Acta Scientific MICROBIOLOGY (ISSN: 2581-3226)

Volume 5 Issue 4 April 2022

Review Article

Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as Biofertilizers: Application

in Agricultural Sustainability

Amirita Rochlani, Amrita Dalwani, NarinaBanoo Shaikh,

Received: February 17, 2022
Nidahurmain Shaikh, Sarita Sharma* and Meenu Saraf S
Published: March 03, 2022
Department of Microbiology and Biotechnology, University of School of Sciences,
© All rights are reserved by Sarita Sharma.,
Gujarat University Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India
et al.
*Corresponding Author: Sarita Sharma, Department of Microbiology and
Biotechnology, University of School of Sciences, Gujarat University Ahmedabad,
Gujarat, India.
DOI: 10.31080/ASMI.2022.05.1028

Abstract
The demand for agricultural productivity has increased dramatically as a result of civilization and industrialization. Chemical
fertilizers and pesticides increase agricultural yields, but they can degrade soil fertility and quality, posing environmental risks. As
a result, the need for environmentally friendly biological agents, such as plant growth promoting rhizobacteria, has skyrocketed in
order to improve soil fertility and agricultural operations while also protecting environmental health. The active activity of plant
growth promoting rhizobacteria in the rhizosphere, which promotes the growth and development of host plants, has long been
known. Plants growing compounds generated by these microbes have a direct or indirect effect on plant physiology, making them
valuable agricultural goods in high demand. The plant’s resistance power has been increased against biotic and abiotic stress condi-
tions thanks to the PGPR’s direct mechanisms (Nitrogen Fixation, Phosphate Solubilization, Phytohormone Production, and Exopoly-
saccharide Production) and indirect mechanisms (Siderophore Production, Antibiotic Production, HCN Production, Lytic Enzymes
Production, Induced Systemic Resistance and Bioremediation). As a result, PGPR as a bio-fertilizer is a good alternative to chemical
fertilizers because it is both environmentally friendly and cost-effective. In this review study, we looked at the usage of PGPR as a bio-
fertilizer for agriculture sustainability, as well as its direct and indirect effects on plant growth and development.

Keywords: PGPR; Rhizosphere; Biofertilizer; Agriculture Sustainability; Biocontrol Agent

Introduction riculture, resulting in disease resistance, salt tolerance, xerotoler-

In India, about 60.6 percent of land is used for agricultural ance, and stress tolerance. The mutualistic link between plants and

pursuits by half of the population, making it an Agricultural Coun- rhizospheric inoculants is critical because it allows them to sur-

try. Soil structure and composition are crucial factors to consider vive abiotic challenges, which improves soil fertility and econom-

when it comes to agriculture. Nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, ics. Rhizobacteria that promote plant growth can be defined as a

humidity, carbon content, and a variety of edaphic and biological symbiotic relationship between plants and microbes that enhance

agents all influence soil composition. Chemical fertilizers supply plant growth and are found in the rhizosphere [10]. Rhizo refers to

sufficient nitrogen, phosphorous, and other elements to soil but the roots, while spherical refers to the surrounding environment.

also degrade soil fertility and quality, resulting in soil and environ- The zone of soil that surrounds a plant’s root system is known as

mental contamination. Many researchers have used a variety of the rhizosphere. There are no defined edges in the zone, which is

scientific methodologies to improve and expand the growth of ag- around 1mm wide. Rhizobacteria are a type of bacteria found in
the rhizosphere that can form a root’s environment [24]. The rhi-

Citation: Sarita Sharma., et al. “Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as Biofertilizers: Application in Agricultural Sustainability". Acta Scientific
Microbiology 5.4 (2022): 12-21.
Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as Biofertilizers: Application in Agricultural Sustainability

13

zosphere’s diverse microbial communities allow the development The rhizoplane is the root surface that is firmly linked to soil
of microorganisms that can boost plant growth under abiotic cir- particles and is surrounded by microorganisms [6]. Bacteria con-
cumstances through direct and indirect mechanisms. Although the centrations in the rhizosphere are 10–1000 times higher than in
root gives the plant mechanical strength and aids in nutrition and bulk soil, but relatively low in lab media.
water intake, it also secretes a range of chemicals. These chemical
substances released by plant roots entice large microbial colonies, In the past years more attention has been paid to PGPR for the
and these chemical compounds are known as root exudates. Root upgradation of soil and enhancement of plant growth via differ-
exudates modify the chemical and physical properties of soil, which ent methods and replacement of chemical fertilizers. A thorough
regulates the makeup of soil microbial communities at the root sur- knowledge is required of PGPR and their interactivity with the bi-
face. Soil microbial communities are difficult to distinguish due to otic and abiotic factors is very much crucial in energy generating
their great phenotypic and genotypic diversity [21]. The bulk of processes and bioremediation operations [36]. PGPR works better
cells in the soil’s upper layer are unculturable, with around 10 9 over chemical fertilizers as they are environmentally friendly, also
cells per gram of soil. The percentage of these cells that have been economically viable and best for the soil management practices for
cultivated and thoroughly researched is minimal, about 5%. Micro- attaining more agricultural sustainability and consequently fecun-
bial populations discovered in the vicinity of these roots include dity of soil. Here, we have discussed various mechanisms by which
Bacteria, Fungi, Yeast, and Protozoa. Few of them are free-living, PGPR can be used as an effective tool to achieve sustainable devel-
and some of them have symbiotic relationships with a variety of opment in agriculture and to improve soil fertility.
plants [21]. Microorganisms and plant interactions can have a posi-
Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria
tive, negative, or neutral influence on plants. Microorganisms can
The discovery of microorganisms (1683) was credited to the
have a variety of effects, depending on the soil conditions. To re-
father of microbiology (Anton Van Leeuwenhoek). However, the
search microbial diversity, a variety of cultivation-dependent and
capacity of these microbes to serve as a plant growth booster has
cultivation-independent techniques are applied [1]. Both mecha-
been exploited for centuries. Bacterial variety is abundant in soil,
nisms have their own set of advantages and disadvantages [21].
and they play an important role in the operation of terrestrial eco-
system processes. Various microorganisms and leguminous plants
work together to improve soil quality and fecundity through sym-
biotic relationships. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria was the
name given to these beneficial bacteria by Kloepper and Schroth
(1981) [24].

PGPR variants
There are two types of PGPR present in rhizosphere [29]
• IPGPR (Intracellular plant growth promoting rhizobacteria):
IPGPR is found in the root cell’s modular structure. For in-
stance, Frankia and endophytes work together to fix nitrogen.
Figure 1: Plant-Microbe interaction (Rhizoshpere) (image
created by PP in MS Office 365). • EPGPR (Extracellular plant growth promoting rhizobacteria):
EPGPR is found in the root cortex cells rhizosphere (rhizo-
plane) or intracellular spaces. Agrobacterium, Caulobacterium,
The rhizosphere is composed of 3 constituents:
Flavobacterium, Pseudomonas, Serratia, and other bacteria are
• The Rhizosphere (soil) examples [18].
• The Rhizoplane and
In nature, Gram-Negative rod-shaped bacteria are predomi-
• The roots.
nantly rhizobacteria, whereas Gram-positive bacterial proportion

Citation: Sarita Sharma., et al. “Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as Biofertilizers: Application in Agricultural Sustainability". Acta Scientific
Microbiology 5.4 (2022): 12-21.
Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as Biofertilizers: Application in Agricultural Sustainability

14

(rod, cocci) is minimal in comparison to gram-negative bacte- Mechanism of action of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria
ria. Because they are a key part of soil nutrient cycling and plant Plant growth rhizobacteria are able to perform various mech-
growth promoting activities, the Actinomycetes group of bacteria is anisms in order to improve plant growth and development and
also implicated in rhizosphere microbial populations. Micromono- eventually lead to the sustainable agricultural practices. Direct
spora sp, Streptomyces sp, and Streptosporangium sp, which are mechanisms of these rhizospheric microorganisms can improve
some of the best identified in the rhizosphere [14], are examples plant growth by enhancing the uptake of nutrients via nitrogen
of Actinomycetes that operate as plant growth promoting microbes. fixation, solubilization of phosphate, production of phytohormones
Streptomyces acts as a PGPR in Pinus taeda, and has been utilised and exopolysaccharide production which results in sustainable and
to control pathogenic fungal infections like Pine Rot. Actinomycetes eco-friendly prespective of agri-science. These microbes also indi-
in the soil produce a variety of antibacterial compounds. The ef- rectly involve in the protection of plants due to the production of
fects of Bacillus subtilis strains on phytopathogens are investigated. antibiotics, hydrogen cyanide, siderophores and other biocontrol
In a wide range of root zone temperatures, PGPR can promote ni- agents. Therefore, plant growth promotion by plant growth rhizo-
trogen fixation and nodulation. Furthermore, utilising these PGPRs bacteria is an important and innocuous way in agriculture [36].
as biofertilizers is an ongoing study topic. When in a connection
with host plants, PGPR is best described as a vital member of the Direct mechanisms
rhizosphere network that enhances their growth and development. PGPR enhance the plant growth and development directly
These bacteria can help enhance economic production, soil fertility, by facilitating nutrient uptake, by nutrient solubilization like of
and ecosystem stability by responding to stressful situations. PGPR phosphate and potassium, exopolysccharide and phytohormones
has been widely utilised to increase agricultural and horticultur- production, and fixation of Nitrogen [9]. The mechanisms as men-
al diversity. They have the ability to turn infertile, unproductive tioned directly affects the plant growth but differ according to the
ground into arable and productive land. Rhizobacteria and grow- plant and microbes involved in it. In the presence of pgpr, increase
ing plants have primarily three types of linkages (neutral, positive, in individual ion fluxes at the root surface help in direct enrichment
and negative) [7]. of nutrient uptake by plants (Figure 2).
• Neutral Consequences: There are no detectable effects on
Improve minerals uptake
the host’s growth and development as a result of the rela-
tionship. The addition of PGPR has an impact on overall plant physiology
by affecting the chemical and physical features of the soil, as well
• Detrimental Effects: The synthesis of fatal chemicals by
as the rhizospheric microorganisms that live in that region. The
phytopathogenic bacteria, such as hydrogen cyanide and
addition of PGPR, which stimulates proton-pump ATPase, boosted
ethylene, has a negative impact on plant growth and devel-
the plant’s mineral absorption. Mineral uptake by plants was re-
opment.
ported to be enhanced when inoculants or rhizobacteria were ap-
• Positive Effects: There are two types of positive effects.
plied. These minerals included calcium, phosphorus, iron, copper,
zinc, and magnesium. The PGPRs in the rhizosphere create a drop
PGPR promotes plant development in both direct and indirect
in pH in the soil and plants, resulting in the creation of organic acid,
ways. These include nitrogen fixation, enhancing overall plant bio-
which causes mineral uptake by crop plants [44]. PGPR has been
chemistry, combating various biotic and abiotic stress situations,
shown in numerous studies to improve the availability of miner-
and creating enzymes to manage plant diseases by offering resis-
als for plants. The important premise in aiding the transfer of such
tance to a variety of phytopathogens through a variety of mecha-
minerals is the solubilization of inaccessible forms of minerals.
nisms.

PGPR as nitrogen fixers

The activity of PGPR varies depending on the type of host plant
[32,45]. Nitrogen (N), a critical component of all life forms, is a vital
ingredient for plant growth. Because it affects the composition of
nucleotides, membrane lipids, and amino acids, it is an important

Citation: Sarita Sharma., et al. “Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as Biofertilizers: Application in Agricultural Sustainability". Acta Scientific
Microbiology 5.4 (2022): 12-21.
Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as Biofertilizers: Application in Agricultural Sustainability

15

component. Nitrogen fixation by biological methods is an impor- Regulators of plant growth

tant microbiological function for supporting life on earth. Pho- Plant growth regulators are organic chemicals that can pro-
tosynthesis is used by photosynthetic bacteria to carry out this mote, inhibit, or change plant growth and development at very low
process. Nitrogen fixation is the process of producing ammonia concentrations (approximately 1 mM). These organic compounds
from atmospheric nitrogen, which is catalysed by the enzyme ni- can also be produced by PGPR. Auxin, cytokinin, gibberellins, eth-
trogenase [13]. Many PGPR species can fix nitrogen and exhibit ylene, abscisic acid, and brassinosteroids are a collection of plant
significant results, hence research on nitrogen fixation has been regulators that the root cell can multiply by producing an excess
ongoing for many years. Many bacterial taxa, such as Rhizobia, have of lateral roots [22,48]. The most important auxin is IAA (Indole -3
been identified that may fix nitrogen mutualistically within plant Acetic acid), which belongs to a group of hormones.
nodules. Frankia (Actinobacteria) can associate with many plant
groups and Alpha-proteobacteria  lives in symbiosis with legume Solubilization of phosphate
plants. Cyanobacteria are also one of the most important nitrogen- Phosphorus is the second most important nutrient for plants
fixing bacteria, coexisting with a wide variety of higher and lower after nitrogen. Phosphorus occurs naturally in the soil in an inor-
plan. The term “associative symbiosis” refers to a relationship be- ganic form, making it one of the most important growth-limiting
tween two separate species or biological systems, which can be variables in agricultural systems. As a result, it is necessary to ap-
mutually beneficial or not required to perform certain activities. ply or add a biological agent capable of converting inorganic/in-
soluble phosphorus to a soluble form. Plants may easily assimilate
Nitrogen fixation process
this type of phosphorus by converting insoluble phosphorus com-
As previously stated, nitrogenase converts atmospheric nitro- plex into soluble simple phosphorus with the help of rhizobacteria
gen to ammonia [13]. Nitrogenase is an oxygen-sensitive enzyme [20]. Phosphorus is generally present in healthy soil at 0.118 mg/
that can be irreversibly inactivated. Nitrogen fixation is accom- dl, while plants require 0.3393 mg/dl for product growth and de-
plished through the hydrolysis of 16 ATP (energy currencies). Ni- velopment [20]. Among the different techniques of Plant Growth
trogen fixation can be divided into two categories: Promotion by bacteria, inorganic phosphate solubilization is
• Nitrogen fixation through symbiotic relationships extremely important in commercial plants. Plants use the ortho-
• Nitrogen fixation through non-symbiotic relationships. phosphate form of phosphorus that rhizobacteria make available.
The two forms of phosphorus that are only absorbed by plants are
The symbiotic nitrogen fixation process is thought to be more
monobasic (H2PO4) and dibasic (HPO4-2) [25]. Phosphate solubiliz-
essential than the non-symbiotic nitrogen fixation process because
ers include rhizobacteria such as Agrobacterium, Flavobacterium,
a large amount of nitrogen may be fixed symbiotically. Various gen-
Pseudomonas, Mycobacterium, and Bacillus. Some of the probable
era, such as Azospirillum, Enterobacter, and Pseudomonas, carry
phosphate solubilizers found in chickpea nodules include Mesorhi-
out the non-symbiotic nitrogen fixation process by stimulating the
zobium ciceri and Mesorhizobium mediterranean. Mineralization of
growth of non-leguminous plants [9]. Whereas, in the case of sym-
organic phosphorus compounds can be carried by enzymes such
biotic nitrogen fixation through inter-relationships with legume
as phosphatase, phytase [26]. Phosphatase enzymes can operate in
plants, Rhizobium, Sinorhizobium, and other bacteria are involved.
both acidic and neutral rhizospheric soil pH. Rhizobium has been
Nitrogen reduction is a difficult procedure that is carried out as fol-
found to have a high amount of acid phosphatase activity.
lows:
Solubilization of phosphate mechanism
N2 + 16Mg ATP + 8e- + 8H+ ---- → 2NH3 + H2 + 16 Mg ADP + 16 Pi.
Phosphate solubilizing bacteria use a variety of methods to con-
Nitrogen fixation is carried out by the gene (nif), which can acti- vert insoluble to soluble forms. Microorganisms produce a variety
vate iron proteins, contribute an electron, manufacture of the iron- of organic acids that can chelate out divalent cations such as the
molybdenum cofactor, and other genes that regulate enzyme activ- Ca+2 as well as phosphates. Phosphate is released when organic
ity. When nitrogen-fixing PGPR is applied to an agricultural field, acids create soluble complexes with metal ions that are strongly
it can improve plant growth and development, regulate nitrogen connected with insoluble phosphorus [26].
levels in the soil, and manage diseases (protection from pathogens)
[29]. They have the potential to be utilized as a biological fertilizer.

Citation: Sarita Sharma., et al. “Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as Biofertilizers: Application in Agricultural Sustainability". Acta Scientific
Microbiology 5.4 (2022): 12-21.
Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as Biofertilizers: Application in Agricultural Sustainability

16

Exopolysaccharide production bing. Siderophores have been the subject of a lot of research in
Exopolysaccharide (EPS) is a type of extracellular matrix that the last ten years because of their unique ability to collect iron
can be either a firmly bonded capsule or a freely produced slime metal cations. Pseudomonas species which acts as a PGPR utilizes
layer. PGPR creates EPS, which helps plants develop even in dry siderophores produced by microorganisms in the rhizosphere to
soil by maintaining a high moisture content in the soil [32]. Un- meet their ions requirements [20]. Especially, Pseudomonas putida,
der adverse situations such as drought, EPS has a positive effect on in particular, exploits siderophores produced by other microor-
plant growth. By creating EPS, PGPR creates a protective sheath or ganisms to enhance the amount of iron available. A powerful sid-
biofilm around the plant’s roots, which protects them from desic- erophore like ferric-siderophore complex plays a vital role in iron
cation. They become adhered to surfaces that have excess moisture uptake by plants when other metals such as nickel and cadmium
with the help of EPS [32]. EPS maintains the rhizobium biofilm and are present. Because it can create siderophore, PGPR is a valuable
ensures that it functions properly. Rhizobium sp, Enterobacter cloa- asset that provides the required amount of iron [20]. PGPR, which
cae, Bacillus pretences, Azotobacter vinelandii, and other PGPR cre- makes siderophores has been shown to be a possible biocontrol
ates EPS [26]. As a result, EPS is directly responsible for the host agent for preventing plant diseases [17]. Between 12 and 24 ppm
plants survival in the face of abiotic stress [40]. of iron is available for plant absorption. The use of iron chelates/
salts, modification of soil pH, application of organic matter to soil
Indirect mechanisms devoid of accessible iron, and application of cultivars with the abil-
PGPR promotes plant growth indirectly by reducing the nega- ity to uptake iron from the soil are all examples of soil management
tive impacts of pathogenic microorganisms. They contribute to and implantation that aims to nurture these values and optimize
the host’s defense power by triggering the synthesis of hostile iron deficiency. However, this strategy appears to be ineffective
chemicals [46]. This strategy indirectly promotes plant growth by and costly. The ability of PGPR to capture iron through their sid-
preventing phytopathogens and their harmful effects, as well as as- erophores and make it available to plants appears to be the most
sisting the plant in growing under diverse abiotic conditions. They effective technique for meeting their iron intake demand [39,49].
aid plant growth by creating enzymes, opposing chemicals such as
Production of HCN (hydrogen cyanide)
antibiotics, and enhancing host resistance power. Indirect process-
es include the formation of siderophores, EPS, and cyanides, all of HCN is a biological control agent and one of the most impor-
which act as plant pathogen antagonists (Figure 2) [40,42]. tant chemical molecules produced by rhizobacteria that promote
plant growth [26]. The secondary metabolite produced during the
early stationary phase is hydrogen cyanide. There is no growth, en-
ergy storage, or main metabolism involved. Cyanide is produced
by a variety of bacteria, fungus, algae, and plants. Because cyanide
is poisonous, it colonises in plant root sections and makes it dif-
ficult for weeds to survive, making it an effective biocontrol weed
agent [36]. Bacillus and Pseudomonas species produce HCN in large
quantities (88.89 percent) [1]. Because cyanide is poisonous, in-
oculating plants with HCN-producing PGPR has no negative con-
sequences. The HCN-producing PGPR is only found in the roots of
their host plants. HCN kills cells through interfering with the elec-
Figure 2: Direct and Indirect mechanisms of plant growth tron transport chain (ETC) and energy supply.
promoting rhizobacteria (image created by PP in MS Office 365
Production of antibiotics
ProPlus, PowerPoint).
There is a lot of competition for resources among bacteria in the
natural world. As a result, the release of antibiotics permits these
Siderophore production
PGPR species to compete effectively. PGPR can kill pathogens in
In an iron-deficient environment, microorganisms make small
plants, however overuse of antibiotic-producing PGPR strains can
organic compounds called siderophores, which aid in iron grab-

Citation: Sarita Sharma., et al. “Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as Biofertilizers: Application in Agricultural Sustainability". Acta Scientific
Microbiology 5.4 (2022): 12-21.
Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as Biofertilizers: Application in Agricultural Sustainability

17

cause pathogenic strains to become resistant [23]. Because of their roots of a bean plant, it induces resistance, resulting in a significant
broad-spectrum activity, fluorescent Pseudomonas species are usu- decrease in PDI (percent disease incidence) and viral concentra-
ally used against plant diseases. Antibiotics stimulate ISR (Induced tion when compared to non-bacteria plants [12].
Systematic Resistance) genes in plants, making antibiotics primary
role in plant disease management [39]. Tolerant to abiotic stress
Any element that hinders a plant’s growth is referred to as stress.
Production of lytic enzymes The formation of free radicals and highly reactive oxygen species
PGPR promotes plant growth by stimulating the production of increases in response to many types of stress [11]. Overproduction
metabolites that regulate phytopathogenic agents. PGPR produces of these species oxidises photosynthetic pigments, lipids, proteins,
enzymes such chitinase, SOD (superoxide dismutase), and ACC and other plant-like components, causing harm. PGPR research has
(1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylic acid) deaminase, which aid in only been conducted on agricultural plants. Under abiotic stress
the destruction of pathogen cell walls [16]. The fungal cell wall is circumstances, leaf water status has been improved with the use
made up of chitin and beta 1-4 N-acetylglucosamine, and the PGPR of PGPR [2,31,40,43,44]. PGPR also aids in the neutralisation of ad-
bacteria produces enzymes called beta 1-3 glucanase and chitinase verse effects on plants by scavenging the cadmium ion that causes
that cause cell wall rupture and so restrict fungal development. Fu- the problem [41]. PGPR has proven to be good scavengers and aid
sarium oxysporum and Fusarium udum cause fusarium wilt by pro- in strengthening resistance to abiotic stress by creating ROS - Scav-
ducing enzymes such as chitinase and beta-glucanases, which are enging enzyme [15,19]. Plants can be stressed by pathogens such
produced by PGPR such as Pseudomonas fluorescence LPK2 [35]. as bacteria, viruses, fungus, insects, and nematodes [26]. As a re-
sult of their impact, crop yields and thus production are reduced.
Induced systematic resistance According to sources, the negative effects of one or more phyto-
In addition to increasing mineral intake and improving general pathogenic organisms account for around 15% of global loss [42].
plant physiology, rhizospheric inoculants can also strengthen plant
defense systems, making the plant resistant to a variety of phyto- PGPR strains such as Paenibacillus polymyxa B2, B3, B4, Bacil-
pathogens. Plants, for example, respond to biotic stressors such as lus amyloliquefaciens HYD-B17, Bacillus thuringiensis, and Bacillus
diseases and insects [28]. Some systemic responses spread to other subtilis RMPB44 can help with issues such as ecosystem nutrient
parts of the plant, far from the injured organ, triggering defensive cycling, co-evolution, and horticulture plant health [31].
systems throughout the plant. Induced resistance is a physiological
Biofertilizers
state in which the crop plant’s defensive efficacy is improved as a
result of biological or chemical means, which helps protect plant The symbiotic interaction between microorganisms and fungi
tissues that were not exposed to the initial attack from future at- has been studied extensively, leading to the coining of the terms
tacks [50]. Induced resistance can be triggered by rhizospheric in- “bioinoculant” and “biofertilizer” [8]. Biofertilizers are living mi-
oculants colonisation or diseases such as insects or herbivores [33]. croorganisms that contribute to plant growth and development by
When pathogens enter defensive mechanisms are activated, such increasing the availability of critical nutrients to the plant when
as the creation and activation of defense enzymes such as phytase, inoculated to seeds, plant surfaces, or soil [34]. These vital nutri-
peroxidases, chitinase, beta 1-3 glucanase, superoxide dismutase, ents are classified as macronutrients (N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S) and mi-
and a few proteinase inhibitors. ISR (induced systemic resistance) cronutrients (Zn, Fe, Cu, Mo, Mn, B, and Cl), with N, P, and K being
is a plant defense mechanism that helps the plant avoid illness. For particularly crucial in helping plants endure stress situations such
a specific pathogen, ISR is not very specific. Within the plant, eth- as drought, cold, and diseases. Chemical fertilizers are commonly
ylene hormone transmission causes induced systemic resistance, employed in farm management nowadays [3]. Chemical fertilizers
which maintains the defensive mechanism active against several are man-made compounds that are applied to crops in order to
plant diseases [38]. Lactones, lipopolysaccharide, siderophores, increase their yield and production [37]. However, these chemical
acetoin, and butanediol are some of the structural components of fertilizers are not only expensive, but they also pose a health risk. As
the bacterial cell that can cause ISR. As PGPR is isolated from the a result of the search for environmentally appropriate alternatives,

Citation: Sarita Sharma., et al. “Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as Biofertilizers: Application in Agricultural Sustainability". Acta Scientific
Microbiology 5.4 (2022): 12-21.
Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as Biofertilizers: Application in Agricultural Sustainability

18

biofertilizers (microbial products) were developed. The health of human health, and so on, are rather concerning. These negative
the soil can be improved as a result of their microbial activity, and repercussions include soil contamination, a deteriorating climatic
they also give necessary nutrients to plants. When biological fer- environment, and land misuse, all of which wreak havoc on soil
tilizers are inoculated, they begin to proliferate and participate in fertility and agricultural methods. To solve these issues, one must
nutrient cycle, benefiting plants [27]. To reduce the use of chemical use scientific knowledge to recognize the interaction of soil with
synthetic fertilizers, effective plant growth-promoting rhizobacte- microbes and their impact on plant growth. We can protect soil and
ria (PGPR) as biofertilizers are more beneficial, eco-friendly, non- plant production while simultaneously increasing output by doing
destructive, and non-virulent to the host plant [5,47]. Biofertiliz- so. Using beneficial PGPR consortia, we can create biofertilizers,
ers are microbial cultures that are cost-effective, easy to use, and bioherbicides, and bioinsecticides to replace hazardous chemical
provide higher growth rates and yields than organic and chemical fertilisers. PGPR is an important part of the IPM (Integrated Pest
fertilizers [4]. Phosphate solubilization, nitrogen fixation, and the Management System). The direct and indirect mechanisms of PGPR,
generation of plant development compounds are all helpful actions such as nitrogen fixation, phosphate solubilization, exopolysaccha-
performed by bacteria utilized as biofertilizers [25,30]. Plants have ride production, phytohormone production, HCN production, lytic
hostile effects towards diverse phytopathogens as a result of the enzyme production, antibiotic production, induced system resis-
presence of these bacteria [8]. At the industrial level, a wide range tance, and siderophore production, are increasing plant growth,
of microorganisms can be utilized as biological fertilizers, depend- yield, and nutrient uptake. More research on specialized rhizo-
ing on their capabilities, such as supplying nutrients to plants and spheric inoculants and microbial colonization in multidisciplinary
functioning as natural pest deterrents. fields that involve applications in nanotechnology, agrotechnology,
material science, and merging functional approaches can result in
The following traits should be present in the optimal strain novel formulations with better and more efficient results.
• It must be capable of standing in the presence of an already
existing bacterial population. Acknowledgement

• It must be able to withstand environmental conditions like We have great facilities thanks to the DST-FIST-sponsored De-

temperature, radiation, drought, and other abiotic factors, partment of Microbiology and Biotechnology, University School of

among other things. Sciences, Gujarat University, Gujarat, India.

• It must be compatible with other microorganisms. Conflicts of Interest

• Their actions and activities must be diverse. We declare that there are no conflicts of interest.
• It must be capable of promoting the host plant’s growth and Bibliography
development.
1. Ahmad F., et al. “Screening of free-living rhizospheric bacteria
• It must be environmentally friendly, as it should not impair for their multiple plant growth-promoting activities”. Micro-
the environment’s health. biological Research 163.2 (2008): 173-181.
• They must be able to interact with the host plant, enhancing
2. Ahmed N I A Z., et al. “Rhizobacteria and silicon synergy mod-
the flow of nutrients directly (N, P, and Fe). ulates the growth, nutrition and yield of mungbean under sa-
• They should promote plant fitness and provide stress pro- line soil”. Pakistan Journal of Botany 52.1 (2020): 9-15.
tection.
3. Aloo, B. N., et al. “Rhizobacteria-based technology for sustain-
• They must be able to reproduce in the rhizosphere [51]. able cropping of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.)”. Potato Re-
search 63.2 (2020): 157-177.
Conclusion
4. Altaf MA., et al. “Potential role of plant growth promoting rhi-
Chemical fertilizers have been widely utilized in agricultural
zobacteria (PGPR) to reduce chemical fertilizer in horticultur-
techniques for several decades, however the long-term impacts of al crops”. International Journal of Research in Agriculture and
these fertilizers on our surrounding environment, including soil, Forestry 6 (2019): 21-30.

Citation: Sarita Sharma., et al. “Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as Biofertilizers: Application in Agricultural Sustainability". Acta Scientific
Microbiology 5.4 (2022): 12-21.
Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as Biofertilizers: Application in Agricultural Sustainability

19

5. Atieno M., et al. “Assessment of biofertilizer use for sustain- 17. Gouda S., et al. “Revitalization of plant growth-promoting rhi-
able agriculture in the Great Mekong Region”. Journal of envi- zobacteria for sustainable development in agriculture”. Micro-
ronmental management, 275 (2020): 111300. biological Research 206 (2018): 131-140.

6. Barea J M. “Rhizosphere and mycorrhiza of field crops”. In Bio- 18. Gray E J and Smith D L. “Intracellular and extracellular PGPR:
logical resource management connecting Science and Policy. commonalities and distinctions in the plant–bacterium sig-
Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2000): 81-92. naling processes”. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 37.3 (2005):
395-412.
7. Bashan Y and De-Bashan L E. “How the plant growth-promot-
ing bacterium Azospirillum promotes plant growth—a critical 19. Habib S H., et al. “Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria en-
assessment”. Advances in Agronomy 108 (2010): 77-136. hance salinity stress tolerance in okra through ROS-scaveng-
ing enzymes”. BioMed Research International (2016).
8. Basu, A., et al. “Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR)
as green bioinoculants: recent developments, constraints, and 20. Jha C K and Saraf M. “Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria
prospects”. Sustainability 13.3 (2021): 1140. (PGPR)”. Journal of Agriculture Research And Development 5.2
(2015): 0108-0119.
9. Bhardwaj D., et al. “Biofertilizers function as a key player in
sustainable agriculture by improving soil fertility, plant tol- 21. Jones DL and Hinsinger P. “The rhizosphere: complex by de-
erance, and crop productivity”. Microbial cell factories 13.1 sign”. Plant and Soil 312.1 (2008): 1-6.
(2014): 1-10.
22. Kaur M., et al. “Potential of indigenous strains of Pseudomonas
10. Bhattacharyya PN and Jha DK. “Plant growth-promoting rhizo- and Bacillus species for the production of plant growth regula-
bacteria (PGPR): emergence in agriculture”. World Journal of tors, viz., Auxins, Gibberellins and Cytokinins from carnation
Microbiology and Biotechnology 28.4 (2012): 1327-1350. and medicinal plants”. Progressive Horticulture 43.1 (2011):
56-60.
11. Dabhi J., et al. “Bioremediation of Heavy Metals: A brand New
Methodology to Sustainable Agriculture”. International Jour- 23. Kenneth OC., et al. “Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria
nal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technol- (PGPR): a novel agent for sustainable food production”. Ameri-
ogy 10.6 (2020): 6031-6049. can Journal of Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 (2019):
35-54.
12. Elbadry M., et al. “Induction of systemic resistance in faba
bean (Vicia faba L.) to bean yellow mosaic potyvirus (BYMV) 24. Kloepper J W and Schroth M N. “Relationship of in vitro an-
via seed bacterization with plant growth promoting rhizobac- tibiosis of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria to plant
teria”.  Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection 113.6 (2000): growth and the displacement of root microflora”. Phytopathol-
247-251. ogy 71.10 (1981): 1020-1024.

13. Franche C., et al. “Nitrogen-fixing bacteria associated with le- 25. Mahanty T., et al. “Biofertilizers: a potential approach for sus-
guminous and non-leguminous plants”. Plant and Soil  321.1 tainable agriculture development”. Environmental Science and
(2009): 35-59. Pollution Research 24.4 (2017): 3315-3335.

14. Franco-Correa M., et al. “Evaluation of actinomycete strains 26. Mahmood A., et al. “Seed biopriming with plant growth pro-
for key traits related with plant growth promotion and my- moting rhizobacteria: a review”. FEMS Microbiology Ecol-
corrhiza helping activities”. Applied Soil Ecology 45.3 (2120): ogy 92.8 (2016): fiw112.
209-217.
27. Manjunath M., et al. “Developing PGPR consortia using novel
15. Gontia‐Mishra I., et al. “Amelioration of drought tolerance in genera Providencia and Alcaligenes along with cyanobacteria
wheat by the interaction of plant growth‐promoting rhizobac- for wheat”. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 57.8 (2011):
teria”. Plant biology 18.6 (2016): 992-1000. 873-887.

16. Goswami D., et al. “Expanding the Horizons for the use of Pae- 28. Martínez-Viveros O., et al. “Mechanisms and practical consid-
nibacillus species as PGPR for sustainable agriculture”. In Ba- erations involved in plant growth promotion by rhizobacte-
cilli and Agrobiotechnology. Springer, Cham (2016): 281-307. ria”.  Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 10.3 (2010):
293-319.

Citation: Sarita Sharma., et al. “Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as Biofertilizers: Application in Agricultural Sustainability". Acta Scientific
Microbiology 5.4 (2022): 12-21.
Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as Biofertilizers: Application in Agricultural Sustainability

20

29. Mia M B and Shamsuddin ZH. “Nitrogen Fixation and Trans- 41. Sharma S., et al. “Phytomining of Heavy Metals: A Green Tech-
portation by Rhizobacteria”. International Journal of Bota- nology to Sustainable Agriculture”. International Journal of In-
ny 6.3 (2010): 235-242. novative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology 10.6
(2021): 7527-7538.
30. Mohanty P., et al. “Insight into the role of PGPR in sustainable
agriculture and environment”. Frontiers in Sustainable Food 42. Sharma S., et al. “Exploring the Biotic Stress Tolerance Poten-
Systems 5 (2021). tial of Heavy Metal Tolerate Rhizobacteria Isolated from Mines
Area and Landfill Site”. Acta Scientific Microbiology 5.2 (2022):
31. Nadeem S M., et al. “Relationship between in vitro character- 31-37.
ization and comparative efficacy of plant growth-promoting
rhizobacteria for improving cucumber salt tolerance”. Archives 43. Sharma S., et al. “Isolation of Heavy Metal Tolerant Rhizobac-
of Microbiology 198.4 (2016): 379-387. teria from Zawar Mines Area, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India”. Bio-
science Biotechnology Research Communication 13.1 (2020):
32. Naseem H., et al. “Exopolysaccharides producing rhizobacteria 233-238.
and their role in plant growth and drought tolerance”. Journal
of Basic Microbiology 58.12 (2018): 1009-1022. 44. Sharma Sarita., et al. “Elucidate the Influence of Heavy Met-
al on Bacterial Growth Isolated from a Mining Location and
33. Prathap M and Kumari B R. “A critical review on plant growth A Waste Dump: Using their Inducible Mechanism”. Current
promoting rhizobacteria”. Journal of Plant Pathology and Mi- Trends in Biomedical Engineering and Biosciences 20.2 (2021):
crobiology 6.4 (2015). 001-006.

34. Raj SN., et al. “Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria: potential 45. Shokati B and Poudineh Z. “An overview of plant growth pro-
green alternative for plant productivity”. In PGPR: biocontrol moting rhizobacteria and their influence on essential oils of
and biofertilization. Springer, Dordrecht (2005): 197-216. medicinal plants: a review article”. Iranian Journal of Plant
Physiology 7.3 (2017): 2051-2061.
35. Ramadan E M., et al. “Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria
and their potential for biocontrol of phytopathogens”. African 46. Singh R P and Jha PN. “Plant growth promoting potential of
Journal of Microbiology Research 10.15 (2016): 486-504. ACC deaminase rhizospheric bacteria isolated from Aerva
javanica: a plant adapted to saline environments”. Interna-
36. Rehman F U., et al. “Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria and tional Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 4.7
their mechanisms involved in agricultural crop production: A (2015): 142-152.
review”. SunText Review of BioTechnology 1.2 (2020): 1-6.
47. Suhag M. “Potential of biofertilizers to replace chemical fertil-
37. Roesti D., et al. “Plant growth stage, fertiliser management izers”.  International Journal of Advanced Research in Science,
and bio-inoculation of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and plant Engineering and Technology 3.5 (2016): 163-167.
growth promoting rhizobacteria affect the rhizobacterial com-
munity structure in rain-fed wheat fields”. Soil Biology and Bio- 48. Sureshbabu K., et al. “Amazing multiple function properties
chemistry 38.5 (2006): 1111-1120. of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria in the rhizosphere
soil”. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied
38. Romera F J., et al. “Induced systemic resistance (ISR) and Fe Sciences 5.2 (2016): 661-683.
deficiency responses in dicot plants”. Frontiers in Plant Science
10 (2019): 287. 49. Saraf M., et al. “Production and optimization of siderophore
from plant growth promoting Rhizobacteria”. Scholar press
39. Sayyed R Z., et al. “Siderophore producing PGPR for crop nu- (2017): 1-85.
trition and phytopathogen suppression”. In Bacteria in agro-
biology: disease management. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg 50. Van Loon L C., et al. “Systemic resistance induced by rhi-
(2013): 449-471. zosphere bacteria”. Annual Review of Phytopathology 36.1
(1998): 453-483.
40. Sharma S., et al. “Biofilm: Used as A Brand-new Technology
in Bioremediation”. Vidya; A Journal of Gujarat University 16.2 51. Zablotowicz R M., et al. “Plant growth promotion mediated
(2021): 99-116. by bacterial rhizosphere colonizers”. In The rhizosphere and
plant growth. Springer, Dordrecht (1991): 315-326.

Citation: Sarita Sharma., et al. “Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as Biofertilizers: Application in Agricultural Sustainability". Acta Scientific
Microbiology 5.4 (2022): 12-21.
Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as Biofertilizers: Application in Agricultural Sustainability

21

Assets from publication with us

• Prompt Acknowledgement after receiving the article
• Thorough Double blinded peer review
• Rapid Publication
• Issue of Publication Certificate
• High visibility of your Published work

Website: www.actascientific.com/
Submit Article: www.actascientific.com/submission.php
Email us: [email protected]
Contact us: +91 9182824667

Citation: Sarita Sharma., et al. “Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as Biofertilizers: Application in Agricultural Sustainability". Acta Scientific
Microbiology 5.4 (2022): 12-21.