Effects of Bacillus subtilis on yield, disease resistance, and soil improvement in continuous ginger cropping

doi:10.16178/j.issn.0528-9017.20250491

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to clarify the effects of Bacillus subtilis agent on yield, disease resistance, and soil improvement in continuous ginger cropping, a field experiment was conducted to study the effect of microbial agent on microbial community structure in continuous cropping soil, ginger yield and disease resistance by setting blank control (no microbial agent, CK) and microbial agent treatment (Bacillus subtilis, TM). The results showed that compared with CK, microbial agent treatment significantly(p<0.05)reduced the disease rate of stem rot and root rot, the ginger yield was significantly increased by 13.84%, and soil available potassium content was increased by 19.60%. The microbial agent treatment significantly increased bacterial diversity and evenness in the rhizosphere soil of ginger, and significantly reduced fungal richness, significantly increased fungal evenness. Microbial agent treatment increased the relative abundance of dominant bacteria such as Actinobacteria and Firmicutes, and beneficial bacteria such as Bacillus and Sphingomonas in the rhizosphere soil of ginger, and reduced the relative abundance of pathogenic bacteria such as Ascomycota and Fusarium. In summary, continuous application of Bacillus subtilis microbial agents during the growth period of ginger can effectively improve the structure of rhizosphere soil microbial communities, increase soil available potassium content, increase ginger yield, and reduce the occurrence of soil borne diseases.

Key words: ginger, microbial agent, Bacillus subtilis, microbial community, yield, continuous cropping

CLC Number:

S632.5

FU Lijun, KE Siqi, HAN Xiaoqing, ZHANG Shangqing, YAN Hongbo, DUAN Huimin, ZHOU Yu. Effects of Bacillus subtilis on yield, disease resistance, and soil improvement in continuous ginger cropping[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2026, 67(1): 222-230.

Figures/Tables 7

References 23

[1]	石娜娜, 袁成磊. 潍坊生姜茎基腐病拮抗菌株筛选及鉴定[J]. 潍坊工程职业学院学报, 2022, 35(5): 84-89.
	SHI N N, YUAN C L. Screening and identification of ginger stem based rot antagonistic strains in Weifang[J]. Journal of Weifang Engineering Vocational College, 2022, 35(5): 84-89.
[2]	张晓明, 辛增英, 辛燕. 微生物菌肥在连作生姜上应用效果初探[J]. 基层农技推广, 2022(4): 40-42.
	ZHANG X M, XIN Z Y, XIN Y. Preliminary study on the application effect of microbial bacterial fertilizer on continuous cropping ginger[J]. Primary Agricultural Technology Extension, 2022(4): 40-42.
[3]	陈政. 连作生姜根际土壤微生物群落结构分析[D]. 泰安: 山东农业大学, 2013.
	CHEN Z. Analysis of continuous cropping on rhizosphere microbial community structure in ginger field[D]. Tai’an: Shandong Agricultural University, 2013.
[4]	孙世君, 刘琦, 叶英杰, 等. 腐植酸对不同连作年限温室黄瓜土壤养分和微生物群落结构的影响[J]. 河南农业科学, 2022, 51(2): 65-74.
	SUN S J, LIU Q, YE Y J, et al. Effects of humic acid on soil nutrients and microbial community structure of cucumber with different continuous cropping years in greenhouse[J]. Journal of Henan Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 51(2): 65-74.
[5]	ZHANG J, WANG P C, TIAN H M, et al. Pyrosequencing-based assessment of soil microbial community structure and analysis of soil properties with vegetable planted at different years under greenhouse conditions[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2019, 187: 1-10.
[6]	张美存, 程田, 多立安, 等. 微生物菌剂对草坪植物高羊茅生长与土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2017, 37(14): 4763-4769.
	ZHANG M C, CHENG T, DUO L A, et al. Effects of microbial agents on the growth of turfgrass Festuca arundinacea and soil enzyme activity[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2017, 37(14): 4763-4769.
[7]	彭海龙, 徐天宇, 钟秉峰, 等. 生防菌剂链霉菌JD211对水稻土壤微生物群落结构及碳代谢的影响[J]. 江西农业大学学报, 2023, 45(2): 384-394.
	PENG H L, XU T Y, ZHONG B F, et al. Effect of biocide Streptomyces JD211 on soil microbial community structure and carbon metabolism in rice[J]. Acta Agriculturae Universitatis Jiangxiensis, 2023, 45(2): 384-394.
[8]	BHATTACHARYYA P N, JHA D K. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR): emergence in agriculture[J]. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2012, 28(4): 1327-1350.
[9]	李庆荣, 邢东旭, 肖阳, 等. 枯草芽孢杆菌生防菌株SEM-9根际定植及对根际土壤微生物多样性的影响[J]. 华南农业大学学报, 2022, 43(4): 82-88.
	LI Q R, XING D X, XIAO Y, et al. Rhizosphere colonization of Bacillus subtilis biocontrol strain SEM-9 and the effect on microbial diversity in rhizosphere soil[J]. Journal of South China Agricultural University, 2022, 43(4): 82-88.
[10]	HINAREJOS E, CASTELLANO M, RODRIGO I, et al. Bacillus subtilis IAB/BS03 as a potential biological control agent[J]. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 2016, 146(3): 597-608.
[11]	杨晓帆, 梁家慧, 于文英, 等. 促生荧光假单胞菌对桃树根区土壤环境和植株生长的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2022, 28(8): 1494-1508.
	YANG X F, LIANG J H, YU W Y, et al. Effect of Pseudomonas fluorescens on rhizospheric soil quality and growth of peach (Prunus persica L. Batsch)[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2022, 28(8): 1494-1508.
[12]	冀玉良, 赵志新, 高宝云. 枯草芽孢杆菌PS-8对桔梗连作障碍土壤的修复及其促生作用[J]. 商洛学院学报, 2022, 36(6): 15-25, 72.
	JI Y L, ZHAO Z X, GAO B Y. The improvement of Bacillus subtilis PS-8 on continuous cropping obstacle soil and its growth-promoting effect on Platycodon grandiflorum[J]. Journal of Shangluo University, 2022, 36(6): 15-25, 72.
[13]	马二磊, 黄芸萍, 臧全宇, 等. 4种微生物菌剂对多年连作甜瓜土壤真菌群落的影响[J]. 中国瓜菜, 2021, 34(4): 15-20.
	MA E L, HUANG Y P, ZANG Q Y, et al. Effects of four microbial agents on soil fungal community in continuous cropping melon based on diversity sequencing[J]. China Cucurbits and Vegetables, 2021, 34(4): 15-20.
[14]	沙月霞, 黄泽阳, 魏照清. 生物菌剂撒施对宁夏石嘴山盐碱地微生物群落结构的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(34): 82-90.
	SHA Y X, HUANG Z Y, WEI Z Q. Impact of microbial agent broadcast application on microbial community structure of saline-alkali soil in Shizuishan of Ningxia[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(34): 82-90.
[15]	黄亚丽, 郑立伟, 黄媛媛, 等. 枯草芽孢杆菌菌剂不同施用方式对甜瓜土壤微生物多样性及生长的影响[J]. 生物工程学报, 2020, 36(12): 2644-2656.
	HUANG Y L, ZHENG L W, HUANG Y Y, et al. Effects of different application methods of Bacillus subtilis agent on soil microbial diversity and growth of muskmelon[J]. Chinese Journal of Biotechnology, 2020, 36(12): 2644-2656.
[16]	刘高峰, 张明宇, 黄光辉, 等. 石灰氮与生物菌剂配施对烟草根际微生物群落及防控青枯病的影响[J]. 河南农业大学学报, 2020, 54(5): 748-754.
	LIU G F, ZHANG M Y, HUANG G H, et al. Effects of application of lime nitrogen and biological bacteria on soil microbial flora of tobacco rhizosphere and prevention and control of bacterial wilt[J]. Journal of Henan Agricultural University, 2020, 54(5): 748-754.
[17]	张晓丽, 王国丽, 常芳弟, 等. 生物菌剂对根际盐碱土壤理化性质和微生物区系的影响[J]. 生态环境学报, 2022, 31(10): 1984-1992.
	ZHANG X L, WANG G L, CHANG F D, et al. Effects of microbial agents on physicochemical properties and microbial flora of rhizosphere saline-alkali soil[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 31(10): 1984-1992.
[18]	鲁奥. 盐碱地中纤维素降解菌的植物促生特性研究[D]. 长春: 东北师范大学, 2019.
	LU A. The plant growth promoting characteristics of cellulose degrading bacteria in saline-sodic soils[D]. Changchun: Northeast Normal University, 2019.
[19]	付宽宽, 王小兵, 汪晓丽, 等. 不同改良措施对设施芹菜根际土壤微生物群落结构的影响[J]. 中国瓜菜, 2022, 35(8): 42-49.
	FU K K, WANG X B, WANG X L, et al. Different improvement measures affects microbial in rhizosphere soil of celery in protected field[J]. China Cucurbits and Vegetables, 2022, 35(8): 42-49.
[20]	高逸, 杨悦, 易欣欣, 等. 设施生菜种植与T1菌肥处理对土壤微生物群落的影响[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2020, 25(6): 57-66.
	GAO Y, YANG Y, YI X X, et al. Effects of greenhouse lettuce planting and T1 bacterial fertilizer treatment on soil microbial community[J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2020, 25(6): 57-66.
[21]	邵美琪, 赵卫松, 苏振贺, 等. 盐胁迫下枯草芽孢杆菌NCD-2对番茄促生作用及对土壤微生物群落结构的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(21): 4573-4584.
	SHAO M Q, ZHAO W S, SU Z H, et al. Effect of Bacillus subtilis NCD-2 on the growth of tomato and the microbial community structure of rhizosphere soil under salt stress[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2021, 54(21): 4573-4584.
[22]	宁琪, 陈林, 李芳, 等. 被孢霉对土壤养分有效性和秸秆降解的影响[J]. 土壤学报, 2022, 59(1): 206-217.
	NING Q, CHEN L, LI F, et al. Effects of Mortierella on nutrient availability and straw decomposition in soil[J]. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2022, 59(1): 206-217.
[23]	王丹, 赵亚光, 马蕊, 等. 微生物菌肥对盐碱地枸杞土壤改良及细菌群落的影响[J]. 农业生物技术学报, 2020, 28(8): 1499-1510.
	WANG D, ZHAO Y G, MA R, et al. Effects of microbial fertilizers on soil improvement and bacterial communities in saline-alkali soils of Lycium barbarum[J]. Journal of Agricultural Biotechnology, 2020, 28(8): 1499-1510.

处理组	病株率/%			产量/(kg·hm^-2)
处理组	茎基腐病	根腐病	合计	产量/(kg·hm^-2)
对照(CK)	4.52±1.16 a	2.47±0.49 a	6.99	75 236.91±2 785.17 b
微生物菌剂处理(TM)	1.83±0.67 b	0.86±0.37 b	2.69	85 649.69±2 136.40 a

处理组	病株率/%			产量/(kg·hm^-2)
处理组	茎基腐病	根腐病	合计	产量/(kg·hm^-2)
对照(CK)	4.52±1.16 a	2.47±0.49 a	6.99	75 236.91±2 785.17 b
微生物菌剂处理(TM)	1.83±0.67 b	0.86±0.37 b	2.69	85 649.69±2 136.40 a

处理	pH值	有机质含量/(g·kg^-1)	全氮含量/(g·kg^-1)	有效磷含量/(mg·kg^-1)	速效钾含量/(mg·kg^-1)
对照(CK)	7.97±0.05 a	27.33±0.31 a	1.94±0.04 a	53.10±3.18 a	296.27±9.65 b
微生物菌剂处理(TM)	7.80±0.10 a	28.63±0.55 a	1.94±0.07 a	56.23±4.27 a	354.33±18.75 a

处理	pH值	有机质含量/(g·kg^-1)	全氮含量/(g·kg^-1)	有效磷含量/(mg·kg^-1)	速效钾含量/(mg·kg^-1)
对照(CK)	7.97±0.05 a	27.33±0.31 a	1.94±0.04 a	53.10±3.18 a	296.27±9.65 b
微生物菌剂处理(TM)	7.80±0.10 a	28.63±0.55 a	1.94±0.07 a	56.23±4.27 a	354.33±18.75 a

样本编号	细菌α-多样性指数				真菌α-多样性指数
样本编号	Chao1指数	Shannon指数	Shannoneven指数	Coverage指数	Chao1指数	Shannon指数	Shannoneven指数	Coverage指数
CK1	3 258.35 ab	6.25 bc	0.78 c	0.99	928.49 a	4.61 ab	0.67 bc	1.00
CK2	3 106.72 bc	6.38 b	0.80 bc	0.98	857.24 ab	4.50 b	0.62 d	1.00
CK3	2 852.14 d	5.94 c	0.73 d	1.00	875.39 ab	4.58 ab	0.66 c	1.00
TM1	3 327.48 a	6.89 a	0.86 a	0.98	821.20 b	4.78 a	0.74 a	1.00
TM2	3 189.45 ab	6.77 a	0.84 a	0.99	722.17 c	4.43 b	0.69 b	1.00
TM3	3 015.10 cd	6.59 ab	0.83 ab	0.99	620.47 d	4.51 b	0.70 b	1.00