J Plant Biotechnol (2023) 50:239-247
Published online December 11, 2023
https://doi.org/10.5010/JPB.2023.50.030.239
© The Korean Society of Plant Biotechnology
Correspondence to : e-mail: bsopho@kku.ac.th
This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
This study aimed to investigate the efficiency of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) in enhancing plant performance and bioactive compound concentrations in tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.). This factorial pot experiment included nine replications over 120 days of cultivation. Three AMF species (Rhizophagus prolifer, Claroideoglomus etunicatum, and Acaulospora mellea) were utilized as inoculum, while non-mycorrhizal controls with or without synthetic NPK fertilizer were compared. Interestingly, C. etunicatum KS-02 inoculations effectuated the best fruit growth and weight, which were statistically higher than those of the control without AMF. However, only fruit fresh weight was higher in plants inoculated with C. etunicatum KS-02 than those treated with the synthetic NPK fertilizer. In addition, C. etunicatum KS-02 inoculations induced a ≥ 11% increase in DDPH (1,1-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl) activity, lycopene content, and carotenoid content compared to the control. This study is the first to report Claroideoglomus species’ effectiveness in promoting growth, fruit yield, and bioactive compound production in L. esculentum Mill. These findings substantiate the significant potential of C. etunicatum KS-02 for tomato cultivation without the adverse effects of excessive synthetic fertilizer use.
Keywords Antioxidants, Carotenoids, Lycopene, Phytochemical, Tomato production
Tomato (
Soil fertility has been declining as a result of cultivation for a long time. Thus, there is an evident need for cultivation management by other means, particularly with the soil biota, which facilitates improved growth performance of tomato fruit. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF), a soil biota belonging to the Division Glomeromycota, offers great potential. It involves a process of fungal symbiosis that colonizes the roots of over 80% of land plants (Boonlue et al. 2012) AMF symbiosis can be observed in nearly all ecosystems and occurs naturally in most plant species. One of the effects of this symbiotic relationship is to increase nutrient uptake from the soil for nutrients such as phosphorus (P), nitrogen (N) and potassium (K), and micronutrients that help for enhancing plant growth (Jeffries 1987). AMF also aids plant growth under adverse environmental conditions, such as aridity, and help prevent diseases in the root system (Seemakram et al. 2021). Moreover, AMF serves to help plants adjust the osmotic balance within their cells (Nacoon et al. 2021), and strengthen plant tolerance to stresses, such as salinity and heavy-metal pollution (Salam et al. 2017). Owing to the above benefits, some species of arbuscular mycorrhizal are of interest for utilization in bio-fertilizers to replace chemical fertilizers, etc.
Therefore, our principle objective was to investigate the role various species of AMF played on the growth performance, and the lycopene, carotenoid, and 1,1-diphenyl-2-picryl-hydrazyl (DPPH) content of the fruit of
The AMF species,
The sandy loam soil properties include pH, electrical conductivity (EC), organic matter (OM), nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), potassium (K), available phosphorus, exchangeable potassium, calcium (Ca), and sodium (Na) were analyzed according to the method described by Seemakram et al (2021). The soil samples were sterilized and stored overnight at room temperature, before being sterilized again under the same conditions, then packed in 6-inch diameter plastic pots; each pot contained 3 kg.
Tomato cultivars of
The pot experiment was carried out in a greenhouse at the Faculty of Science, Khon Kaen University, Thailand. The experimental design was conducted with a factorial completely randomized design (CRD) with 5 treatments in 6 replications as follows: (T1) control, sterilized soil without AMF; (T2) control with mineral fertilizer, sterilized soil without AMF with the addition of mineral nutrients (N,P,K: 15-15-15) at 0.32 g per pot; (T3) inoculation with
Mycorrhizal root colonization intensity was determined according to the method described by Koske and Gemma (1989). Roots were washed with 10% KOH for 3 min at 95°C, and then soaked in 2% HCl overnight. Trypan blue solution (0.05%) was used to stain root samples, which were then cut into 1 cm long pieces. The cellular structures of AMF, including vesicles, arbuscules, and hyphae, were observed using a microscope at 40 × magnification (SMZ745T Nikon, Japan) (Seemakram et al. 2022).
After 90 days of transplantation, the parameters of plant growth including plant height, stem diameter, SPAD and leaf area (Arnon 1949) were evaluated. The number and fresh weight of fruit were analyzed at harvest. Leaves, stem and roots were dried in an oven at 80°C for 3 days prior to analysis, and the dry weight measured to record plant biomass. The nutrient uptake concentration (N, P and K) of the samples was next determined. The parameters determining the quality of the plant roots, including the diameter, specific root length (SRL) and root tissue density (RTD), were measured by scanning the root samples using an Epson scanner V800 PHOTO, and the data were analyzed using WINRHIZO Pro2004a software (REGENT Instruments Inc., Quebec, QC, Canada).
Fruit samples were cut and blended using a blender. Then, the samples were kept on ice in dark conditions. The sample of 0.2 g was transferred to a 50 mL covered test tube. A total of 20 mL of hexane: acetone: ethanol (HAE) of 2:1:1 (v/v/v) was added to the sample tubes. After that, the samples were mixed for 10 min and 3 mL of distilled water was added to each sample tube. The samples were agitated for several minutes. Then, the samples were kept at room temperature. The supernatant of the hexane layer that contained lycopene and carotenoid was measured using a spectrophotometer at the wavelengths of 503 and 449 nm, respectively. The lycopene and carotenoid contents were calculated according to the formula described by Biswas et al. (2011) and Fester et al. (2002)
Free-radical-scavenging activity of 1,1-diphenyl-2-picryl-hydrazyl (DPPH) was detected modifying to the method described by Leong and Shui (2002). A freshly 0.1 mM solution of DPPH in methanol was prepared. A 100 µL of each sample (with appropriate dilution) was first mixed with 4.0 mL of DPPH solution, before holding at room temperature for 30 min prior to measurement. The mixture solution was measured at 517 nm and detected by spectrophotometer. Methanol (0.5 mL), replacing the sample, was used as the blank. The percentage of radical-scavenging ability was analyzed by using the following formula:
Scavenging ability (%) = (Absorbance 517 nm of control - Absorbance 517 nm of sample) / Absorbance 517 nm of control × 100
All data from this work were evaluated by analysis of variance (ANOVA) for data from the factorial CRD. Fisher’s least significant difference (LSD) was significant at p ≤ 0.05. The correlation between data was analyzed using Statistix 10 software.
The quantity of AMF spores and root colonization in
Table 1 AMF spores in soil and AMF colonization in tomato roots
Treatment | Spore/gram soil | Root colonization (%) |
---|---|---|
0.00c | 0.00c | |
0.00c | 0.00c | |
2.68b | 20.19ab | |
10.29ab | 28.23a | |
21.14a | 29.01a | |
11.36 | 28.09 | |
* | n.s. |
Numbers followed by the same letters in each column indicate values that were not significantly different according to the LSD test. * significant difference at
The ability of AMF to enhance plant growth was detected with respect to plant height, leaf greenness, diameter, leaf area, stem dry weight, leaf dry weight and root dry weight. In addition, the plant yield, including the number of fruits and the fruit fresh weight, was also evaluated (Table 2). The presence of AMF was found to increase all of the plant growth parameters in comparison to the control plant (T1). All of the plant growth parameters and yields in these treatments were significantly increased when compared to the control plant treatment. In the case of tomato inoculated with
Table 2 Effects of AMF on tomato growth
Treatment | SPAD | Height (cm) | Diameter (cm) | Leaf area (cm2) | Total number of fruits | Fruit fresh weight (g) | Stem dry weight (g) | Leaf dry weight (g) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
30.25b | 68.80b | 13.01b | 15.09c | 5b | 10.16c | 3.92b | 1.96a | |
45.32a | 76.50ab | 16.90a | 30.78a | 10a | 18.38b | 7.62a | 2.18a | |
40.18a | 68.50b | 15.10ab | 25.75ab | 8ab | 24.16ab | 5.56b | 2.32a | |
38.06a | 74.50ab | 13.70b | 20.02b | 11a | 25.17ab | 6.61ab | 2.18a | |
39.27a | 78.60a | 16.70a | 29.35a | 10a | 40.70a | 7.64a | 2.67a | |
20.18 | 25.01 | 24.50 | 27.52 | 24.31 | 29.07 | 27.09 | 25.67 | |
* | ** | ** | * | ** | * | * | n.s. |
T1: control without AMF inoculum; T2: chemical fertilizer; T3:
Table 3 shows the plant root growth performance of the tomato plants grown under different conditions. The results indicate that most of the root traits were significantly improved by inoculation with either AMF compared to control plant (T1). Nevertheless, the root dry weight and specific root length of the plants inoculated with
Table 3 Effects of AMF on tomato root growth
Treatment | Root dry weight (g) | Average diameter (mm) | Specific root length (m g-1) | Root tissue density (g cm-3) |
---|---|---|---|---|
0.91ab | 0.28a | 107.95b | 94.02a | |
1.23a | 0.30a | 113.31ab | 78.03ab | |
0.88b | 0.29a | 113.18ab | 83.60ab | |
1.09ab | 0.28a | 124.11ab | 81.78ab | |
1.24a | 0.28a | 149.93a | 67.69b | |
21.36 | 28.09 | 25.71 | 24.02 | |
* | n.s. | * | * |
T1: control without AMF inoculum; T2: chemical fertilizer; T3:
The effects of AMF on NPK concentration in tomato plants are indicated in Table 4. The tomato plants to which chemical fertilizer had been applied showed the maximum value of N,P. Among the AMF-inoculated treatments, N accumulation in the plants was increased but no significant difference was found with the non-inoculated control. The concentration of P in tomato plant inoculated with AMF was not statistically higher than that of the control treatment. However, the highest phosphorus content was detected in the tomato inoculation with
Table 4 Effects of AMF on nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium concentrations in tomatoes
Treatment | N concentration (mg g-1) | P concentration (mg g-1) | K concentration (mg g-1) |
---|---|---|---|
16.6b | 10.2b | 10.9b | |
21.2a | 23.3a | 13.7ab | |
17.5ab | 15.1ab | 15.7a | |
16.9b | 10.1b | 14.4ab | |
19.9ab | 13.8b | 15.9a | |
29.09 | 25.83 | 27.42 | |
* | * | * |
T1: control without AMF inoculum; T2: chemical fertilizer; T3:
Fruit lycopene content, carotenoid content and antioxidant activity increased with all of the AMF treatments compared to the control treatment without fertilizer, and no significant difference was found with chemical fertilizer treatment. The maximum antioxidant activity (97.29%), lycopene content (0.62 µg/g) and carotenoid content (3.22 µg/g) were found in the
Table 5 Effect of AMF on antioxidant activity, lycopene content, and carotenoid content in tomatoes
Treatment | DPPH (%) | Lycopene (µg/g) | Carotenoid (µg/g) |
---|---|---|---|
87.14b | 0.42b | 2.37b | |
96.26a | 0.52ab | 3.38a | |
96.23a | 0.49b | 3.26a | |
95.61a | 0.59ab | 3.16a | |
97.29a | 0.62a | 3.22a | |
27.09 | 25.71 | 25.32 | |
* | * | * |
T1: control without AMF inoculum; T2: chemical fertilizer; T3:
Correlations between AMF, % colonization, nutrient uptake and the concentration of secondary compounds and the plant growth parameters of tomato at the harvest stage are shown in Table 6. Mycorrhizal colonization and root dry weight significantly positively correlated with the number of fruit, fruit fresh weight, antioxidant activity, lycopene content and K concentration of the plant. Among the AMF treatments,
Table 6 Correlation between AMF, nutrient uptake, antioxidants, lycopene, and carotenoids in tomatoes
Correlation | CF | AMF1 | AMF2 | AMF3 | Root colonization | No. of spores | Root dry weight | No. of fruit | Fruit fresh weight | DPPH | Lycopene | Carotenoids | N | P |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-0.59** | 0.18 ns | 0.48* | 0.51* | |||||||||||
-0.42 ns | -0.25 ns | 0.21 ns | 0.88** | 0.81** | ||||||||||
0.52* | -0.62** | 0.06 ns | 0.55* | 0.16 ns | 0.53* | |||||||||
0.28 ns | -0.18 ns | 0.51* | 0.28 ns | 0.58* | 0.53* | 0.73** | ||||||||
-0.26 ns | 0.02 ns | 0.07 ns | 0.84** | 0.83** | 0.92** | 0.54* | 0.63** | |||||||
0.23 ns | 0.23 ns | 0.14 ns | 0.37 ns | 0.60** | 0.49* | 0.57* | 0.86** | 0.75** | ||||||
0.10 ns | -0.01 ns | 0.36 ns | 0.47* | 0.73** | 0.68** | 0.67** | 0.94** | 0.82** | 0.94** | |||||
0.41 ns | 0.25 ns | 0.11 ns | 0.19 ns | 0.43 ns | 0.29 ns | 0.55* | 0.84** | 0.58* | 0.97** | 0.87** | ||||
0.76** | -0.25 ns | -0.41ns | 0.40 ns | -0.15 ns | 0.18 ns | 0.81** | 0.48 ns | 0.35 ns | 0.56* | 0.47* | 0.62** | |||
0.91** | 0.06 ns | -0.45** | -0.07 ns | -0.42 ns | -0.29 ns | 0.48 ns | 0.30 ns | -0.02 ns | 0.46 ns | 0.24 ns | 0.61** | 0.85** | ||
-0.11 ns | 0.43 ns | 0.07 ns | 0.49* | 0.77** | 0.61** | 0.33 ns | 0.68** | 0.85** | 0.92** | 0.86** | 0.83** | 0.33 ns | 0.19 ns |
**, significant difference at
According to our previous studies, the species of AMF showed high efficiency in enhancing plant growth and biomass in perennial plants belonging to the legume family (Siamese rosewood and Burma padauk) (Seemakram et al. 2021) and cannabis (Seemakram et al. 2022). Therefore, we expected inoculation with AMF to play a key role in boosting the growth and production of secondary metabolites in tomato. The efficiency of three AMF species, namely
This study identified that colonization with AMF affected growth performance of tomato cultivars and the production of secondary metabolites of tomato fruits beneficially under greenhouse conditions. Treatment with
As may be expected, for the roots of tomato plants colonized by AMF in all treatments, the root qualities were affected. However, the root dry weight and specific root length after treatment with
Both inoculation with AMF and synthetic fertilizer served to increase the performance of tomato and increased the capacity of the DPPH, lycopene content and carotenoid content compared to the unfertilized control. The maximum DDPH activity and lycopene and carotenoid contents for the
Our study shows that using AMF obtained a similar result in terms of plant growth performance, tomato yield and functional compounds in tomato fruit compared with the application of chemical fertilizer; inoculation with
Our study demonstrates the effect of AMF inoculation on the growth promotion, yield and bioactive compound production of tomato (
This work was supported by the Fundamental Fund of Khon Kaen University in FY 2022, grant no. FRB650032/0161, which received funding support from the National Science, Research and Innovation Fund (NSRF).
This research was supported by the Fundamental Fund of Khon Kaen University in FY 2022, grant no. FRB650032/0161, through the research on growth enhancement and carotenoid accumulation in tomato fruit by arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi by Khon Kaen University, Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Science, which received funding support from the National Science, Research and Innovation Fund (NSRF).
J Plant Biotechnol 2023; 50(1): 239-247
Published online December 11, 2023 https://doi.org/10.5010/JPB.2023.50.030.239
Copyright © The Korean Society of Plant Biotechnology.
Thanapat Suebrasri・Wasan Seemakram・Chanon Lapjit・Wiyada Mongkolthanaruk・Sophon Boonlue
Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, Nakhon Ratchasima College, Nakhon Ratchasima, 30000, Thailand
Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Science, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, 40002, Thailand
Department of Horticulture, Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, 40002, Thailand
Correspondence to:e-mail: bsopho@kku.ac.th
This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
This study aimed to investigate the efficiency of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) in enhancing plant performance and bioactive compound concentrations in tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.). This factorial pot experiment included nine replications over 120 days of cultivation. Three AMF species (Rhizophagus prolifer, Claroideoglomus etunicatum, and Acaulospora mellea) were utilized as inoculum, while non-mycorrhizal controls with or without synthetic NPK fertilizer were compared. Interestingly, C. etunicatum KS-02 inoculations effectuated the best fruit growth and weight, which were statistically higher than those of the control without AMF. However, only fruit fresh weight was higher in plants inoculated with C. etunicatum KS-02 than those treated with the synthetic NPK fertilizer. In addition, C. etunicatum KS-02 inoculations induced a ≥ 11% increase in DDPH (1,1-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl) activity, lycopene content, and carotenoid content compared to the control. This study is the first to report Claroideoglomus species’ effectiveness in promoting growth, fruit yield, and bioactive compound production in L. esculentum Mill. These findings substantiate the significant potential of C. etunicatum KS-02 for tomato cultivation without the adverse effects of excessive synthetic fertilizer use.
Keywords: Antioxidants, Carotenoids, Lycopene, Phytochemical, Tomato production
Tomato (
Soil fertility has been declining as a result of cultivation for a long time. Thus, there is an evident need for cultivation management by other means, particularly with the soil biota, which facilitates improved growth performance of tomato fruit. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF), a soil biota belonging to the Division Glomeromycota, offers great potential. It involves a process of fungal symbiosis that colonizes the roots of over 80% of land plants (Boonlue et al. 2012) AMF symbiosis can be observed in nearly all ecosystems and occurs naturally in most plant species. One of the effects of this symbiotic relationship is to increase nutrient uptake from the soil for nutrients such as phosphorus (P), nitrogen (N) and potassium (K), and micronutrients that help for enhancing plant growth (Jeffries 1987). AMF also aids plant growth under adverse environmental conditions, such as aridity, and help prevent diseases in the root system (Seemakram et al. 2021). Moreover, AMF serves to help plants adjust the osmotic balance within their cells (Nacoon et al. 2021), and strengthen plant tolerance to stresses, such as salinity and heavy-metal pollution (Salam et al. 2017). Owing to the above benefits, some species of arbuscular mycorrhizal are of interest for utilization in bio-fertilizers to replace chemical fertilizers, etc.
Therefore, our principle objective was to investigate the role various species of AMF played on the growth performance, and the lycopene, carotenoid, and 1,1-diphenyl-2-picryl-hydrazyl (DPPH) content of the fruit of
The AMF species,
The sandy loam soil properties include pH, electrical conductivity (EC), organic matter (OM), nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), potassium (K), available phosphorus, exchangeable potassium, calcium (Ca), and sodium (Na) were analyzed according to the method described by Seemakram et al (2021). The soil samples were sterilized and stored overnight at room temperature, before being sterilized again under the same conditions, then packed in 6-inch diameter plastic pots; each pot contained 3 kg.
Tomato cultivars of
The pot experiment was carried out in a greenhouse at the Faculty of Science, Khon Kaen University, Thailand. The experimental design was conducted with a factorial completely randomized design (CRD) with 5 treatments in 6 replications as follows: (T1) control, sterilized soil without AMF; (T2) control with mineral fertilizer, sterilized soil without AMF with the addition of mineral nutrients (N,P,K: 15-15-15) at 0.32 g per pot; (T3) inoculation with
Mycorrhizal root colonization intensity was determined according to the method described by Koske and Gemma (1989). Roots were washed with 10% KOH for 3 min at 95°C, and then soaked in 2% HCl overnight. Trypan blue solution (0.05%) was used to stain root samples, which were then cut into 1 cm long pieces. The cellular structures of AMF, including vesicles, arbuscules, and hyphae, were observed using a microscope at 40 × magnification (SMZ745T Nikon, Japan) (Seemakram et al. 2022).
After 90 days of transplantation, the parameters of plant growth including plant height, stem diameter, SPAD and leaf area (Arnon 1949) were evaluated. The number and fresh weight of fruit were analyzed at harvest. Leaves, stem and roots were dried in an oven at 80°C for 3 days prior to analysis, and the dry weight measured to record plant biomass. The nutrient uptake concentration (N, P and K) of the samples was next determined. The parameters determining the quality of the plant roots, including the diameter, specific root length (SRL) and root tissue density (RTD), were measured by scanning the root samples using an Epson scanner V800 PHOTO, and the data were analyzed using WINRHIZO Pro2004a software (REGENT Instruments Inc., Quebec, QC, Canada).
Fruit samples were cut and blended using a blender. Then, the samples were kept on ice in dark conditions. The sample of 0.2 g was transferred to a 50 mL covered test tube. A total of 20 mL of hexane: acetone: ethanol (HAE) of 2:1:1 (v/v/v) was added to the sample tubes. After that, the samples were mixed for 10 min and 3 mL of distilled water was added to each sample tube. The samples were agitated for several minutes. Then, the samples were kept at room temperature. The supernatant of the hexane layer that contained lycopene and carotenoid was measured using a spectrophotometer at the wavelengths of 503 and 449 nm, respectively. The lycopene and carotenoid contents were calculated according to the formula described by Biswas et al. (2011) and Fester et al. (2002)
Free-radical-scavenging activity of 1,1-diphenyl-2-picryl-hydrazyl (DPPH) was detected modifying to the method described by Leong and Shui (2002). A freshly 0.1 mM solution of DPPH in methanol was prepared. A 100 µL of each sample (with appropriate dilution) was first mixed with 4.0 mL of DPPH solution, before holding at room temperature for 30 min prior to measurement. The mixture solution was measured at 517 nm and detected by spectrophotometer. Methanol (0.5 mL), replacing the sample, was used as the blank. The percentage of radical-scavenging ability was analyzed by using the following formula:
Scavenging ability (%) = (Absorbance 517 nm of control - Absorbance 517 nm of sample) / Absorbance 517 nm of control × 100
All data from this work were evaluated by analysis of variance (ANOVA) for data from the factorial CRD. Fisher’s least significant difference (LSD) was significant at p ≤ 0.05. The correlation between data was analyzed using Statistix 10 software.
The quantity of AMF spores and root colonization in
Table 1 . AMF spores in soil and AMF colonization in tomato roots.
Treatment | Spore/gram soil | Root colonization (%) |
---|---|---|
0.00c | 0.00c | |
0.00c | 0.00c | |
2.68b | 20.19ab | |
10.29ab | 28.23a | |
21.14a | 29.01a | |
11.36 | 28.09 | |
* | n.s. |
Numbers followed by the same letters in each column indicate values that were not significantly different according to the LSD test. * significant difference at
The ability of AMF to enhance plant growth was detected with respect to plant height, leaf greenness, diameter, leaf area, stem dry weight, leaf dry weight and root dry weight. In addition, the plant yield, including the number of fruits and the fruit fresh weight, was also evaluated (Table 2). The presence of AMF was found to increase all of the plant growth parameters in comparison to the control plant (T1). All of the plant growth parameters and yields in these treatments were significantly increased when compared to the control plant treatment. In the case of tomato inoculated with
Table 2 . Effects of AMF on tomato growth.
Treatment | SPAD | Height (cm) | Diameter (cm) | Leaf area (cm2) | Total number of fruits | Fruit fresh weight (g) | Stem dry weight (g) | Leaf dry weight (g) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
30.25b | 68.80b | 13.01b | 15.09c | 5b | 10.16c | 3.92b | 1.96a | |
45.32a | 76.50ab | 16.90a | 30.78a | 10a | 18.38b | 7.62a | 2.18a | |
40.18a | 68.50b | 15.10ab | 25.75ab | 8ab | 24.16ab | 5.56b | 2.32a | |
38.06a | 74.50ab | 13.70b | 20.02b | 11a | 25.17ab | 6.61ab | 2.18a | |
39.27a | 78.60a | 16.70a | 29.35a | 10a | 40.70a | 7.64a | 2.67a | |
20.18 | 25.01 | 24.50 | 27.52 | 24.31 | 29.07 | 27.09 | 25.67 | |
* | ** | ** | * | ** | * | * | n.s. |
T1: control without AMF inoculum; T2: chemical fertilizer; T3:
Table 3 shows the plant root growth performance of the tomato plants grown under different conditions. The results indicate that most of the root traits were significantly improved by inoculation with either AMF compared to control plant (T1). Nevertheless, the root dry weight and specific root length of the plants inoculated with
Table 3 . Effects of AMF on tomato root growth.
Treatment | Root dry weight (g) | Average diameter (mm) | Specific root length (m g-1) | Root tissue density (g cm-3) |
---|---|---|---|---|
0.91ab | 0.28a | 107.95b | 94.02a | |
1.23a | 0.30a | 113.31ab | 78.03ab | |
0.88b | 0.29a | 113.18ab | 83.60ab | |
1.09ab | 0.28a | 124.11ab | 81.78ab | |
1.24a | 0.28a | 149.93a | 67.69b | |
21.36 | 28.09 | 25.71 | 24.02 | |
* | n.s. | * | * |
T1: control without AMF inoculum; T2: chemical fertilizer; T3:
The effects of AMF on NPK concentration in tomato plants are indicated in Table 4. The tomato plants to which chemical fertilizer had been applied showed the maximum value of N,P. Among the AMF-inoculated treatments, N accumulation in the plants was increased but no significant difference was found with the non-inoculated control. The concentration of P in tomato plant inoculated with AMF was not statistically higher than that of the control treatment. However, the highest phosphorus content was detected in the tomato inoculation with
Table 4 . Effects of AMF on nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium concentrations in tomatoes.
Treatment | N concentration (mg g-1) | P concentration (mg g-1) | K concentration (mg g-1) |
---|---|---|---|
16.6b | 10.2b | 10.9b | |
21.2a | 23.3a | 13.7ab | |
17.5ab | 15.1ab | 15.7a | |
16.9b | 10.1b | 14.4ab | |
19.9ab | 13.8b | 15.9a | |
29.09 | 25.83 | 27.42 | |
* | * | * |
T1: control without AMF inoculum; T2: chemical fertilizer; T3:
Fruit lycopene content, carotenoid content and antioxidant activity increased with all of the AMF treatments compared to the control treatment without fertilizer, and no significant difference was found with chemical fertilizer treatment. The maximum antioxidant activity (97.29%), lycopene content (0.62 µg/g) and carotenoid content (3.22 µg/g) were found in the
Table 5 . Effect of AMF on antioxidant activity, lycopene content, and carotenoid content in tomatoes.
Treatment | DPPH (%) | Lycopene (µg/g) | Carotenoid (µg/g) |
---|---|---|---|
87.14b | 0.42b | 2.37b | |
96.26a | 0.52ab | 3.38a | |
96.23a | 0.49b | 3.26a | |
95.61a | 0.59ab | 3.16a | |
97.29a | 0.62a | 3.22a | |
27.09 | 25.71 | 25.32 | |
* | * | * |
T1: control without AMF inoculum; T2: chemical fertilizer; T3:
Correlations between AMF, % colonization, nutrient uptake and the concentration of secondary compounds and the plant growth parameters of tomato at the harvest stage are shown in Table 6. Mycorrhizal colonization and root dry weight significantly positively correlated with the number of fruit, fruit fresh weight, antioxidant activity, lycopene content and K concentration of the plant. Among the AMF treatments,
Table 6 . Correlation between AMF, nutrient uptake, antioxidants, lycopene, and carotenoids in tomatoes.
Correlation | CF | AMF1 | AMF2 | AMF3 | Root colonization | No. of spores | Root dry weight | No. of fruit | Fruit fresh weight | DPPH | Lycopene | Carotenoids | N | P |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-0.59** | 0.18 ns | 0.48* | 0.51* | |||||||||||
-0.42 ns | -0.25 ns | 0.21 ns | 0.88** | 0.81** | ||||||||||
0.52* | -0.62** | 0.06 ns | 0.55* | 0.16 ns | 0.53* | |||||||||
0.28 ns | -0.18 ns | 0.51* | 0.28 ns | 0.58* | 0.53* | 0.73** | ||||||||
-0.26 ns | 0.02 ns | 0.07 ns | 0.84** | 0.83** | 0.92** | 0.54* | 0.63** | |||||||
0.23 ns | 0.23 ns | 0.14 ns | 0.37 ns | 0.60** | 0.49* | 0.57* | 0.86** | 0.75** | ||||||
0.10 ns | -0.01 ns | 0.36 ns | 0.47* | 0.73** | 0.68** | 0.67** | 0.94** | 0.82** | 0.94** | |||||
0.41 ns | 0.25 ns | 0.11 ns | 0.19 ns | 0.43 ns | 0.29 ns | 0.55* | 0.84** | 0.58* | 0.97** | 0.87** | ||||
0.76** | -0.25 ns | -0.41ns | 0.40 ns | -0.15 ns | 0.18 ns | 0.81** | 0.48 ns | 0.35 ns | 0.56* | 0.47* | 0.62** | |||
0.91** | 0.06 ns | -0.45** | -0.07 ns | -0.42 ns | -0.29 ns | 0.48 ns | 0.30 ns | -0.02 ns | 0.46 ns | 0.24 ns | 0.61** | 0.85** | ||
-0.11 ns | 0.43 ns | 0.07 ns | 0.49* | 0.77** | 0.61** | 0.33 ns | 0.68** | 0.85** | 0.92** | 0.86** | 0.83** | 0.33 ns | 0.19 ns |
**, significant difference at
According to our previous studies, the species of AMF showed high efficiency in enhancing plant growth and biomass in perennial plants belonging to the legume family (Siamese rosewood and Burma padauk) (Seemakram et al. 2021) and cannabis (Seemakram et al. 2022). Therefore, we expected inoculation with AMF to play a key role in boosting the growth and production of secondary metabolites in tomato. The efficiency of three AMF species, namely
This study identified that colonization with AMF affected growth performance of tomato cultivars and the production of secondary metabolites of tomato fruits beneficially under greenhouse conditions. Treatment with
As may be expected, for the roots of tomato plants colonized by AMF in all treatments, the root qualities were affected. However, the root dry weight and specific root length after treatment with
Both inoculation with AMF and synthetic fertilizer served to increase the performance of tomato and increased the capacity of the DPPH, lycopene content and carotenoid content compared to the unfertilized control. The maximum DDPH activity and lycopene and carotenoid contents for the
Our study shows that using AMF obtained a similar result in terms of plant growth performance, tomato yield and functional compounds in tomato fruit compared with the application of chemical fertilizer; inoculation with
Our study demonstrates the effect of AMF inoculation on the growth promotion, yield and bioactive compound production of tomato (
This work was supported by the Fundamental Fund of Khon Kaen University in FY 2022, grant no. FRB650032/0161, which received funding support from the National Science, Research and Innovation Fund (NSRF).
This research was supported by the Fundamental Fund of Khon Kaen University in FY 2022, grant no. FRB650032/0161, through the research on growth enhancement and carotenoid accumulation in tomato fruit by arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi by Khon Kaen University, Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Science, which received funding support from the National Science, Research and Innovation Fund (NSRF).
Table 1 . AMF spores in soil and AMF colonization in tomato roots.
Treatment | Spore/gram soil | Root colonization (%) |
---|---|---|
0.00c | 0.00c | |
0.00c | 0.00c | |
2.68b | 20.19ab | |
10.29ab | 28.23a | |
21.14a | 29.01a | |
11.36 | 28.09 | |
* | n.s. |
Numbers followed by the same letters in each column indicate values that were not significantly different according to the LSD test. * significant difference at
Table 2 . Effects of AMF on tomato growth.
Treatment | SPAD | Height (cm) | Diameter (cm) | Leaf area (cm2) | Total number of fruits | Fruit fresh weight (g) | Stem dry weight (g) | Leaf dry weight (g) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
30.25b | 68.80b | 13.01b | 15.09c | 5b | 10.16c | 3.92b | 1.96a | |
45.32a | 76.50ab | 16.90a | 30.78a | 10a | 18.38b | 7.62a | 2.18a | |
40.18a | 68.50b | 15.10ab | 25.75ab | 8ab | 24.16ab | 5.56b | 2.32a | |
38.06a | 74.50ab | 13.70b | 20.02b | 11a | 25.17ab | 6.61ab | 2.18a | |
39.27a | 78.60a | 16.70a | 29.35a | 10a | 40.70a | 7.64a | 2.67a | |
20.18 | 25.01 | 24.50 | 27.52 | 24.31 | 29.07 | 27.09 | 25.67 | |
* | ** | ** | * | ** | * | * | n.s. |
T1: control without AMF inoculum; T2: chemical fertilizer; T3:
Table 3 . Effects of AMF on tomato root growth.
Treatment | Root dry weight (g) | Average diameter (mm) | Specific root length (m g-1) | Root tissue density (g cm-3) |
---|---|---|---|---|
0.91ab | 0.28a | 107.95b | 94.02a | |
1.23a | 0.30a | 113.31ab | 78.03ab | |
0.88b | 0.29a | 113.18ab | 83.60ab | |
1.09ab | 0.28a | 124.11ab | 81.78ab | |
1.24a | 0.28a | 149.93a | 67.69b | |
21.36 | 28.09 | 25.71 | 24.02 | |
* | n.s. | * | * |
T1: control without AMF inoculum; T2: chemical fertilizer; T3:
Table 4 . Effects of AMF on nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium concentrations in tomatoes.
Treatment | N concentration (mg g-1) | P concentration (mg g-1) | K concentration (mg g-1) |
---|---|---|---|
16.6b | 10.2b | 10.9b | |
21.2a | 23.3a | 13.7ab | |
17.5ab | 15.1ab | 15.7a | |
16.9b | 10.1b | 14.4ab | |
19.9ab | 13.8b | 15.9a | |
29.09 | 25.83 | 27.42 | |
* | * | * |
T1: control without AMF inoculum; T2: chemical fertilizer; T3:
Table 5 . Effect of AMF on antioxidant activity, lycopene content, and carotenoid content in tomatoes.
Treatment | DPPH (%) | Lycopene (µg/g) | Carotenoid (µg/g) |
---|---|---|---|
87.14b | 0.42b | 2.37b | |
96.26a | 0.52ab | 3.38a | |
96.23a | 0.49b | 3.26a | |
95.61a | 0.59ab | 3.16a | |
97.29a | 0.62a | 3.22a | |
27.09 | 25.71 | 25.32 | |
* | * | * |
T1: control without AMF inoculum; T2: chemical fertilizer; T3:
Table 6 . Correlation between AMF, nutrient uptake, antioxidants, lycopene, and carotenoids in tomatoes.
Correlation | CF | AMF1 | AMF2 | AMF3 | Root colonization | No. of spores | Root dry weight | No. of fruit | Fruit fresh weight | DPPH | Lycopene | Carotenoids | N | P |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-0.59** | 0.18 ns | 0.48* | 0.51* | |||||||||||
-0.42 ns | -0.25 ns | 0.21 ns | 0.88** | 0.81** | ||||||||||
0.52* | -0.62** | 0.06 ns | 0.55* | 0.16 ns | 0.53* | |||||||||
0.28 ns | -0.18 ns | 0.51* | 0.28 ns | 0.58* | 0.53* | 0.73** | ||||||||
-0.26 ns | 0.02 ns | 0.07 ns | 0.84** | 0.83** | 0.92** | 0.54* | 0.63** | |||||||
0.23 ns | 0.23 ns | 0.14 ns | 0.37 ns | 0.60** | 0.49* | 0.57* | 0.86** | 0.75** | ||||||
0.10 ns | -0.01 ns | 0.36 ns | 0.47* | 0.73** | 0.68** | 0.67** | 0.94** | 0.82** | 0.94** | |||||
0.41 ns | 0.25 ns | 0.11 ns | 0.19 ns | 0.43 ns | 0.29 ns | 0.55* | 0.84** | 0.58* | 0.97** | 0.87** | ||||
0.76** | -0.25 ns | -0.41ns | 0.40 ns | -0.15 ns | 0.18 ns | 0.81** | 0.48 ns | 0.35 ns | 0.56* | 0.47* | 0.62** | |||
0.91** | 0.06 ns | -0.45** | -0.07 ns | -0.42 ns | -0.29 ns | 0.48 ns | 0.30 ns | -0.02 ns | 0.46 ns | 0.24 ns | 0.61** | 0.85** | ||
-0.11 ns | 0.43 ns | 0.07 ns | 0.49* | 0.77** | 0.61** | 0.33 ns | 0.68** | 0.85** | 0.92** | 0.86** | 0.83** | 0.33 ns | 0.19 ns |
**, significant difference at
Jung Won Shin · Sejin Kim · Jin Hyun Choi · Chang Kil Kim
J Plant Biotechnol 2024; 51(1): 219-226Diky Setya Diningrat · Marsal Risfandi · Novita Sari Harahap · Ayu Nirmala Sari · Kusdianti · Henny Kharina Siregar
J Plant Biotechnol 2020; 47(1): 100-106
Journal of
Plant Biotechnology