Advertisement

Marginal impact of cropping BADH transgenic maize BZ-136 on chemical property, enzyme activity, and bacterial community diversity of rhizosphere soil

  • Xin Bai
  • Xing Zeng
  • Siqi Huang
  • Jinsong Liang
  • Liying Dong
  • Yingnan Wei
  • Yue Li
  • Juanjuan QuEmail author
  • Zhenhua WangEmail author
Regular Article
  • 71 Downloads

Abstract

Aims

Transgenic betaine aldehyde dehydrogenase (BADH) maize that overaccumulates glycine betaine (GB) is developed to enhance tolerance to salt stress, while the ecological risk of cropping BADH transgenic maize BZ-136 on soil properties and rhizosphere microorganisms is ambiguous.

Methods

A pot experiment was conducted and soils were sampled at seedling, elongation, flowering, and mature stage. Soil chemical properties and enzyme activities were determined with conventional method and bacterial community diversity of BZ-136 rhizosphere was analyzed by high-throughput sequencing technique as compared with those of parental maize Zheng58 and conventional maize U8112.

Results

Cropping BZ-136 has a transient effect on EC, organic C or total N at some growth stage in neutral and saline-alkaline soil, a significant effect on urease activities from elongation to mature stage in saline-alkaline soil, and a slight influence on bacterial diversity at different stages in neutral soil and a significant impact at seedling stage in saline-alkaline soil.

Conclusion

Cropping BADH transgenic maize has transient or minor effects on soil chemistry, enzyme activity, and bacterial community diversity, while parallel factors, such as plant growth stage and soil type might also influence the rhizosphere microorganisms.

Keywords

BADH transgenic maize Soil chemical property Soil enzyme activity Bacterial community Risk assessment 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Xin Bai and Xing Zeng contributed equally to this work. This work is supported by Major Subject of Environmental Safety Assessment Technology for Genetically Modified Maize, Wheat, and Soybean, China (No.2016ZX08011-003).

Supplementary material

11104_2019_3941_MOESM1_ESM.docx (608 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 608 kb)

References

  1. Ahsan MH, Hussnain H, Saleem M, Malik TA, Aslam M (2007) Gene action and progeny performance for various traits in maize. Pak J Agric Sci 44:608–613Google Scholar
  2. Beare MH, Coleman DC, Jr DAC, Hendrix PF, Odum EP (1995) A hierarchical approach to evaluating the significance of soil biodiversity to biogeochemical cycling. Plant Soil 170:5–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boncompagni E, Osteras M, Poggi MC, Rudulier DL (1999) Occurrence of choline and glycine betaine uptake and metabolism in the family Rhizobiaceae and their roles in osmoprotection. Appl Environ Microbiol 65:2072–2077Google Scholar
  4. Bremner JM, Mulvaney CS (1982) Nitrogen total. In: Page, A.L. (Ed.), Methods of soil analysis. Part 2. American Society of Agronomy. Soil Sci. Soc. Am., Inc. Publisher, Madison, WI, USA, 595–624Google Scholar
  5. Chun YJ, Kimb DY, Kimb HJ, Parkb KW, Jeongb SC, Parkc S, Leed B, Harne CH, Kimf HM, Kimb CG (2011) Do transgenic chili pepper plants producing viral coat protein affect the structure of a soil microbial community? Appl Soil Ecol 51(1):130–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cornfield AH (1960) Ammonia released on treating soils with n sodium hydroxide as a possible means of predicting the nitrogen-supplying power of soils. Nature 187(4733):260–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Di H, Tian Y, Zu HY, Meng XY, Zeng X, Wang ZH (2015) Enhanced salinity tolerance in transgenic maize plants expressing a BADH gene from Atriplex micrantha. Euphytica 206:775–783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dunfield KE, Germida JJ (2003) Seasonal changes in the rhizosphere microbial communities associated with field-grown genetically modified canola (Brassica napus). Appl Environ Microbiol 69:7310–7318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fan WJ, Zhang M, Zhang HX, Zhang P (2012) Improved tolerance to various abiotic stresses in transgenic sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas) expressing spinach betaine aldehyde dehydrogenase. PLoS One 7(5):e37344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Frankenberger WT, Bingham FT (1982) Influence of salinity on soil enzyme activities. Soil Sci Soc Am J 46:1173–1177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Griffiths BS, Caul S, Thompson J, Birch ANE, Scrimgeour C, Cortet J, Foggo A, Hackeet CA, Krogh PH (2006) Soil microbial and faunal community responses to Bt maize and insecticide in two soils. J Environ Qual 35:734–741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gupta PK (2004) Methods in environmental analysis: Water, Soil and Air. AgrobiosGoogle Scholar
  13. Holmstrom KO, Somersalo S, Mandal A, Palva TE, Welin B (2000) Improved tolerance to salinity and low temperature in transgenic tobacco producing glycine betaine. J Exp Bot 51:177–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Icoz I, Saxena D, Andow DA, Zwahlen C, Stotzky G (2008) Microbial populations and enzyme activities in soil in situ under transgenic corn expressing cry proteins from Bacillus thuringiensis. J Environ Qual 37:647–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jepson PC, Croft BA, Pratt GE (1994) Test systems to determine the ecological risks posed by toxin release from bacillus-thuringiensis genes in crop plants. Mol Ecol 3:81–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jin K, Sleutel S, Buchan D, De Neve S, Cai DX, Gabriels D, Jin JY (2009) Changes of soil enzyme activities under different tillage practices in the Chinese Loess Plateau. Soil Tillage Res 104:115–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kappes R, Bremer E (1998) Response of Bacillus subtilis to high osmolarity: uptake of carnitine, crotonobetaine, and γ-butyrobetaine via the ABC transport system OpuC. Microbiology 144:83–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kersters K, Vos PD, Gillis M, Swings J, Vandamme P, Stackebrandt E (2006) Introduction to the Proteobacteria. Prokaryotes 3–37Google Scholar
  19. Li CR, Xu JW, Song HY, Li CY, Zheng L, Wang WD, Wang YH (2006) Soil enzyme activities in different plantations in lowlands of the Yellow River Delta, China. J Plant Ecol 30(5):802–809 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  20. Li XG, Liu BA, Cui JJ, Liu DD, Ding S, Gilna B, Luo JY, Fang ZX, Cao W, Han ZM (2011) No evidence of persistent effects of continuously planted transgenic insect-resistant cotton on soil microorganisms. Plant Soil 339:247–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Li P, Dong JY, Yang SF, Bai L, Wang JB, Wu GG, Wu X, Yao QH, Tang XM (2014) Impact of b-carotene transgenic rice with four synthetic genes on rhizosphere enzyme activities and bacterial communities at different growth stages. Eur J Soil Biol 65:40–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Liang J, Meng F, Sun S, Wu C, Wu H, Zhang M, Zhang H, Zheng X, Song X, Zhang Z (2015) Community structure of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in rhizospheric soil of a transgenic high-methionine soybean and a near isogenic variety. PLoS One 10(12):e0145001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lilley AK, Bailey MJ, Cartwright C, Turner SL, Hirsch PR (2006) Life in earth: the impact of GM plants on soil ecology? Trends Biotechnol 24:9–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Liu N, Zhu P, Peng C, Kang LS, Gao HJ, Clarke NJ, Clarke JL (2010) Effect on soil chemistry of genetically modified (GM) vs. non-GM maize. GM Crops 1(3):5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lu GH, Tang CY, Hua XM, Cheng J, Wang GH, Zhu YL, Zhang LY, Shou HX, Qi JL, Yang YH (2018) Effects of an EPSPS-transgenic soybean line ZUTS31 on root-associated bacterial communities during field growth. PLoS One 13(2):e0192008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Maacaroun A (2008) Effect of the irrigation with saline water on the behavior of 2 soil enzymes urease and saccharase, soil respiration and soil humidity. Scientific papers–University of Agronomic Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Bucharest. Series B, Horticulture 51:95–98 (in Romania)Google Scholar
  27. Mallory-Smith C, Zapiola M (2008) Gene flow from glyphosate-resistant crops. Pest Manag Sci 64:428–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mathesius U (2003) Conservation and divergence of signalling pathways between roots and soil microbes – the rhizobium-legume symbiosis compared to the development of lateral roots, mycorrhizal interactions and nematode-induced galls. Plant Soil 255:105–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Milling A, Smalla K, Maidl FX, Schloter M, Munch JC (2004) Effects of transgenic potatoes with an altered starch composition on the diversity of soil and rhizosphere bacteria and fungi. Plant Soil 266:23–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nimusiima J, Köberl M, Tumuhairwe JB, Kubiriba J, Staver C, Berg G (2015) Transgenic banana plants expressing Xanthomonas wilt resistance genes revealed a stable non-target bacterial colonization structure. Sci Rep 5:18078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Oliveira AP, Pampulha ME, Bennett JP (2008) A two-year field study with transgenic Bacillus thuringiensis maize: effects on soil microorganisms. Sci Total Environ 405:351–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Petrosino JF, Highlander S, Luna RA, Gibbs RA, Versalovic J (2009) Metagenomic pyrosequencing and microbial identification. Clin Chem 55:856–866CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Prochazkova D, Sairam RK, Leckshmy S, Wilhelmova N (2013) Differential response of a maize hybrid and its parental lines to salinity. Czech J Genet Plant 49(1):9–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rauschen S, Nguyen HT, Schuphan I, Jehle JA, Eber S (2008) Rapid degradation of the Cry3Bb1 protein from Diabrotica resistant Bt-corn Mon88017 during ensilation and fermentation in biogas production facilities. J Sci Food Agric 88:1709–1715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rhodes D, Hanson AD (1993) Quaternary ammonium and tertiary sulfonium compounds in higher plants. Annu Rev Plant Biol 44:357–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sahoo RK, Tuteja N (2013) Effect of salinity tolerant PDH45 transgenic rice on physicochemical properties, enzymatic activities and microbial communities of rhizosphere soils. Plant Signal Behav 8(8):e24950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Shen RF, Cai H, Gong WH (2006) Transgenic Bt cotton has no apparent effect on enzymatic activities or functional diversity of microbial communities in rhizosphere soil. Plant Soil 285:149–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Su J, Hirji R, Zhang L, He CK, Selvaraj G, Wu R (2006) Evaluation of the stress-inducible production of choline oxidase in transgenic rice as a strategy for producing the stressprotectant glycine betaine. J Exp Bot 57:1129–1135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sun CX, Chen LJ, Wu ZJ (2004) Persistence of Bt of toxin in soil and its effects of soil phosphatase activity. Acta Pedol Sin 41:761–766Google Scholar
  40. Tao JM, Liu XD, Liang YL, Niu JJ, Xiao YH, Gu YB, Ma LY, Meng DL, Zhang YG, Huang WK, Peng DL, Yin HQ (2017) Maize growth responses to soil microbes and soil properties after fertilization with different green manures. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 101:1289–1299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Trevors JT, Kuikman P, Watson B (2010) Transgenic plants and biogeochemical cycles. Mol Ecol Resour 3:57–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Velmourougane K, Sahu A (2013) Impact of transgenic cottons expressing cry1Ac on soil biological attributes. Plant Soil Environ 3:108–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Walkley A, Black IA (1934) An examination of Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter, and a proposed modification of the chromic acid tritation method. Soil Sci 37(1):29–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wang B, Shen H, Yang X, Guo T, Zhang B, Yan W (2013) Effects of chitinase-transgenic (McChit1) tobacco on the rhizospheric microflora and enzyme activities of the purple soil. Plant Soil Environ 59:241–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wolfenbarger LL, Phifer PR (2000) The ecological risks and benefits of genetically engineered plants. Science 290:2088–2093CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wolt JD (2009) Advancing environmental risk assessment for transgenic biofeedstock crops. Biotechnol Biofuels 2(1):1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wu WX, Ye QF, Min H (2004) Effect of straws from Bt-transgenic rice on selected biological activities in water-flooded soil. Eur J Soil Biol 40:15–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wu J, Yu Z, Xu J, Du J, Ji F, Dong F, Li X (2014) Impact of transgenic wheat with wheat yellow mosaic virus resistance on microbial community diversity and enzyme activity in rhizosphere soil. PLoS One 9(6):e98394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Yin ZX, Gao Z, Feng Y, Gu SY (2017) Study on effect and mechanism of using betaine to treat expansive soil. Journal of Highway and Transportation Research and Development 34(3):1–6, 14 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  50. Zhang N, Si HJ, Wen G, Du HH, Liu BL, Wang D (2011a) Enhanced drought and salinity tolerance in transgenic potato plants with a BADH gene from spinach. Plant Biotechnol Rep 5(1):71–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zhang C, Xue S, Liu GB, Song ZL (2011b) A comparison of soil qualities of different revegetation types in the loess plateau, China. Plant Soil 347:163–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zhang YN, Xie M, Li CY, Wu G, Peng DL (2014) Impacts of the transgenic CrylAc and CpTI insect-resistant cotton SGK321 on selected soil enzyme activities in the rhizosphere. Plant Soil Environ 60:401–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Resources and EnvironmentNortheast Agricultural UniversityHarbinChina
  2. 2.College of AgricultureNortheast Agricultural UniversityHarbinChina

Personalised recommendations