Comparing the Effects of Bacterial and Fungal Biofertilizers on Wheat Yield and Water Use Efficiency under Drought Stress: The Role of ACC-deaminase and Various Fungal Formulations

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

• S.S. Hosseini ¹
• F. Rejali ²
• P. Keshavarz ³

¹ Department of Soil Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran

² Department of Soil Biology and Biotechnology, Soil and Water Research Institute, AREEO, Karaj, Iran

³ Soil and Water Research Department, Khorasan Razavi Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Mashhad, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22067/jsw.2025.90176.1440

Abstract

 
Introduction
 Water scarcity is a major challenge in Iran, with annual rainfall averaging 235 to 260 mm, only a third of the global average. Wheat, a staple crop in Iran, faces severe yield reduction under drought conditions. Utilizing biofertilizers like plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) and arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi could help enhance water use efficiency (WUE) and yield in such environments. However, the effectiveness of biofertilizers varies based on several factors, including the type of biofertilizer (bacterial or fungal), the strain or species used, and the formulation (solid or liquid). Despite the established benefits of both PGPR and AM fungi in enhancing drought tolerance and WUE, there is a lack of comparative studies that examine the specific performance of bacterial versus fungal biofertilizers and their formulations under varying levels of water stress. Thus, the objectives of this study are as follows: 1) to identify the most suitable type of biofertilizer (bacterial or fungal) for improving wheat yield and WUE under drought conditions in Mashhad's climatic conditions; 2) to determine the effect of ACC deaminase enzyme on the efficiency of PGPR in enhancing wheat yield and WUE; 3) to compare the performance of AM fungal biofertilizers in two formulations (powder and liquid) and between single-species and multi-species inoculants.
 
Material and Methods
 The experiment was conducted as a split-plot design with three replicates, where irrigation levels constituted the main plots, and biofertilizer treatments formed the subplots. The irrigation treatments included full irrigation (100% of wheat’s water requirement), mild drought stress (85%), and severe drought stress (65%). The biofertilizer treatments were: no biofertilizer (F1), serving as a control; Pseudomonas fluorescens producing ACC-deaminase (F2); P. fluorescens without ACC-deaminase (F3); AM fungi (Rhizophagus irregularis) in liquid form (F4); and (5) AM fungi (R. irregularis, Funneliformis mosseae, and Claroideoglomus etunicatum) in powdered form (F5).
 
Results and Discussion
 Both irrigation levels and biofertilizer types had significant impacts on root colonization, yield, and WUE. Reducing irrigation from 100% to 85% and 65% of crop water requirements significantly reduced root colonization across all treatments. Among the bacterial treatments, only P. fluorescens producing ACC-deaminase (F2) showed a significant positive effect under severe drought (65% irrigation). This treatment increased grain yield by 9%, biological yield by 7%, and WUE by 6.8% compared to the control (F1). The presence of ACC-deaminase likely contributed to mitigating the effects of drought-induced ethylene, promoting better root growth and nutrient uptake under water stress. In contrast, P. fluorescens without ACC-deaminase (F3) did not significantly improve yield or WUE, emphasizing the importance of ACC-deaminase in promoting drought tolerance. Fungal biofertilizers outperformed bacterial treatments in grain and biological yield, as well as WUE. Under severe drought, powdered AM fungi (F5) increased grain yield by 26% and biological yield by 21% compared to the control, and WUE based on grain yield improved by 26%. This superior performance of AM fungi, particularly in powdered form, can be attributed to their ability to enhance nutrient and water uptake under drought conditions. These findings corroborate earlier studies that demonstrated AM fungi's ability to improve crop yield and WUE under drought stress by enhancing water uptake, nutrient availability, and improving the plant's physiological responses, such as maintaining cell membrane stability and increasing antioxidant activity. The powdered formulation of AM fungi (F5) showed greater effectiveness than the liquid form (F4). The higher colonization rates and performance in yield improvement may be due to the inclusion of multiple fungal species in the powdered form. The performance differences between the liquid and powdered AM fungi formulations may also be influenced by the physical properties of the biofertilizer since powdered inoculants are most effective when applied to the seeds of grasses like wheat and barley, as the structure of these seeds allows for better adhesion of the powder.
 
Conclusion
 In conclusion, among the bacterial biofertilizers, only P. fluorescens producing ACC-deaminase significantly enhanced plant performance under severe drought, underscoring the importance of ACC-deaminase in alleviating drought stress. However, fungal biofertilizers, especially in powdered form, were more effective overall in improving yield, biological productivity, and WUE under varying levels of water stress. This research confirms that the application of AM fungi can serve as an effective strategy for improving wheat yield and increasing WUE in the climatic conditions of Mashhad. Overall, the observed differences in the effectiveness of these biofertilizers suggest that the appropriate selection of both type and formulation of biofertilizers can significantly contribute to managing water stress and improving crop production.

Keywords

• Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi
• Drought stress
• Irrigation levels
• Microorganisms
• PGPR

Main Subjects

• Soil science

©2025 The author(s). This is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).

References

1. Ahluwalia, O., Singh, P.C., & Bhatia, R. (2021). Resources, environment and sustainability a review on drought stress in plants : Implications, mitigation and the role of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria. Resources, Environment and Sustainability, 5(July), 100032. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resenv.2021.100032
2. Akhtar, S.S., Amby, D.B., Hegelund, J.N., Fimognari, L., Großkinsky, D.K., Westergaard, J.C., Müller, R., Moelbak, L., Liu, F., & Roitsch, T. (2020). Bacillus licheniformis FMCH001 increases water use efficiency via growth stimulation in both normal and drought conditions. Frontiers in Plant Science, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.00297
3. Amiri, R., Nikbakht, A., & Etemadi, N. (2015). Alleviation of drought stress on rose geranium [Pelargonium graveolens (L.) Herit.] in terms of antioxidant activity and secondary metabolites by mycorrhizal inoculation. Scientia Horticulturae, 197, 373–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2015.09.062
4. Askari, A., Ardakani, M.R., Paknejad, F., & Hosseini, Y. (2019). Effects of mycorrhizal symbiosis and seed priming on yield and water use efficiency of sesame under drought stress condition. Scientia Horticulturae, 257, 108749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2019.108749
5. Azaizeh, H.A., Marschner, H., Römheld, V., & Wittenmayer, L. (1995). Effects of a vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus and other soil microorganisms on growth, mineral nutrient acquisition and root exudation of soil-grown maize plants. Mycorrhiza, 5(5), 321–327. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00207404
6. Azami-Atajan, F., Hammami, H., & Yaghoobzadeh, M. (2020). The application of plant growth promoting microorganisms and phosphate fertilizers on yield, yield components and water use efficiency of wheat at levels of irrigation water. Journal of Crop Production, 12(4), 1–24. (In Persian with English abstract).
7. Barazetti, A.R., Simionato, A.S., Navarro, M.O.P., Santos, I.M.O. dos, Modolon, F., Andreata, M.F. de L., Liuti, G., Cely, M.V.T., Chryssafidis, A.L., Dealis, M.L., & Andrade, G. (2019). Formulations of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi inoculum applied to soybean and corn plants under controlled and field conditions. Applied Soil Ecology, 142, 25–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2019.05.015
8. Basiru, S., Mwanza, H.P., & Hijri, M. (2020). Analysis of Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal inoculant benchmarks. Microorganisms, 9(1), 81. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9010081
9. Beltrano, J., & Ronco, M.G. (2008). Improved tolerance of wheat plants (Triticum aestivum) to drought stress and rewatering by the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus Glomus claroideum: Effect on growth and cell membrane stability. Brazilian Journal of Plant Physiology, 20(1), 29–37. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677-04202008000100004
10. Bilal, S., Khan, A.L., Shahzad, R., Asaf, S., Kang, S.-M., & Lee, I.-J. (2017). Endophytic Paecilomyces formosus LHL10 augments Glycine max adaptation to Ni-contamination through affecting Endogenous phytohormones and oxidative stress. Frontiers in Plant Science, 8, 870. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.00870
11. Birhane, E., Sterck, F.J., Fetene, M., Bongers, F., & Kuyper, T.W. (2012). Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi enhance photosynthesis, water use efficiency, and growth of frankincense seedlings under pulsed water availability conditions. Oecologia, 169(4), 895–904. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-012-2258-3
12. Bramley, H., Turner, N.C., & Siddique, K.H.M. (2013). Water use efficiency. In C. Kole (Ed.), Genomics and Breeding for Climate-Resilient Crops (pp. 225–268). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37048-9_6
13. Brunetti, C., Saleem, A.R., Della Rocca, G., Emiliani, G., De Carlo, A., Balestrini, R., Khalid, A., Mahmood, T., & Centritto, M. (2021). Effects of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria strains producing ACC deaminase on photosynthesis, isoprene emission, ethylene formation and growth of Mucuna pruriens (L.) DC. in response to water deficit. Journal of Biotechnology, 331, 53–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiotec.2021.03.008
14. Calvet, C., Camprubi, A., Pérez-Hernández, A., & Lovato, P.E. (2013). Plant growth stimulation and root colonization potential of in vivo versus in vitro arbuscular mycorrhizal inocula. HortScience Horts, 48(7), 897–901. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.48.7.897
15. Cardoso, I., & Kuyper, T. (2006). Mycorrhizas and tropical soil fertility. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 116(1–2), 72–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2006.03.011
16. Carmen, C.A., Patricia, P., Rubén, B., & Victoria, S.M. (2016). Plant–Rhizobacteria interaction and drought stress tolerance in plants. In M. A. Hossain, S. H. Wani, S. Bhattacharjee, D. J. Burritt, & L.-S. P. Tran (Eds.), Drought Stress Tolerance in Plants, Vol 1 (pp. 287–308). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28899-4_12
17. Cheng, Z., Park, E., & Glick, B.R. (2007). 1-Aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate deaminase from Pseudomonas putida UW4 facilitates the growth of canola in the presence of salt. Canadian Journal of Microbiology, 53(7), 912–918. https://doi.org/10.1139/W07-050
18. Crossay, T., Majorel, C., Redecker, D., Gensous, S., Medevielle, V., Durrieu, G., Cavaloc, Y., & Amir, H. (2019). Is a mixture of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi better for plant growth than single-species inoculants? Mycorrhiza, 29(4), 325–339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00572-019-00898-y
19. Garmendia, I., & Mangas, V. J. (2014). Comparative study of substrate-based and commercial formulations of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in Romaine lettuce subjected to salt stress. Journal of Plant Nutrition, 37(11), 1717–1731. https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2014.889149
20. Glick, B.R., Liu, C., Ghosh, S., & Dumbroff, E.B. (1997). Early development of canola seedlings in the presence of the plant growth-promoting rhizobacterium Pseudomonas putida GR12-2. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 29(8), 1233–1239. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-0717(97)00026-6
21. Glick, B.R., Penrose, D. M., & Li, J. (1998). A model for the lowering of plant ethylene concentrations by plant growth-promoting bacteria. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 190(1), 63–68. https://doi.org/10.1006/jtbi.1997.0532
22. Hasanpour, J., & Zand, B. (2014). Effect of wheat (Triticum aestivum) seed inoculation with bio-fertilizers on reduction of drought stress damage. Iranian Journal of Seed Sciences and Research, 1(2), 1–12. (In Persian with English abstract).
23. Hashem, A., Abd_Allah, E.F., Alqarawi, A.A., Al Huqail, A.A., Egamberdieva, D., & Wirth, S. (2016). Alleviation of cadmium stress in Solanum lycopersicum by arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi via induction of acquired systemic tolerance. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences, 23(2), 272–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2015.11.002
24. Hosseini, S.S., Rejali, F., & Keshavarz, P. (2024). Effect of some biofertilizers on the physiological characteristics of wheat flag leaves and rhizosphere enzyme activities at different irrigation levels. Journal of Sol Biology, 12(1), 65–88. (In Persian with English abstract).
25. Hyde, K.D., Xu, J., Rapior, S., Jeewon, R., Lumyong, S., Niego, A.G.T., Abeywickrama, P.D., Aluthmuhandiram, J.V.S., Brahamanage, R.S., Brooks, S., Chaiyasen, A., Chethana, K.W.T., Chomnunti, P., Chepkirui, C., Chuankid, B., de Silva, N.I., Doilom, M., Faulds, C., Gentekaki, E., & Stadler, M. (2019). The amazing potential of fungi: 50 ways we can exploit fungi industrially. Fungal Diversity, 97(1), 1–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13225-019-00430-9
26. Jalili, F., Khavazi, K., Pazira, E., Nejati, A., Rahmani, H. A., Sadaghiani, H.R., & Miransari, M. (2009). Isolation and characterization of ACC deaminase-producing fluorescent Pseudomonads, to alleviate salinity stress on canola (Brassica napus) growth. Journal of Plant Physiology, 166(6), 667–674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph. 2008.08.004
27. Jiriaie, M., Fateh, E., & Aynehband, A. (2014). Evaluation the morph physiological changes in wheat cultivars from the use of Mycorrhiza and Azospirillum. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research, 12(4), 841–851. (In Persian with English abstract).
28. Johansson, J.F., Paul, L.R., & Finlay, R.D. (2004). Microbial interactions in the mycorrhizosphere and their significance for sustainable agriculture. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 48(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.femsec.2003.11.012
29. Khan, Y., Shah, S., & Hui, T. (2022). The roles of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in influencing plant nutrients, photosynthesis, and Metabolites of Cereal Crops—A Review. Agronomy, 12(9), 2191. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12092191
30. Kormanik, P. P., & McGraw, A.-C. (1982). Quantification of vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizae in plant roots. In N. C. Schenck (Ed.), Methods and principles of mycorrhizal research (pp. 37–47). American Phytopathological Society. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:91636228
31. Kumar, A., Patel, J. S., Meena, V. S., & Srivastava, R. (2019). Recent advances of PGPR based approaches for stress tolerance in plants for sustainable agriculture. Biocatalysis and Agricultural Biotechnology, 20, 101271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bcab.2019.101271
32. Li, H., Guo, Q., Jing, Y., Liu, Z., Zheng, Z., Sun, Y., Xue, Q., & Lai, H. (2020). Application of streptomyces pactum Act12 enhances drought resistance in wheat. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation, 39(1), 122–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00344-019-09968-z
33. Li, J., Meng, B., Chai, H., Yang, X., Song, W., Li, S., Lu, A., Zhang, T., & Sun, W. (2019). Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi alleviate drought stress in C3 (Leymus chinensis) and C4 (Hemarthria altissima) grasses via altering antioxidant enzyme activities and photosynthesis. Frontiers in Plant Science, 10, 450785. https://doi.org/ 10.3389/fpls.2019.00499
34. Lim, J.-H., & Kim, S.-D. (2013). Induction of drought stress resistance by multi-functional PGPR Bacillus licheniformis K11 in pepper. The Plant Pathology Journal, 29(2), 201–208. https://doi.org/10.5423/PPJ.SI.02.2013.0021
35. Majidi, A., & Rejali, F. (2023). Mycorrhizal symbiosis and glycine betaine effect foliar application on some agronomic traits of rainfed wheat in calcareous soils. Iranian Journal of Soil and Water Research, 54(2), 281–297. (In Persian with English abstract).
36. Malusà, E., Pinzari, F., & Canfora, L. (2016). Efficacy of biofertilizers: Challenges to improve crop production. in Microbial Inoculants in Sustainable Agricultural Productivity (pp. 17–40). Springer India. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2644-4_2
37. Mathur, S., Tomar, R.S., & Jajoo, A. (2019). Arbuscular Mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) protects photosynthetic apparatus of wheat under drought stress. Photosynthesis Research, 139(1–3), 227–238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11120-018-0538-4
38. Mayak, S., Tirosh, T., & Glick, B.R. (2004). Plant growth-promoting bacteria that confer resistance to water stress in tomatoes and peppers. Plant Science, 166(2), 525–530. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2003.10.025
39. Moradgholi, A., Mobasser, H., Ganjali, H., Fanaie, H., & Mehraban, A. (2022). WUE, protein and grain yield of wheat under the interaction of biological and chemical fertilizers and different moisture regimes. Cereal Research Communications, 50(1), 147–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42976-021-00145-1
40. Nadeem, S. M., Ahmad, M., Zahir, Z. A., Javaid, A., & Ashraf, M. (2014). The role of mycorrhizae and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) in improving crop productivity under stressful environments. Biotechnology Advances, 32(2), 429–448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2013.12.005
41. Nadeem, S.M., Naveed, M., Ayyub, M., Khan, M.Y., Ahmad, M., & Zahir, Z.A. (2016). Potential, limitations and future prospects of Pseudomonas for sustainable agriculture and environment: A Review. Soil & Environment, 35(2).
42. Naseri, R., Barary, M., Zarea, M. J., Khavazi, K., & Tahmasebi, Z. (2017). Effect of plant growth promoting bacteria and Mycorrhizal fungi on growth and yield of wheat under dryland conditions. Journal of Sol Biology, 5(1), 49–66. (In Persian with English abstract).
43. Naseri rad, H., Naseri, R., Mirzaei, A., & Zarei, B. (2021). Effects of phosphorous fertilizer and mycorrhizal fungi on yield and yield components of durum wheat (Triticum turgidum durum) under rainfed condition. Applied Field Crops Research, 34(3), 43–68. (In Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.21608/ajas.2021.93649.1043
44. Oliveira, R.S., Rocha, I., Ma, Y., Vosátka, M., & Freitas, H. (2016). Seed coating with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi as an ecotechnologicalapproach for sustainable agricultural production of common wheat (Triticum aestivum). Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health. Part A, 79(7), 329–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/15287394.2016.1153448
45. Olumi somarin, S., Ajali, J., Faramarzi, A., Abdi, M., & Nazari, N. (2023). Study of the effect of irrigation, mycorrhiza, and azospirillum on the quantitative and qualitative yield of barley varieties. Iranian Journal of Soil and Water Research, 54(2), 407–427. (In Persian with English abstract).
46. Omidvari, S., Salamati, N., & Abdi, S. (2020). Study the effects of irrigation regime and biofertilizers on yield and yield component of wheat. Journal of Crops Improvement, 22(2), 193–204. (In Persian with English abstract).
47. Ortas, I., & Ustuner, O. (2014). The effects of single species, dual species and indigenous mycorrhiza inoculation on citrus growth and nutrient uptake. European Journal of Soil Biology, 63, 64–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.ejsobi.2014.05.007
48. Parihar, M., Rakshit, A., Rana, K., Prasad Meena, R., & Chandra Joshi, D. (2020). A consortium of arbuscular mycorrizal fungi improves nutrient uptake, biochemical response, nodulation and growth of the pea (Pisum sativum) under salt stress. Rhizosphere, 15, 100235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rhisph.2020.100235
49. Pellegrino, E., Nuti, M., & Ercoli, L. (2022). Multiple arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal consortia enhance yield and fatty acids of Medicago sativa: A two-year field study on agronomic traits and tracing of fungal persistence. Frontiers in Plant Science, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.814401
50. Phillips, J., & Hayman, D. (1970). Improved procedures for clearing roots and staining parasitic and vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi for rapid assessment of infection. Transactions of the British Mycological Society, 55(1), 158–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-1536(70)80110-3
51. Pons, C., & Müller, C. (2022). Impacts of Drought Stress and Mycorrhizal Inoculation on the Performance of Two Spring Wheat Cultivars. Plants, 11(17), 2187. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11172187
52. Rahimi, Z., Hosseinpanahi, F., & Siosemardeh, A. (2019). Evaluation of yield, radiation and water use efficiency of drought resistant and susceptible wheat cultivars under different irrigation levels. Plant Production and Genetics, 2(1), 19–34. (In Persian with English abstract). https://jwr.uok.ac.ir/article_61144.html
53. Rehman, M.M.U., Zhu, Y., Abrar, M., Khan, W., Wang, W., Iqbal, A., Khan, A., Chen, Y., Rafiq, M., Tufail, M. A., Ye, J.-S., & Xiong, Y.-C. (2024). Moisture- and period-dependent interactive effects of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria and AM fungus on water use and yield formation in dryland wheat. Plant and Soil, 502(1), 149–165. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1516690/v1
54. Rocha, I., Duarte, I., Ma, Y., Souza-Alonso, P., Látr, A., Vosátka, M., Freitas, H., & Oliveira, R.S. (2019). Seed Coating with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi for improved field production of Chickpea. Agronomy, 9(8), 471. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9080471
55. Rocha, I., Ma, Y., Souza-Alonso, P., Vosátka, M., Freitas, H., & Oliveira, R.S. (2019). Seed coating: A tool for delivering beneficial microbes to agricultural crops. Frontiers in Plant Science, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.01357
56. Rubin, R.L., van Groenigen, K.J., & Hungate, B.A. (2017). Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria are more effective under drought: a meta-analysis. Plant and Soil, 416(1–2), 309–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-017-3199-8
57. Ruíz-Sánchez, M., Armada, E., Muñoz, Y., García de Salamone, I.E., Aroca, R., Ruíz-Lozano, J.M., & Azcón, R. (2011). Azospirillum and arbuscular mycorrhizal colonization enhance rice growth and physiological traits under well-watered and drought conditions. Journal of Plant Physiology, 168(10), 1031–1037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2010.12.019
58. Sahu, P. K., & Brahmaprakash, G. P. (2016). Formulations of biofertilizers – Approaches and advances. In R. Singh, D., Singh, H., Prabha (Ed.), Microbial Inoculants in Sustainable Agricultural Productivity (pp. 179–198). Springer India. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2644-4_12
59. Saif, S., Abid, Z., Ashiq, M.F., Altaf, M., & Ashraf, R.S. (2021). Biofertilizer formulations. In Biofertilizers (pp. 211–256). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119724995.ch7
60. Siddiqui, Z. A., & Kataoka, R. (2011). Mycorrhizal inoculants: Progress in inoculant production technology. In Microbes and Microbial Technology (pp. 489–506). Springer New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7931-5_18
61. Smyth, E.M., McCarthy, J., Nevin, R., Khan, M. R., Dow, J.M., O’Gara, F., & Doohan, F.M. (2011). In vitro analyses are not reliable predictors of the plant growth promotion capability of bacteria; a Pseudomonas fluorescens strain that promotes the growth and yield of wheat. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 111(3), 683–692. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2011.05079.x
62. Tabassum, B., Khan, A., Tariq, M., Ramzan, M., Iqbal Khan, M.S., Shahid, N., & Aaliya, K. (2017). Bottlenecks in commercialisation and future prospects of PGPR. Applied Soil Ecology, 121(October), 102–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2017.09.030
63. Tang, H., Hassan, M.U., Feng, L., Nawaz, M., Shah, A.N., Qari, S.H., Liu, Y., & Miao, J. (2022). The critical role of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi to improve drought tolerance and nitrogen use efficiency in crops. Frontiers in Plant Science, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.919166
64. Treseder, K. K. (2013). The extent of mycorrhizal colonization of roots and its influence on plant growth and phosphorus content. Plant and Soil, 371(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-013-1681-5
65. Unkovich, M., Baldock, J., & Forbes, M. (2010). Variability in harvest index of grain crops and potential significance for carbon accounting. In D. L. Sparks (Ed.), Advances in Agronomy (Vol. 105, pp. 173–219). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113(10)05005-4
66. Yagini, F., seyed sharifi, R., Khomari, S., & Gasemi, M. (2020). Effect of supplementary irrigation and seed inoculation with bio fertilizers on yield and some physiological traits of rainfed wheat. Jispp, 9(39), 147–163. (In Persian with English abstract). http://jispp.iut.ac.ir/article-1-1321-en.html
67. Yavuz, D., Baştaş, K. K., Seymen, M., Yavuz, N., Kurtar, E. S., Süheri, S., Türkmen, Ö., Gür, A., & Kıymacı, G. (2023). Role of ACC deaminase-producing rhizobacteria in alleviation of water stress in watermelon. Scientia Horticulturae, 321, 112288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2023.112288
68. Zabihi, H. R., Savaghebi, G. R., Khavazi, K., Ganjali, A., & Miransari, M. (2011). Pseudomonas bacteria and phosphorous fertilization, affecting wheat (Triticum aestivum ) yield and P uptake under greenhouse and field conditions. Acta Physiologiae Plantarum, 33(1), 145–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-010-0531-9
69. Zahir, Z.A., Munir, A., Asghar, H.N., Shaharoona, B., & Arshad, M. (2008). Effectiveness of rhizobacteria containing ACC deaminase for growth promotion of peas (Pisum sativum) under drought conditions. JOournal Microbiology Biotechnology, 18(5), 958–963. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1002-0160(08)60055-7
70. Zarei, T., Moradi, A., Kazemeini, S.A., Akhgar, A., & Rahi, A.A. (2020). The role of ACC deaminase producing bacteria in improving sweet corn (Zea mays var saccharata) productivity under limited availability of irrigation water. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 20361. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-77305-6
71. Zhang, X., Wang, L., Ma, F., Yang, J., & Su, M. (2017). Effects of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi inoculation on carbon and nitrogen distribution and grain yield and nutritional quality in rice (Oryza sativa ). Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 97(9), 2919–2925. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.8129