria on nodulation of Phaseolus vulgaris L. are dependent on plant P nutrition. Eur J Plant Pathol. 2007;119:341–351. doi: 10.1007/s10658-007-9154-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR62] 62.Shamseldin A, Hafez EE, Abdelsalam H, Werner D. Genetic biodiversity of common bean nodulating rhizobia and studying their symbiotic effectiveness combined with strains of genus Azotobacter, Bacillus or Pseudomonas in Egypt. Res J Agric Biol Sci. 2007;3:184–194. [Google Scholar]

[CR63] 63.Srinivasan M, Holl FB, Petersen DJ. Nodulation of Phaseolus vulgaris by Rhizobium etli is enhanced by the presence of Bacillus. Can J Microbiol. 1997;43:1–8. doi: 10.1139/m97-001. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR64] 64.Stajković O, Delić D, Jošić D, Kuzmanović D, Rasulić N, Knežević-Vukčević J. Improvement of common bean growth by coinoculation with Rhizobium and plant growth-promoting bacteria. Rom Biotechnol Lett. 2011;16:5919–5926. [Google Scholar]

[CR65] 65.Vessey JK, Buss TJ. Bacillus cereus UW85 inoculation effects on growth, nodulation, and N accumulation in grain legumes: controlled-environment studies. Can J Plant Sci. 2002;82:282–290. doi: 10.4141/P01-047. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR66] 66.Araújo ASF, Carneiro RFV, Bezerra AAC, Araújo FF. Co-inoculação rizóbio e Bacillus subtilis em feijão-caupi e leucena: efeito sobre a nodulação, a fixação de N2 e o crescimento das plantas. Ciênc Rural. 2010;40:182–185. doi: 10.1590/S0103-84782009005000249. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR67] 67.Araújo F, Araújo A, Souza M. Inoculação do feijão-caupi com rizobactérias promotoras de crescimento e desempenho na produção de biomassa. Pesq Agropec Pernambucana. 2012;17:53–58. doi: 10.12661/pap.2012.010. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR68] 68.Silva VN, Figueiredo MDVB. Atuação de rizóbios com rizobactéria promotora de crescimento em plantas na cultura do caupi (Vigna unguiculata [L.] Walp.) Acta Sci Agron. 2006;28:407–412. doi: 10.4025/actasciagron.v28i3.964. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR69] 69.Silva VN, Silva LESF, Martínez CR, Burity HA, Figueiredo MVB. Estirpes de Paenibacillus promotoras de nodulação específica na simbiose em Bradyrhizobium em caupi. Acta Sci Agron. 2007;29:331–338. doi: 10.4025/actasciagron.v29i3.277. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR70] 70.Lima ASTD, Barreto MDCS, Araújo JM, Seldin L, Burity HA, Figueiredo MDVB. Sinergismo Bacillus, Brevibacillus e, ou, Paenibacillus na simbiose Bradyrhizobium-caupi. Rev Bras Ciênc Solo. 2011;35:713–721. doi: 10.1590/S0100-06832011000300006. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR71] 71.Rodrigues AC, Antunes JEL, Medeiros VV, Barros BGF, Figueiredo MVB. Resposta da co-inoculação de bactérias promotoras de crescimento em plantas e Bradyrhizobium sp. em caupi. BioSci J. 2012;28:196–202. [Google Scholar]

[CR72] 72.Rodrigues AC, Antunes JEL, Costa AF, Oliveira JP, Figueiredo MVB. Interrelationship of Bradyrhizobium sp. and plant growth-promoting bacteria in cowpea: survival and symbiotic performance. J Microbiol. 2013;51:49–55. doi: 10.1007/s12275-013-2335-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR73] 73.Abbas M, Haroun S, Mowfy A, Agha M. Coinoculation effect of rhizobia and endophytic bacteria on Vicia faba growth and metabolism. J Plant Prod. 2018;9:269–272. doi: 10.21608/jpp.2018.35470. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR74] 74.El-Howeity MA, Abdalla AA, Abo-Kora HA, El-Shinnawi MM. Response of faba bean plants to inoculation with Rhizobium leguminosarium and other rhizobacteria under three nitrogen leves in newly reclaimed soil. J Soil Sci Agric Eng. 2009;34:7325–7345. doi: 10.21608/jssae.2009.103835. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR75] 75.Rugheim AME, Abdelgani ME. Effects of Rhizobium and Bacillus megaterium var. phosphaticum strains and chemical fertilizers on symbiotic properties and yield of faba bean (Vicia faba L.) Adv Environ Biol. 2009;3:337–346. [Google Scholar]

[CR76] 76.Abd-El-Khair H, Haggag KH, El-Nasr HIS. Field application of Trichoderma harzianum and Bacillus subtilis combined with Rhizobium for controlling Fusarium root rot in faba bean in organic farming. Middle East J Appl Sci. 2018;8:865–873. [Google Scholar]

[CR77] 77.Mahakavi T, Baskaran L, Rajesh M, Ganesh KS. Efficient of biofertilizers on growth and yield characteristics of groundnut Arachis hypogaea L. J Environm Treat Techn. 2014;2:158–161. [Google Scholar]

[CR78] 78.Mathivanan S, Chidambaram AA, Sundramoorthy P, Baskaran L, Kalaikandhan R. Effect of combined inoculations of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) on the growth and yield of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2014;3:1010–1020. [Google Scholar]

[CR79] 79.Preyanga R, Anandham R, Krishnamoorthy R, Senthilkumar M, Gopal NO, Vellaikumar A, Meena S. Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) nodule Rhizobium and passenger endophytic bacterial cultivable diversity and their impact on plant growth promotion. Rhizosphere. 2021;17:100309. doi: 10.1016/j.rhisph.2021.100309. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR80] 80.Akhtar MS, Shakeel U, Siddiqui ZA. Biocontrol of Fusarium wilt by Bacillus pumilus, Pseudomonas alcaligenes and Rhizobium sp. on lentil. Turk J Biol. 2010;34:1–7. doi: 10.3906/biy-0809-12. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR81] 81.Kumar R, Chandra R. Influence of PGPR and PSB on Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. viciae strain competition and symbiotic performance in lentil. World J Agric Sci. 2008;4:297–301. [Google Scholar]

[CR82] 82.Kumar A, Jha MN, Singh D, Pathak D, Rajawat MVS. Prospecting catabolic diversity of microbial strains for developing microbial consortia and their synergistic effect on Lentil (Lens esculenta) growth, yield and iron biofortification. Arch Microbiol. 2021;203:4913–4928. doi: 10.1007/s00203-021-02446-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR83] 83.Mishra PK, Mishra S, Selvakumar G, Bisht JK, Kundu S, Gupta HS. Coinoculation of Bacillus thuringeinsis-KR1 with Rhizobium leguminosarum enhances plant growth and nodulation of pea (Pisum sativum L.) and lentil (Lens culinaris L.) World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2009;25:753–761. doi: 10.1007/s11274-009-9963-z. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR84] 84.Tsigie A, Tilak KVBR, Saxena AK. Field response of legumes to inoculation with plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria. Biol Fert Soil. 2011;47:971–974. doi: 10.1007/s00374-011-0573-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR85] 85.Abdel-Fattah I, El-Nahrawy S, El-Mansoury MA. Interaction effect of skipping irrigation and coinoculation with Bradyrhizobium and some strains of Bacillus bacteria on growth dynamics of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.) its yield and water productivity. Egypt J Soil Sci. 2020;60:167–181. doi: 10.21608/ejss.2020.24792.1344. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR86] 86.Gangaraddi V, Brahmaprakash G. Evaluation of selected microbial consortium formulations on growth of green gram (Vigna radiata L.) Int J Chem Stud. 2018;6:1909–1913. doi: 10.20546/ijcmas.2019.810.061. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR87] 87.Gupta A, Saxena AK, Gopal M, Tilak KVBR. Effects of coinoculation of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria and Bradyrhizobium sp.(vigna) on growth and yield of green gram [Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek] Trop Agric-London Then Trinidad. 2003;80:28–35. [Google Scholar]

[CR88] 88.Pandya M, Rajput M, Rajkumar S. Exploring plant growth promoting potential of non rhizobial root nodules endophytes of Vigna radiata. Microbiol. 2015;84:80–89. doi: 10.1134/S0026261715010105. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR89] 89.Qureshi MA, Shakir MA, Iqbal A, Akhtar N, Khan A. Coinoculation of phosphate solubilizing bacteria and rhizobia for improving growth and yield of mungbean (Vigna radiata L.) J Anim Plant Sci. 2011;21:491–497. [Google Scholar]

[CR90] 90.Sindhu SS, Gupta SK, Suneja S, Dadarwal KR. Enhancement of green gram nodulation and growth by Bacillus species. Biol Plant. 2002;45:117–120. doi: 10.1023/A:1015117027863. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR91] 91.Tariq M, Hameed S, Yasmeen T, Ali A. Non-rhizobial bacteria for improved nodulation and grain yield of mung bean [Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek] Afr J Biotec. 2012;11:15012–15019. doi: 10.5897/AJB11.3438. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR92] 92.Schwartz AR, Ortiz I, Maymon M, Herbold CW, Fujishige NA, Vijanderan JA, Villella W, Hanamoto K, Diener A, Sanders ER, Mason DA, Hirsch AM. Bacillus simplex—A little known PGPB with anti-fungal activity—alters pea legume root architecture and nodule morphology when coinoculated with Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. viciae. Agron. 2013;3:595–620. doi: 10.3390/agronomy3040595. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR93] 93.Dutta S, Morang P, Kumar N, Kumar BD. Two rhizobacterial strains, individually and in interactions with Rhizobium sp., enhance fusarial wilt control, growth, and yield in pigeon pea. J Microbiol. 2014;52:778–784. doi: 10.1007/s12275-014-3496-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR94] 94.Osman AG, Rugheim AME, Elsoni EM. Effects of biofertilization on nodulation, nitrogen and phosphorus content and yield of pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) Adv Environ Biol. 2011;5:2742–2749. [Google Scholar]

[CR95] 95.Rajendran G, Sing F, Desai AJ, Archana G. Enhanced growth and nodulation of pigeon pea by coinoculation of Bacillus strains with Rhizobium spp. Bioresour Technol. 2008;99:4544–4550. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2007.06.057. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR96] 96.Tilak KVBR, Ranganayaki N, Manoharachari C. Synergistic effects of plant-growth promoting rhizobacteria and Rhizobium on nodulation and nitrogen fixation by pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan) Eur J Soil Sci. 2006;57:67–71. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2389.2006.00771.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR97] 97.Alves-Neto AJ, Lana MC, Lorenzetti E, Henkemeier NP, Schimiloski S, Ritter G. Conventional inoculants and biological protector, coinoculation and nitrogen fertilization in soybean. Sci Agrar. 2020;19:187–195. doi: 10.18188/sap.v19i2.23522. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR98] 98.Annapurna K, Ramadoss D, Bose P, Vithalkumar L. In situ localization of Paenibacillus polymyxa HKA-15 in roots and root nodules of soybean (Glycine max. L.) Plant Soil. 2013;373:641–648. doi: 10.1007/s11104-013-1825-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR99] 99.Araújo FFD, Hungria M. Nodulação e rendimento de soja co-infectada com Bacillus subtilis e Bradyrhizobium japonicum/Bradyrhizobium elkanii. Pesq Agropec Bras. 1999;34:1633–1643. doi: 10.1590/S0100-204X1999000900014. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR100] 100.Araújo FF, Bonifácio A, Bavaresco LG, Mendes LW, Araújo ASF. Bacillus subtilis changes the root architecture of soybean grown on nutrient-poor substrate. Rhizosphere. 2021;18:100348. doi: 10.1016/j.rhisph.2021.100348. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR101] 101.Atieno M, Herrmann L, Okalebo R, Lesueur D. Efficiency of different formulations of Bradyrhizobium japonicum and effect of coinoculation of Bacillus subtilis with two different strains of Bradyrhizobium japonicum. World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2012;28:2541–2550. doi: 10.1007/s11274-012-1062-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR102] 102.Bai Y, Zhou X, Smith DL. Enhanced soybean plant growth resulting from coinoculation of Bacillus strains with Bradyrhizobium japonicum. Crop Sci. 2003;43:1774–1781. doi: 10.2135/cropsci2003.1774. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR103] 103.Braga-Junior GM, Chagas LFB, Amaral LRO, Miller LO, Junior AFC. Eficiência da inoculação por Bacillus subtilis sobre biomassa e produtividade de soja. Rev Bras Ciênc Agrár. 2018;13:5571. doi: 10.5039/agraria.v13i4a5571. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR104] 104.Bullied WJ, Buss TJ, Vessey JK. Bacillus cereus UW85 inoculation effects on growth, nodulation, and N accumulation in grain legumes: field studies. Can J Plant Sci. 2002;82:291–298. doi: 10.4141/P01-048. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR105] 105.Iličić RM, Pivić RN, Dinić ZS, Latković DS, Vlajić SA, Jošić DLJ. The enhancement of soybean growth and yield in a field trial through introduction of mixtures of Bradyrhizobium japonicum, Bacillus sp. and Pseudomonas chlororaphis. Not Sci Biol. 2017;9:274–279. doi: 10.15835/nsb9210081. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR106] 106.Li DM, Alexander M. Coinoculation with antibiotic-producing bacteria to increase colonization and nodulation by rhizobia. Plant Soil. 1988;108:211–219. doi: 10.1007/BF02375651. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR107] 107.Marinković J, Bjelić D, Tintor B, Miladinović J, Đurić V, Đordević V. Effects of soybean coinoculation with plant growth promoting rhizobacteria in field trial. Rom Biotechnol Lett. 2018;23:13401–13408. [Google Scholar]

[CR108] 108.Masciarelli O, Llanes A, Luna V. A new PGPR co-inoculated with Bradyrhizobium japonicum enhances soybean nodulation. Microbiol Res. 2014;169:609–615. doi: 10.1016/j.micres.2013.10.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR109] 109.Mel'nikova NN, Bulavenko LV, Kurdish IK, Titova LV, Kots' SYa, Formation and function of the Legume-Rhizobium symbiosis of soybean plants while introducing bacterial strains from the genera Azotobacter and Bacillus. Appl Biochem Microbiol. 2002;38:368–372. doi: 10.1023/A:1016291207590. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR110] 110.Moretti LG, Crusciol CAC, Bossolani JW, Momesso JW, Garcia A, Kuramae EE, Hungria M. Bacterial consortium and microbial metabolites increase grain quality and soybean yield. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr. 2020;20:1923–1934. doi: 10.1007/s42729-020-00263-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR111] 111.Oliveira LBG, Teixeira-Filho MCM, Galindo FS, Nogueira TAR, Barco-Neto M, Buzetti S. Forms and types of coinoculation in the soybean crop in Cerrado region. Rev Ciênc Agrar. 2019;42:924–932. doi: 10.19084/rca.15828. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR112] 112.Pacentchuk F, Gomes JM, Lima VA, Mendes MC, Sandini IE, Jadoski SO. Effect of coinoculation of plant growth promoting bacteria on soybean crop. Res Soc Dev. 2020;9:e39291211360. doi: 10.33448/rsd-v9i12.11360. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR113] 113.Pankaj K, Mishra S, Mishra G, Selvakumar SK, Gupta HS. Enhanced soybean (Glycine max L.) plant growth and nodulation by Bradyrhizobium japonicum-SB1 in presence of Bacillus thuringiensis-KR1. Acta Agric Scand B Soil Plant Sci. 2009;59:189–196. doi: 10.1080/09064710802040558. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR114] 114.Sibponkrung S, Kondo T, Tanaka K, Tittabutr P, Boonkerd N, Yoshida K, Teaumroong N. Coinoculation of Bacillus velezensis strain S141 and Bradyrhizobium strains promotes nodule growth and nitrogen fixation. Microorganisms. 2020;8:678. doi: 10.3390/microorganismos8050678. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR115] 115.Subramanian P, Kim K, Krishnamoorthy R, Sundaram S, Sa T. Endophytic bacteria improve nodule function and plant nitrogen in soybean on coinoculation with Bradyrhizobium japonicum MN110. Plant Growth Regul. 2015;76:327–332. doi: 10.1007/s10725-014-9993-x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR116] 116.Poonguzhali P, Selvaraj S, Madhaiyan M, Thangaraju M, Ryu J, Chung K, Sa T. Effects of co-cultures, containing N-fixer and P-solubilizer, on the growth and yield of pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.) and blackgram (Vigna mungo L.) J Microbiol Biotec. 2005;15:903–908. [Google Scholar]

[CR117] 117.Hedges LV, Gurevitch J, Curtis PS. The meta-analysis of response ratios in experimental ecology. Ecol. 1999;80:1150–1156. doi: 10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080[1150:TMAORR]2.0.CO;2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR118] 118.Gurevitch J, Hedges LV. Meta-analysis: combining the results of independent experiments. In: Scheneir SM, Gurevitch J, editors. Designs and analysis of ecological experiments. 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2001. pp. 347–369. [Google Scholar]

[CR119] 119.Viechtbauer W. Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. J Statist Software. 2010;36:1–48. doi: 10.18637/jss.v036.i03. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR120] 120.Buhian WP, Bensmihen S. Mini-review: nod factor regulation of phytohormone signaling and homeostasis during rhizobia-legume symbiosis. Front Plant Sci. 2018;9:1247. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2018.01247. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR121] 121.Dayoub E, Naudin C, Piva G, Shirtliffe SJ, Fustec J, Corre-Hellou G. Traits affecting early season nitrogen uptake in nine legume species. Heliyon. 2017;3:e00244. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2017.e00244. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR122] 122.Barnawal D, Maji D, Bharti N, Chanotiya CS, Kalra A. ACC Deaminase-containing Bacillus subtilis reduces stress ethylene-induced damage and improves mycorrhizal colonization and rhizobial nodulation in Trigonella foenum-graecum under drought stress. J Plant Growth Regul. 2013;32:809–822. doi: 10.1007/s00344-013-9347-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR123] 123.Radhakrishnan R, Hashem A, Abd-Allah EF. Bacillus: a biological tool for crop improvement through bio-molecular changes in adverse environments. Front Physiol. 2017;8:667. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2017.00667. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[CR124] 124.Kuzyakov Y, Domanski G. Carbon input by plants into the soil. Review. J Plant Nutr Soil Sc. 2000;163:421–431. doi: 10.1002/1522-2624(200008)163:4<421::AID-JPLN421>3.0.CO;2-RLal,2017. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR125] 125.Kaschuk G, Yin X, Hungria M, Leffelaar PA, Giller KE, Kuyper TW. Photosynthetic adaptation of soybean due to varying effectiveness of N2 fixation by two distinct Bradyrhizobium japonicum strains. Environm Exp Bot. 2012;76:1–6. doi: 10.1016/j.envexpbot.2011.10.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[CR126] 126.Backer R, Rokem JS, Ilangumaran G, Lamont J, Praslickova D, Ricci E, Subramanian S, Smith DL. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria: context, mechanisms of action, and roadmap to commercialization of biostimulants for sustainable agriculture. Front Plant Sci. 2018;9:1473. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2018.01473. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

PERMALINK

Coinoculation impact on plant growth promotion: a review and meta-analysis on coinoculation of rhizobia and plant growth-promoting bacilli in grain legumes

Glaciela Kaschuk

André Carlos Auler

Crislaine Emidio Vieira

Felix Dapore Dakora

Sanjay K Jaiswal

Sonia Purin da Cruz

Abstract

Supplementary Information

Introduction

Table 1.

Materials and methods

Data collection

Results

Table 2.

Table 3.

Table 4.

Table 5.

Discussion

Supplementary Information

Acknowledgements

Author contribution

Funding

Declarations

Conflict of interest

Footnotes

Contributor Information

References

Associated Data

Supplementary Materials

ACTIONS

PERMALINK

RESOURCES

Cite

Add to Collections

PERMALINK

Coinoculation impact on plant growth promotion: a review and meta-analysis on coinoculation of rhizobia and plant growth-promoting bacilli in grain legumes

Glaciela Kaschuk

André Carlos Auler

Crislaine Emidio Vieira

Felix Dapore Dakora

Sanjay K Jaiswal

Sonia Purin da Cruz

Abstract

Supplementary Information

Introduction

Table 1.

Materials and methods

Data collection

Results

Table 2.

Table 3.

Table 4.

Table 5.

Discussion

Supplementary Information

Acknowledgements

Author contribution

Funding

Declarations

Conflict of interest

Footnotes

Contributor Information

References

Associated Data

Supplementary Materials

ACTIONS

PERMALINK

RESOURCES

Similar articles

Cited by other articles

Links to NCBI Databases