Comparative analysis of five methods for recovering rhizobacteria from cotton roots

Abstract
A variety of methods have been used for recovering introduced bacteria from plant roots. The objective of this study was to compare systematically five methods: agitation in buffer, agitation with glass beads in buffer, mixing in a StomacherR lab-blender, sonication, and trituration with mortar and pestle. Cotton seeds were treated with two previously reported rhizobacterial strains, Pseudomonas fluorescens strain Pf-5 and Bacillus subtilis strain GB03. The efficiency of recovery by each method was determined 3 weeks later by comparing average bacterial populations from whole root systems, single 2.0-cm root segments, and two root regions (the uppermost 5 cm of taproot and the lowermost 5 cm). Treatment with the StomacherR blender yielded significantly higher (P = 0.05) mean populations of GB03 compared with all other methods and significantly higher mean populations of Pf-5 compared with agitation with glass beads. From the lowermost 5 cm of taproot, populations of Pf-5 recovered by the StomacherR treatment were significantly higher than all other methods. The inclusion of glass beads for agitation treatments resulted in neither consistently higher absolute numbers of recovered bacteria nor reductions in variability. The mean standard error of each recovery method varied among root sources, and no single method consistently had the highest or lowest mean standard error. Mean standard errors for strain GB03 were generally lower than those for Pf-5 with each root source and each method of recovery. When viewed in composite, the data suggest that the StomacherR treatment was the best for recovering the greatest absolute numbers of rhizobacteria; however, this treatment had high mean standard errors. Investigations of root colonization by introduced rhizobacteria should include several recovery methods to optimize recovered numbers or to decrease variability, depending on the experimental objectives. Key words: root colonization, rhizobacteria, Pseudomonas fluorescens, Bacillus subtilis, cotton.

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: