4.1 Article

Plant Growth Promoting Bacteria from Cow Dung Based Biodynamic Preparations

Journal

INDIAN JOURNAL OF MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 54, Issue 4, Pages 413-418

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12088-014-0468-6

Keywords

Bacillus spp.; Biofertilizer; BD500; Cow pat pit; Fermentation; Lysinibacillus sp.; Panchagavya

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Indigenous formulations based on cow dung fermentation are commonly used in organic farming. Three biodynamic preparations viz., Panchagavya (PG), BD500 and 'Cow pat pit' (CPP) showed high counts of lactobacilli (10(9) ml(-1)) and yeasts (10(4) ml(-1)). Actinomycetes were present only in CPP (10(4) ml(-1)) and absent in the other two. Seven bacterial isolates from these ferments were identified by a polyphasic approach: Bacillus safensis (PG1), Bacillus cereus (PG2, PG4 PG5), Bacillus subtilis (BD2) Lysinibacillus xylanilyticus (BD3) and Bacillus licheniformis (CPP1). This is the first report of L. xylanilyticus and B. licheniformis in biodynamic preparations. Only three carbon sources-dextrose, sucrose and trehalose out of 21 tested were utilized by all the bacteria. None could utilize arabinose, dulcitol, galactose, inositol, inulin, melibiose, raffinose, rhamnose and sorbitol. All the strains produced indole acetic acid (1.8-3.7 mu g ml(-1) culture filtrate) and ammonia. None could fix nitrogen; but all except B. safensis and B. licheniformis could solubilize phosphorous from insoluble tri-calcium phosphate. All the strains except L. xylaniliticus exhibited antagonism to the plant pathogen Rhizoctonia bataticola whereas none could inhibit Sclerotium rolfsi. In green house experiment in soil microcosms, bacterial inoculation significantly promoted growth of maize; plant dry weight increased by similar to 21 % due to inoculation with B. cereus (PG2). Results provide a basis for understanding the beneficial effects of biodynamic preparations and industrial deployment of the strains.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available