Search
2025 Volume 2
Article Contents
REVIEW   Open Access    

Evolution of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria under global climate change

More Information
  • The advancement of life in all its forms relies on agricultural practices and food security, which are fundamentally influenced by soil characteristics. The demand for agricultural products has surged due to climate change and global population growth, leading to a significant increase in the utilization of chemical fertilizers. Since chemical agents have affected soil fertility and quality by degradation, causing the development of agricultural fields with rich soil to be incomprehensible, consideration for a secure and profitable agricultural production has drifted. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) have established eco-evolutionary relationships with host plants, fitness, and productivity. Microbial renaissance driven by plant growth regulators has been successfully achieved through disease resistance in emerging pathogens, bio-fertilization, rhizoremediation, and stimulating root growth. PGPR can profoundly increase plant growth by producing growth hormones, improving nutrient uptake, suppressing plant pathogens, and protecting against biotic and abiotic stress conditions. Here, we provide insight into sustainable agricultural development aimed at increasing crop yield and production by exploring the mechanisms and commercial applications of potential rhizobacteria under changing climatic conditions.
  • 加载中
  • [1] Peixoto RS, Voolstra CR, Sweet M, Duarte CM, Carvalho S, et al. 2022. Harnessing the microbiome to prevent global biodiversity loss. Nature Microbiology 7:1726−35 doi: 10.1038/s41564-022-01173-1

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [2] Singh BK, Delgado-Baquerizo M, Egidi E, Guirado E, Leach JE, et al. 2023. Climate change impacts on plant pathogens, food security and paths forward. Nature Reviews Microbiology 21:640−56 doi: 10.1038/s41579-023-00900-7

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [3] Ahmed A, He P, He P, Wu Y, He Y, et al. 2023. Environmental effect of agriculture-related manufactured nano-objects on soil microbial communities. Environment International 173:107819 doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2023.107819

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [4] Wang L, Lu P, Feng S, Hamel C, Sun D, et al. 2024. Strategies to improve soil health by optimizing the plant–soil–microbe–anthropogenic activity nexus. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 359:108750 doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2023.108750

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [5] Fallah N, Pang Z, Zhang C, Tayyab M, Yang Z, et al. 2023. Complementary effects of biochar, secondary metabolites, and bacteria biocontrol agents rejuvenate ratoon sugarcane traits and stimulate soil fertility. Industrial Crops and Products 202:117081 doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2023.117081

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [6] Bahram M, Hildebrand F, Forslund SK, Anderson JL, Soudzilovskaia NA, et al. 2018. Structure and function of the global topsoil microbiome. Nature 560:233−37 doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0386-6

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [7] Compant S, Cassan F, Kostić T, Johnson L, Brader G, et al. 2024. Harnessing the plant microbiome for sustainable crop production. Nature Reviews Microbiology 23:9−23 doi: 10.1038/s41579-024-01079-1

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [8] Arif I, Batool M, Schenk PM. 2020. Plant microbiome engineering: expected benefits for improved crop growth and resilience. Trends in Biotechnology 38:1385−96 doi: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2020.04.015

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [9] Ahmed A, Liu Y, Khan R, He P, He P, et al. 2025. Molecular insights from integrated metabolome-transcriptome into endophyte Bacillus subtilis L1-21 surfactin against citrus Huanglongbing. Microbiological Research 290:127942 doi: 10.1016/j.micres.2024.127942

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [10] Mia MAB, Shamsuddin ZH, Wahab Z, Marziah M. 2010. Effect of plant growth promoting rhizobacterial (PGPR) inoculation on growth and nitrogen incorporation of tissue-cultured 'musa' plantlets under nitrogen-free hydroponics condition. Australian Journal of Crop Science 4:85

    Google Scholar

    [11] Beijerinck MW. 1888. Die bacterien der papilionaceenknöllchen. Botanische Zeitung 46:725

    Google Scholar

    [12] Kloepper JW, Schroth MN. 1981. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria and plant growth under gnotobiotic conditions. Phytopathology 71:642−44 doi: 10.1094/Phyto-71-642

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [13] He S, Li L, Lv M, Wang R, Wang L, et al. 2024. PGPR: key to enhancing crop productivity and achieving sustainable agriculture. Current Microbiology 81:377 doi: 10.1007/s00284-024-03893-5

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [14] El-Deriny MM, Ibrahim DSS, Farag NS. 2024. Rhizobacteria as a potential bioagent against root-galling disease in vegetable crops. In Microbial Biostimulants. New York: Apple Academic Press. pp. 149−76. doi: 10.1201/9781003484837-6
    [15] Spooren J, van Bentum S, Thomashow LS, Pieterse CMJ, Weller DM, et al. 2024. Plant-driven assembly of disease-suppressive soil microbiomes. Annual Review of Phytopathology 62:1−30 doi: 10.1146/annurev-phyto-021622-100127

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [16] Santoyo G, Orozco-Mosqueda MdC, Afridi MS, Mitra D, Valencia-Cantero E, et al. 2024. Trichoderma and Bacillus multifunctional allies for plant growth and health in saline soils: recent advances and future challenges. Frontiers in Microbiology 15:1423980 doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2024.1423980

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [17] Thakur R, Dhar H, Mathew S, Gulati A. 2024. PGPR inoculants journey from lab to land: challenges and limitations. Microbiological Research 289:127910 doi: 10.1016/j.micres.2024.127910

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [18] Grover M, Ali SZ, Sandhya V, Rasul A, Venkateswarlu B. 2011. Role of microorganisms in adaptation of agriculture crops to abiotic stresses. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology 27:1231−40 doi: 10.1007/s11274-010-0572-7

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [19] Ruzzi M, Aroca R. 2015. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria act as biostimulants in horticulture. Scientia Horticulturae 196:124−34 doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2015.08.042

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [20] Cailleau G, Braissant O, Verrecchia EP. 2004. Biomineralization in plants as a long-term carbon sink. Naturwissenschaften 91:191−94 doi: 10.1007/s00114-004-0512-1

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [21] Patel M, Islam S, Glick BR, Vimal SR, Bhor SA, et al. 2024. Elaborating the multifarious role of PGPB for sustainable food security under changing climate conditions. Microbiological Research 289:127895 doi: 10.1016/j.micres.2024.127895

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [22] Chetan K, Varma PK, Chandrasekhar V, Kumar PA, Vasanthi V. 2024. Plant, bacteria and fungi crosstalk: Direct and indirect biocontrol mechanisms of sugarcane rhizoplane Pseudomonas species against Fusarium wilt. Rhizosphere 31:100952 doi: 10.1016/j.rhisph.2024.100952

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [23] Moreno-Velandia CA, Garcia-Arias FL, Dávila-Mora L, Rodríguez E, Villabona-Gélvez A, et al. 2024. The potential of PGPR and Trichoderma-based bioproducts and resistant cultivars as tools to manage clubroot disease in cruciferous crops. Frontiers in Plant Science 14:1323530 doi: 10.3389/fpls.2023.1323530

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [24] Wen T, Ding Z, Thomashow LS, Hale L, Yang S, et al. 2023. Deciphering the mechanism of fungal pathogen‐induced disease‐suppressive soil. New Phytologist 238:2634−50 doi: 10.1111/nph.18886

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [25] Shree B, Jayakrishnan U, Bhushan S. 2022. Impact of key parameters involved with plant-microbe interaction in context to global climate change. Frontiers in Microbiology 13:1008451 doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2022.1008451

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [26] Chadfield VGA, Hartley SE, Redeker KR. 2022. Associational resistance through intercropping reduces yield losses to soil‐borne pests and diseases. New Phytologist 235:2393−405 doi: 10.1111/nph.18302

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [27] Pieterse CMJ, Stringlis IA. 2023. Chemical symphony of coumarins and phenazines in rhizosphere iron solubilization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 120:e2304171120 doi: 10.1073/pnas.2304171120

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [28] Atieno M, Herrmann L, Nguyen HT, Phan HT, Nguyen NK, et al. 2020. Assessment of biofertilizer use for sustainable agriculture in the Great Mekong Region. Journal of Environmental Management 275:111300 doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111300

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [29] Li S, Tian Y, Wu K, Ye Y, Yu J, et al. 2018. Modulating plant growth–metabolism coordination for sustainable agriculture. Nature 560:595−600 doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0415-5

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [30] Ladha JK, Peoples MB, Reddy PM, Biswas JC, Bennett A, et al. 2022. Biological nitrogen fixation and prospects for ecological intensification in cereal-based cropping systems. Field Crops Research 283:108541 doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2022.108541

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [31] Thiruvengadam R, Venkidasamy B, Easwaran M, Chi HY, Thiruvengadam M, et al. 2024. Dynamic interplay of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species (ROS and RNS) in plant resilience: Unveiling the signaling pathways and metabolic responses to biotic and abiotic stresses. Plant Cell Reports 43:198 doi: 10.1007/s00299-024-03281-0

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [32] Muhammad A, Kong X, Zheng S, Bai N, Li L, et al. 2024. Exploring plant-microbe interactions in adapting to abiotic stress under climate change: a review. Frontiers in Plant Science 15:1482739 doi: 10.3389/fpls.2024.1482739

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [33] Lai Z, Liu Z, Deng Y, Feng W, Zhao Y, et al. 2024. Distinguishing the effects of micro‐and macro‐habitats on plant‐associated microbiomes in the Qinghai‐Tibetan Qaidam Basin. Land Degradation & Development 35:3344−61 doi: 10.1002/ldr.5134

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [34] Zeng Q, Hu HW, Ge AH, Xiong C, Zhai CC, et al. 2025. Plant–microbiome interactions and their impacts on plant adaptation to climate change. Journal of Integrative Plant Biology 67:826−44 doi: 10.1111/jipb.13863

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [35] Addison SL, Rúa MA, Smaill SJ, Singh BK, Wakelin SA. 2024. Partner or perish: tree microbiomes and climate change. Trends in Plant Science 29:1029−40 doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2024.03.008

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [36] Tariq A, Ullah I, Sardans J, Graciano C, Mussarat S, et al. 2023. Strigolactones can be a potential tool to fight environmental stresses in arid lands. Environmental Research 229:115966 doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2023.115966

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [37] Gerhardt KE, Huang XD, Glick BR, Greenberg BM. 2009. Phytoremediation and rhizoremediation of organic soil contaminants: potential and challenges. Plant Science 176:20−30 doi: 10.1016/j.plantsci.2008.09.014

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [38] Saikia V. 2015. Biochemical characterization and mechanistic study of heavy metal detoxification in the metal resistant bacteria. Tezpur University, India.
    [39] Mostofa MG, Rahman MM, Ghosh TK, Kabir AH, Abdelrahman M, et al. 2022. Potassium in plant physiological adaptation to abiotic stresses. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 186:279−89 doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2022.07.011

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [40] Zhao D, Wang H, Chen S, Yu D, Reiter RJ. 2021. Phytomelatonin: an emerging regulator of plant biotic stress resistance. Trends in Plant Science 26:70−82 doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2020.08.009

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [41] Roeber VM, Bajaj I, Rohde M, Schmülling T, Cortleven A. 2021. Light acts as a stressor and influences abiotic and biotic stress responses in plants. Plant, Cell & Environment 44:645−64 doi: 10.1111/pce.13948

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [42] Du B, Haensch R, Alfarraj S, Rennenberg H. 2024. Strategies of plants to overcome abiotic and biotic stresses. Biological Reviews 99:1524−36 doi: 10.1111/brv.13079

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [43] Singh K, Gupta R, Shokat S, Iqbal N, Kocsy G, et al. 2024. Ascorbate, plant hormones and their interactions during plant responses to biotic stress. Physiologia Plantarum 176:e14388 doi: 10.1111/ppl.14388

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [44] Lesk C, Anderson W, Rigden A, Coast O, Jägermeyr J, et al. 2022. Compound heat and moisture extreme impacts on global crop yields under climate change. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment 3:872−89

    Google Scholar

    [45] Mikiciuk G, Miller T, Kisiel A, Cembrowska-Lech D, Mikiciuk M, et al. 2024. Harnessing beneficial microbes for drought tolerance: a review of ecological and agricultural innovations. Agriculture 14:2228 doi: 10.3390/agriculture14122228

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [46] Bolivar-Anillo HJ, González-Rodríguez VE, Cantoral JM, García-Sánchez D, Collado IG, et al. 2021. Endophytic bacteria Bacillus subtilis, isolated from Zea mays, as potential biocontrol agent against Botrytis cinerea. Biology 10:492 doi: 10.3390/biology10060492

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [47] Zarea MJ. 2024. Foliar application of Azospirillum brasilense, salicylic acid and zinc on wheat Performance under rain–fed condition. Cereal Research Communications 00:1−18 doi: 10.1007/s42976-024-00570-y

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [48] Wang F, Jin F, Lin X, Jia F, Song K, et al. 2024. Priestia aryabhattai improves soil environment and promotes alfalfa growth by enhancing rhizosphere microbial carbon sequestration capacity under greenhouse conditions. Current Microbiology 81:420 doi: 10.1007/s00284-024-03946-9

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [49] Ferioun M, Zouitane I, Bouhraoua S, Elouattassi Y, Belahcen D, et al. 2025. Applying microbial biostimulants and drought-tolerant genotypes to enhance barley growth and yield under drought stress. Frontiers in Plant Science 15:1494987 doi: 10.3389/fpls.2024.1494987

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [50] Liu X, Ji H, Zhang C, Sun N, Xia T, et al. 2024. The poly-γ-glutamic acid-producing bacterium Bacillus amyloliquefaciens W25 enhanced the salt tolerance of lettuce by regulating physio-biochemical processes and influencing the rhizosphere soil microbial community. Environmental and Experimental Botany 220:105679 doi: 10.1016/j.envexpbot.2024.105679

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [51] Soares EV, Petropoulos SA, Soares HM. 2022. Bio-based solutions for sustainable development of agriculture. Frontiers in Plant Science 13:1056140 doi: 10.3389/fpls.2022.1056140

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [52] Dong Y, Guo J, Lin H. 2024. Microbe-plant combined remediation technology for heavy metals in soil: a comprehensive review. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution 235:711 doi: 10.1007/s11270-024-07538-y

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [53] Abiala MA. 2025. Rhizobacteria genome sequences: platform for defining mechanisms for sustainable growth of food crops under drought stress. Discover Plants 2:26 doi: 10.1007/s44372-025-00092-9

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [54] Güler M, Öğütcü H. 2024. Isolation and characterization of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) from rhizosphere of Helianthus annuus L. International Journal of Agriculture Environment and Food Sciences 8:412−29 doi: 10.31015/jaefs.2024.2.16

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [55] Muñoz-Carvajal E, González M, Fuentes Y, Oetiker N, Giordano A, et al. 2024. Rhizobacteria Enterobacter sp. LHB11 and Bacillus sp. PIXIE induced systemic tolerance against drought stress in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum). Agronomy 14:3013 doi: 10.3390/agronomy14123013

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [56] Kusale SP, Attar YC, Sayyed RZ, El Enshasy H, Hanapi SZ, et al. 2021. Inoculation of Klebsiella variicola alleviated salt stress and improved growth and nutrients in wheat and maize. Agronomy 11:927 doi: 10.3390/agronomy11050927

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [57] Egamberdieva D, Jabborova D, Wirth SJ, Alam P, Alyemeni MN, et al. 2018. Interactive effects of nutrients and Bradyrhizobium japonicum on the growth and root architecture of soybean (Glycine max L.). Frontiers in Microbiology 9:1000 doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.01000

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [58] Compant S, Samad A, Faist H, Sessitsch A. 2019. A review on the plant microbiome: ecology, functions, and emerging trends in microbial application. Journal of Advanced Research 19:29−37 doi: 10.1016/j.jare.2019.03.004

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [59] Rodrigues EP, Santos Rodrigues L, de Oliveira ALM, Baldani VLD, dos Santos Teixeira KR, et al. 2008. Azospirillum amazonense inoculation: effects on growth, yield and N 2 fixation of rice (Oryza sativa L.). Plant and Soil 302:249−61 doi: 10.1007/s11104-007-9476-1

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [60] Cui M, Bao B, Wu Y, Hui N, Li MH, et al. 2024. Light grazing alleviates aeolian erosion–deposition effects on microbial communities in a semi-arid grassland. Ecological Processes 13:31 doi: 10.1186/s13717-024-00510-y

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [61] Bergmann GT, Bates ST, Eilers KG, Lauber CL, Caporaso JG, et al. 2011. The under-recognized dominance of Verrucomicrobia in soil bacterial communities. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 43:1450−55 doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2011.03.012

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [62] Coban O, De Deyn GB, van der Ploeg M. 2022. Soil microbiota as game-changers in restoration of degraded lands. Science 375:abe0725 doi: 10.1126/science.abe0725

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [63] Hartman K, van der Heijden MG, Roussely-Provent V, Walser JC, Schlaeppi K. 2017. Deciphering composition and function of the root microbiome of a legume plant. Microbiome 5:1−13 doi: 10.1186/s40168-016-0220-z

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [64] Jansson JK, Hofmockel KS. 2020. Soil microbiomes and climate change. Nature Reviews Microbiology 18:35−46 doi: 10.1038/s41579-019-0265-7

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [65] Pang Z, Chen J, Wang T, Gao C, Li Z, et al. 2021. Linking plant secondary metabolites and plant microbiomes: a review. Frontiers in Plant Science 12:621276 doi: 10.3389/fpls.2021.621276

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [66] Senko H, Kajić S, Huđ A, Palijan G, Petek M, et al. 2024. Will the beneficial properties of plant-growth promoting bacteria be affected by waterlogging predicted in the wake of climate change: a model study. Applied Soil Ecology 198:105379 doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2024.105379

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [67] Doni F, Mispan MS, Suhaimi NSM, Ishak N, Uphoff N. 2019. Roles of microbes in supporting sustainable rice production using the system of rice intensification. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 103:5131−42 doi: 10.1007/s00253-019-09879-9

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [68] Cavicchioli R, Ripple WJ, Timmis KN, Azam F, Bakken LR, et al. 2019. Scientists' warning to humanity: microorganisms and climate change. Nature Reviews Microbiology 17:569−86 doi: 10.1038/s41579-019-0222-5

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [69] Banerjee S, Van Der Heijden MGA. 2023. Soil microbiomes and one health. Nature Reviews Microbiology 21:6−20 doi: 10.1038/s41579-022-00779-w

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [70] Kılıç O, Boz I, Eryılmaz GA. 2020. Comparison of conventional and good agricultural practices farms: A socio-economic and technical perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production 258:120666 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120666

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [71] Sharma I, Sharma S, Sharma V, Singh AK, Sharma A, et al. 2024. PGPR-enabled bioremediation of pesticide and heavy metal-contaminated soil: a review of recent advances and emerging challenges. Chemosphere 362:142678 doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2024.142678

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [72] Shi WX, Guo JJ, Yu XX, Li ZX, Weng BY, et al. 2024. Diversity and interactions of rhizobacteria determine multinutrient traits in tomato host plants under nitrogen and water disturbances. Horticulture Research 12:uhae290 doi: 10.1093/hr/uhae290

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [73] Herms CH, Hennessy RC, Bak F, Dresbøll DB, Nicolaisen MH. 2022. Back to our roots: exploring the role of root morphology as a mediator of beneficial plant–microbe interactions. Environmental Microbiology 24:3264−72 doi: 10.1111/1462-2920.15926

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [74] Ali S, Hameed S, Shahid M, Iqbal M, Lazarovits G, et al. 2020. Functional characterization of potential PGPR exhibiting broad-spectrum antifungal activity. Microbiological Research 232:126389 doi: 10.1016/j.micres.2019.126389

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [75] Soliman SA, Abdelhameed RE, Metwally RA. 2023. In vivo and In vitro evaluation of the antifungal activity of the PGPR Bacillus amyloliquefaciens RaSh1 (MZ945930) against Alternaria alternata with growth promotion influences on Capsicum annuum L. plants. Microbial Cell Factories 22:70 doi: 10.1186/s12934-023-02080-8

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [76] Malik L, Sanaullah M, Mahmood F, Hussain S, Siddique MH, et al. 2022. Unlocking the potential of co-applied biochar and plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) for sustainable agriculture under stress conditions. Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture 9:58 doi: 10.1186/s40538-022-00327-x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [77] Gamalero E, Glick BR. 2020. The use of plant growth-promoting bacteria to prevent nematode damage to plants. Biology 9:381 doi: 10.3390/biology9110381

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [78] Woźniak M, Gałązka A. 2019. The rhizosphere microbiome and its beneficial effects on plants–current knowledge and perspectives. Postępy Mikrobiologii - Advancements of Microbiology 58:59−69 doi: 10.21307/pm-2019.58.1.059

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [79] Kumar A, Dubey A. 2020. Rhizosphere microbiome: engineering bacterial competitiveness for enhancing crop production. Journal of Advanced Research 24:337−52 doi: 10.1016/j.jare.2020.04.014

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [80] Serepa-Dlamini M. 2020. Metabolite fingerprinting of culturable endophytic bacteria isolated from Dicoma anomala and their antimicrobial activity. Thesis. University of Johannesburg, South Africa.
    [81] Seth K, Vyas P, Deora S, Gupta AK, Meena M, et al. 2023. Understanding plant-plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) interactions for inducing plant defense. In Plant-microbe interaction − recent advances in molecular and biochemical approaches, eds. Swapnil P, Meena M, Harish, Marwal A, Vijayalakshmi S, et al. The Netherlands: Elsevier. pp. 201−26. doi: 10.1016/b978-0-323-91876-3.00010-5
    [82] Srivastava AK, Singh RD, Pandey GK, Mukherjee PK, Foyer CH. 2025. Unravelling the molecular dialogue of beneficial microbe − plant interactions. Plant, Cell & Environment 48:2534−48 doi: 10.1111/pce.15245

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [83] Berg G, Dorador C, Egamberdieva D, Kostka JE, Ryu CM, et al. 2024. Shared governance in the plant holobiont and implications for one health. FEMS Microbiology Ecology 100:fiae004 doi: 10.1093/femsec/fiae004

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [84] Karnwal A, Shrivastava S, Al-Tawaha ARMS, Kumar G, Kumar A, et al. 2024. PGPR-mediated breakthroughs in plant stress tolerance for sustainable farming. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation 43:2955−71 doi: 10.1007/s00344-023-11013-z

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [85] Enebe MC, Babalola OO. 2019. The impact of microbes in the orchestration of plants' resistance to biotic stress: a disease management approach. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 103:9−25 doi: 10.1007/s00253-018-9433-3

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [86] Sharma S, Chen C, Navathe S, Chand R, Pandey SP. 2019. A halotolerant growth promoting rhizobacteria triggers induced systemic resistance in plants and defends against fungal infection. Scientific Reports 9:4054 doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-40930-x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [87] Sangiorgio D, Cellini A, Donati I, Pastore C, Onofrietti C, et al. 2020. Facing climate change: application of microbial biostimulants to mitigate stress in horticultural crops. Agronomy 10:794 doi: 10.3390/agronomy10060794

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [88] Mohanraj J, Subramanian KS, Yuvaraj M. 2024. Nano-fibre matrix loaded with multi-nutrients to achieve balanced crop nutrition in greengram (Vigna radiata L.). Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 207:108369 doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2024.108369

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [89] Soares JC, Santos CS, Carvalho SMP, Pintado MM, Vasconcelos MW. 2019. Preserving the nutritional quality of crop plants under a changing climate: importance and strategies. Plant and Soil 443:1−26 doi: 10.1007/s11104-019-04229-0

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [90] Zhang X, Ward BB, Sigman DM. 2020. Global nitrogen cycle: critical enzymes, organisms, and processes for nitrogen budgets and dynamics. Chemical Reviews 120:5308−51 doi: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.9b00613

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [91] Rutledge HL, Cook BD, Nguyen HPM, Herzik MA Jr, Tezcan FA. 2022. Structures of the nitrogenase complex prepared under catalytic turnover conditions. Science 377:865−69 doi: 10.1126/science.abq7641

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [92] Uesaka K, Banba M, Chiba S, Fujita Y. 2024. Restoration of the functional nif gene cluster by complex recombination events during heterocyst development in the nitrogen-fixing cyanobacterium Calothrix sp. NIES-4101. Plant and Cell Physiology 65:1050−64 doi: 10.1093/pcp/pcae011

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [93] Srivastava D, Ghosh AK, Ranjan A, Sinharoy S. 2024. Genome sequencing of Mesorhizobium Spp. NI-7, an efficient nitrogen-fixing microsymbiont of chickpea with potential to unravel the molecular mechanisms of symbiotic nitrogen fixation in legumes. Journal of Plant Biochemistry and Biotechnology 33:607−14 doi: 10.1007/s13562-024-00917-w

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [94] Chieb M, Gachomo EW. 2023. The role of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria in plant drought stress responses. BMC Plant Biology 23:407 doi: 10.1186/s12870-023-04403-8

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [95] Oleńska E, Małek W, Wójcik M, Swiecicka I, Thijs S, Vangronsveld J. 2020. Beneficial features of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria for improving plant growth and health in challenging conditions: A methodical review. Science of the Total Environment 743:140682 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140682

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [96] Li N, Wen J, Wu R, Hu D, Zhang L, et al. 2023. Dual effects of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) on the Moso bamboo-soil system: Plant growth promotion and microbial community stability. Industrial Crops and Products 203:117151 doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2023.117151

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [97] Benidire L, Madline A, Pereira SIA, Castro PML, Boularbah A. 2021. Synergistic effect of organo-mineral amendments and plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) on the establishment of vegetation cover and amelioration of mine tailings. Chemosphere 262:127803 doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.127803

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [98] Guimarà VF, Klein J, Ferreira MB. 2020. Promotion of rice growth and productivity as a result of seed inoculation with Azospirillum brasilense. African Journal of Agricultural Research 16:765−76 doi: 10.5897/AJAR2020.14723

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [99] Zhang J, Hussain S, Zhao F, Zhu L, Cao X, et al. 2018. Effects of Azospirillum brasilense and Pseudomonas fluorescens on nitrogen transformation and enzyme activity in the rice rhizosphere. Journal of Soils and Sediments 18:1453−65 doi: 10.1007/s11368-017-1861-7

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [100] Karimzadeh J, Ali Alikhani H, Etesami H, Ali Pourbabaei A. 2021. Improved phosphorus uptake by wheat plant (Triticum aestivum L.) with rhizosphere fluorescent pseudomonads strains under water-deficit stress. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation 40:162−78 doi: 10.1007/s00344-020-10087-3

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [101] Liu X, Jiang X, He X, Zhao W, Cao Y, et al. 2019. Phosphate-solubilizing Pseudomonas sp. strain P34-L promotes wheat growth by colonizing the wheat rhizosphere and improving the wheat root system and soil phosphorus nutritional status. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation 38:1314−24 doi: 10.1007/s00344-019-09935-8

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [102] Mabood F, Smith DL. 2005. Pre‐incubation of Bradyrhizobium japonicum with jasmonates accelerates nodulation and nitrogen fixation in soybean (Glycine max) at optimal and suboptimal root zone temperatures. Physiologia Plantarum 125:311−23 doi: 10.1111/j.1399-3054.2005.00559.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [103] Lastochkina O. 2019. Bacillus subtilis-mediated abiotic stress tolerance in plants. Bacilli and Agrobiotechnology: Phytostimulation and Biocontrol: Volume 2. pp. 97−133. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-15175-1_6
    [104] Li A. 2024. Role of diazotrophic bacteria in promoting sugarcane growth and yield. Field Crop 13:7

    Google Scholar

    [105] Nakkeeran S, Rajamanickam S, Saravanan R, Vanthana M, Soorianathasundaram K. 2021. Bacterial endophytome-mediated resistance in banana for the management of Fusarium wilt. 3 Biotech 11:267 doi: 10.1007/s13205-021-02833-5

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [106] Pessoa RS, Silva CA, Moretti BS, Furtini Neto AE, Inda AV, et al. 2015. Solubilization of potassium from alternative rocks by humic and citric acids and coffee husk. Ciência e Agrotecnologia 39:553−64 doi: 10.1590/s1413-70542015000600002

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [107] Pathak DV, Kumar M, Rani K. 2017. Biofertilizer application in horticultural crops. In Microorganisms for Green Revolution, eds. Panpatte D, Jhala Y, Vyas R, Shelat H. Singapore: Springer. pp. 215−27. doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-6241-4_11
    [108] Mao HK, Hu Q, Yang L, Liu J, Kim DY, et al. 2017. When water meets iron at Earth's core–mantle boundary. National Science Review 4:870−78 doi: 10.1093/nsr/nwx109

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [109] Sarikhani E, Sagova-Mareckova M, Omelka M, Kopecky J. 2017. The effect of peat and iron supplements on the severity of potato common scab and bacterial community in tuberosphere soil. FEMS Microbiology Ecology 93:fiw206 doi: 10.1093/femsec/fiw206

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [110] Rahimi S, Talebi M, Baninasab B, Gholami M, Zarei M, Shariatmadari H. 2020. The role of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) in improving iron acquisition by altering physiological and molecular responses in quince seedlings. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 155:406−15 doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2020.07.045

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [111] Shao Z, Gu S, Zhang X, Xue J, Yan T, et al. 2024. Siderophore interactions drive the ability of Pseudomonas spp. consortia to protect tomato against Ralstonia solanacearum. Horticulture Research 11:uhae186 doi: 10.1093/hr/uhae186

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [112] Romero F, Labouyrie M, Orgiazzi A, Ballabio C, Panagos P, et al. 2024. Soil health is associated with higher primary productivity across Europe. Nature Ecology & Evolution 8:1847−55 doi: 10.1038/s41559-024-02511-8

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [113] Toor GS, Yang YY, Das S, Dorsey S, Felton G. 2021. Soil health in agricultural ecosystems: current status and future perspectives. Advances in Agronomy 168:157−201 doi: 10.1016/bs.agron.2021.02.004

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [114] Das PP, Singh KR, Nagpure G, Mansoori A, Singh RP, et al. 2022. Plant-soil-microbes: A tripartite interaction for nutrient acquisition and better plant growth for sustainable agricultural practices. Environmental Research 214:113821 doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2022.113821

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [115] Toledo Cabrera B. 2021. Effect of Rhizobium inoculation on tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) yield in protected crops. Biology and Life Sciences Forum 3:52 doi: 10.3390/IECAG2021-09993

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [116] Langendries S, Goormachtig S. 2021. Paenibacillus polymyxa, a Jack of all trades. Environmental Microbiology 23:5659−69 doi: 10.1111/1462-2920.15450

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [117] Wu Q, Yang L, Chen Y, Liang H, Liu M, et al. 2025. Acid phosphatase-driven advancements in peanut growth and microbial community dynamics in phosphorus-limited soils. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 25:83−101 doi: 10.1007/s42729-024-02114-z

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [118] Marjanović J, Zubairu AM, Varga S, Turdalieva S, Ramos-Diaz F, et al. 2024. Demonstrating agroecological practices in potato production with conservation tillage and Pseudomonas spp., Azotobacter spp., Bacillus spp. bacterial inoculants—evidence from hungary. Agronomy 14:2979 doi: 10.3390/agronomy14122979

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [119] Ahamad L, Siddiqui ZA. 2021. Effects of Pseudomonas putida and Rhizophagus irregularis alone and in combination on growth, chlorophyll, carotenoid content and disease complex of carrot. Indian Phytopathology 74:763−73 doi: 10.1007/s42360-021-00346-y

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [120] Hill Y, Colombi E, Bonello E, Haskett T, Ramsay J, et al. 2021. Evolution of diverse effective N2-fixing microsymbionts of Cicer arietinum following horizontal transfer of the Mesorhizobium ciceri CC1192 symbiosis integrative and conjugative element. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 87:e02558-20 doi: 10.1128/AEM.02558-20

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [121] Akhtar N, Iqbal A, Qureshi M, Khan KH. 2010. Effect of phosphate solubilizing bacteria on the phosphorus availability and yield of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Journal of Scientific Research 40:15−24

    Google Scholar

    [122] Biswas D, Chakraborty AK, Srivastava V, Mandal A. 2024. Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR): reports on their colonization, beneficial activities, and use as bioinoculant. Advances in Agriculture 2024:8173024 doi: 10.1155/2024/8173024

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [123] Khan M, Khan T, Tabassum B, Hashim M. 2024. Microbiome-driven soil fertility: understanding symbiotic relationships. In Progress in Soil Microbiome Research, ed. Parray JA. Cham: Springer. pp. 77-115. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-71487-0_4
    [124] Shedeed ZA, Gheda S, Elsanadily S, Alharbi K, Osman MEH. 2022. Spirulina platensis biofertilization for enhancing growth, photosynthetic capacity and yield of Lupinus luteus. Agriculture 12:781 doi: 10.3390/agriculture12060781

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [125] Silveira RD, Veras FF, Hernandes KC, Bach E, Passaglia LMP, et al. 2024. Genomic analysis reveals genes that encode the synthesis of volatile compounds by a Bacillus velezensis-based biofungicide used in the treatment of grapes to control Aspergillus carbonarius. International Journal of Food Microbiology 415:110644 doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2024.110644

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [126] Valdovinos-Nava W, Chan-Cupul W, Hernández-Ortega HA, Ruíz-Sánchez E. 2020. Effects of biological and mineral fertilization on the growth, nutrition, and yield of Capsicum chinense under greenhouse conditions. Journal of Plant Nutrition 43:2286−98 doi: 10.1080/01904167.2020.1771586

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [127] EL Sabagh A, Islam MS, Hossain A, Iqbal MA, Mubeen M, et al. 2022. Phytohormones as growth regulators during abiotic stress tolerance in plants. Frontiers in Agronomy 4:765068 doi: 10.3389/fagro.2022.765068

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [128] Poveda J, González-Andrés F. 2021. Bacillus as a source of phytohormones for use in agriculture. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 105:8629−45 doi: 10.1007/s00253-021-11492-8

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [129] Johnson R, Vishwakarma K, Hossen MS, Kumar V, Shackira AM, et al. 2022. Potassium in plants: growth regulation, signaling, and environmental stress tolerance. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 172:56−69 doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2022.01.001

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [130] Park J, Lee Y, Martinoia E, Geisler M. 2017. Plant hormone transporters: what we know and what we would like to know. BMC Biology 15:93 doi: 10.1186/s12915-017-0443-x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [131] Manna M, Rengasamy B, Sinha AK. 2024. Nutrient and water availability influence rice physiology, root architecture and ionomic balance via auxin signalling. Plant, Cell & Environment 48:2691−705 doi: 10.1111/pce.15171

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [132] Bao D, Chang S, Li X, Qi Y. 2024. Advances in the study of auxin early response genes: Aux/IAA, GH3, and SAUR. The Crop Journal 12:964−78 doi: 10.1016/j.cj.2024.06.011

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [133] Rico‐Jiménez M, Muñoz‐Mira S, Lomas‐Martínez C, Krell T, Matilla MA. 2023. Regulation of indole‐3‐acetic acid biosynthesis and consequences of auxin production deficiency in Serratia plymuthica. Microbial Biotechnology 16:1671−89 doi: 10.1111/1751-7915.14296

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [134] Bigatton ED, Castillejo MA, Ayoub, Baldessari JJ, Bruno M, et al. 2024. Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR): impact on peanut flowering, seed physical quality, and yield determination (Arachis hypogaea L.). Industrial Crops and Products 219:119024 doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2024.119024

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [135] Zhao T, Deng X, Xiao Q, Han Y, Zhu S, et al. 2020. IAA priming improves the germination and seedling growth in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) via regulating the endogenous phytohormones and enhancing the sucrose metabolism. Industrial Crops and Products 155:112788 doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2020.112788

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [136] Kudoyarova G, Arkhipova T, Korshunova T, Bakaeva M, Loginov O, et al. 2019. Phytohormone mediation of interactions between plants and non-symbiotic growth promoting bacteria under edaphic stresses. Frontiers in Plant Science 10:1368 doi: 10.3389/fpls.2019.01368

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [137] Ravelo-Ortega G, Raya-González J, López-Bucio J. 2023. Compounds from rhizosphere microbes that promote plant growth. Current Opinion in Plant Biology 73:102336 doi: 10.1016/j.pbi.2023.102336

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [138] Li H, Wang JQ, Liu Q. 2020. Photosynthesis product allocation and yield in sweet potato with spraying exogenous hormones under drought stress. Journal of Plant Physiology 253:153265 doi: 10.1016/j.jplph.2020.153265

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [139] Gupta R, Elkabetz D, Leibman-Markus M, Sayas T, Schneider A, et al. 2022. Cytokinin drives assembly of the phyllosphere microbiome and promotes disease resistance through structural and chemical cues. The ISME journal 16:122−37 doi: 10.1038/s41396-021-01060-3

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [140] Feng L, Li Q, Zhou D, Jia M, Liu Z, et al. 2024. B. subtilis CNBG‐PGPR‐1 induces methionine to regulate ethylene pathway and ROS scavenging for improving salt tolerance of tomato. The Plant Journal 117:193−211 doi: 10.1111/tpj.16489

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [141] Ahmad M, Pataczek L, Hilger TH, Zahir ZA, Hussain A, et al. 2018. Perspectives of microbial inoculation for sustainable development and environmental management. Frontiers in Microbiology 9:2992 doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.02992

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

  • Cite this article

    Munir S. 2025. Evolution of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria under global climate change. Agrobiodiversity 2(2): 33−43 doi: 10.48130/abd-0025-0005
    Munir S. 2025. Evolution of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria under global climate change. Agrobiodiversity 2(2): 33−43 doi: 10.48130/abd-0025-0005

Figures(3)  /  Tables(2)

Article Metrics

Article views(2179) PDF downloads(1138)

Other Articles By Authors

REVIEW   Open Access    

Evolution of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria under global climate change

Agrobiodiversity  2 2025, 2(2): 33−43  |  Cite this article

Abstract: The advancement of life in all its forms relies on agricultural practices and food security, which are fundamentally influenced by soil characteristics. The demand for agricultural products has surged due to climate change and global population growth, leading to a significant increase in the utilization of chemical fertilizers. Since chemical agents have affected soil fertility and quality by degradation, causing the development of agricultural fields with rich soil to be incomprehensible, consideration for a secure and profitable agricultural production has drifted. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) have established eco-evolutionary relationships with host plants, fitness, and productivity. Microbial renaissance driven by plant growth regulators has been successfully achieved through disease resistance in emerging pathogens, bio-fertilization, rhizoremediation, and stimulating root growth. PGPR can profoundly increase plant growth by producing growth hormones, improving nutrient uptake, suppressing plant pathogens, and protecting against biotic and abiotic stress conditions. Here, we provide insight into sustainable agricultural development aimed at increasing crop yield and production by exploring the mechanisms and commercial applications of potential rhizobacteria under changing climatic conditions.

    • Climate change is diminishing crop yield and escalating the cost of agricultural products, and an additional 77 million people are at risk of food insecurity by 2050[1]. Significant increase in global temperature and the emergence of additional abiotic stressors adversely affect crop yield. In this context, eco-friendly technologies and sustainable farming practices offer a promising solution, enhancing yields under more challenging conditions and improving resource utilization[2]. The goal is to maintain plant health by sequestering carbon, preserving and enhancing soil organic matter and mineral content, and promoting healthy crop yields while reducing detrimental inputs[3,4]. While certain plants have developed the resilience to tolerate environmental fluctuations and thrive in harsh conditions, most crops will likely experience reduced productivity as environmental stresses surpass their ability to adapt. Distinctive bacterial genera are essential constituents of the soil ecosystem[5], playing a key role in various biotic activities that enhance turnover and support crop production[4,6]. These bacteria enhance plant growth by increasing nutrient availability in soils, synthesizing plant growth regulators, protecting plants from phytopathogens through regulating plant defence or directly inhibiting them, and reshaping soil composition. Additionally, they contribute to bio-remediating the contaminated soils by sequestering toxic metal species[7]. Root-related microorganisms, including endophytes, interact closely with one another and play a crucial role in regulating significant physiological procedures[8], particularly nutrient acquisition and plant resilience towards abiotic stresses[7,9]. Plants inhabited by plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) typically exhibit increased root hair development, hence enhancing the absorption of minerals and micronutrients from the soil[10].

      The study on rhizobacteria which colonize plant roots and regulate plant health, has significantly advanced during the past century. Understanding plant-microbe interactions began in the late 19th and early 20th centuries with soil microbiology research. Beijerinck discovered nitrogen-fixing Rhizobium species in legume root nodules, revealing soil bacteria's symbiotic potential to boost plant growth[11]. Kloepper & Schroth coined the name PGPR after discovering free-living bacteria that promoted plant development in the 1960s and 1970s[12]. Research has expanded our understanding of rhizobacteria roles including both beneficial and harmful species. Nitrogen fixation, phosphate solubilization, hormone generation, and pathogen defense by beneficial rhizobacteria like Pseudomonas, Bacillus, Azospirillum, and Rhizobium help plants flourish[13]. Ralstonia solanacearum and Agrobacterium tumefaciens, on the other hand, cause bacterial wilt and crown gall, respectively. While PGPR are vital for sustainable agriculture, their presence and effectiveness are significantly affected by environmental conditions[14]. Soil pH, temperature, moisture levels, and nutrient availability also impact the microbial community makeup and decide whether beneficial or detrimental microorganisms will prevail. Under appropriate conditions, PGPR can outcompete pathogenic bacteria and form beneficial associations with plants[15]. However, environmental stressors such as drought, salinity, and pollution may alter microbial populations, sometimes favoring pathogenic bacteria or diminishing PGPR efficiency[16]. Optimizing plant-microbe interactions in agricultural and natural settings requires a thorough understanding of rhizobacteria, including its pros and cons. Therefore, there is a need to improve PGPR performance and reduce bacterial impacts by comprehensively reviewing rhizobacteria history and functions.

      PGPR treatment has significantly improved the cultivation of various plants[17], and established foundational resilience to a range of abiotic stresses in plants, often through modulation of plant physiology[18]. Leguminous plants and microbes have a significant deal of potential to improve the quality and richness of soil[19] through symbiotic co-development and bio-mineralization[20]. It is necessary to investigate the potential of these rhizobacteria in soil to mitigate plant pathogens under fluctuating climatic conditions and to enhance plant growth through various direct and indirect mechanisms, considering the increasing impact of climate change and the introduction of new pathogens[21,22]. An integrated method could be employed for transplanted vegetables to produce healthy transplants that are tolerant to nematodes and various infections for a minimum of several weeks post-transplantation to the field[23]. Selected strains of putative PGPR activate plant-induced systemic resistance (ISR) effectively against multiple plant diseases. ISR is a plant-mediated mechanism akin to traditional pathogen-induced resistance, wherein uninfected regions of previously infected plants gradually acquire enhanced resistance to subsequent diseases[24].

      PGPR is now essential in sustainable agriculture since it enhances plant development and improves soil health through multiple mechanisms. However, the changing climate is posing substantial threats to these helpful microbes. Climate change dramatically alters the environmental conditions that bacterial communities inhabit. These alterations impact bacterial communities diversity, abundance, and functionality[25]. Increasing temperature, altered rainfall patterns, and increasing carbon dioxide levels contribute to changes in bacterial population structure. Consequently, some species might be lost while others proliferate, disrupting ecological balances. Climate-induced changes in bacterial community diversity could result in a shift in mutualistic interactions, potentially reducing plant fitness. Meanwhile, plants can influence the composition and structure of associated bacterial communities through root exudation, creating a dynamic feedback loop. During eco-evolutionary events, bacteria might have undergone several selection pressures where beneficial interactions with host plants shape the hemostasis in the microbiome (Fig. 1). Hereby, we aim to examine the influence of climate change on PGPR and emphasize its effects on their diversity, functionality, and plant-microbe interaction. By understanding these effects, we can develop strategies to reduce the harmful impact of climate change and improve the resilience of agricultural systems. Considering the significant role of PGPR in stress and plant growth development by combating plant diseases and enhancing agriculture productivity, it is important to explore and highlight their significant role in biotic and abiotic stresses and overall plant growth development.

      Figure 1. 

      Evolution of plant-PGPR interactions under climate change.

      Climate change can impact eco-evolutionary dynamics of plant growth promoting bacterial communities. Plant-associated PGPRs have been evolving with host plants to better adapt and perform beneficial activities contributing to improved health status. The eco-evolutionary selection of species and genotypes can modulate plant-microbe interactions and by selecting mutualistic bacteria along parasitism-mutualism continuum.
    • Phytopathogenic microorganisms pose a significant and constant threat to agribusiness and ecosystem stability, subvert the soil biology, disturb plant conditions, degrade soil productivity, and thus may result in harmful consequences for human wellbeing alongside contaminated groundwater[26]. PGPR is a promising and ecologically well-suited alternative to improve plant development and continual fertility of the soil. The microbes colonizing the rhizosphere include parasites, algae, bacteria, protozoa, and actinomycetes. However, bacteria are the most plentiful and well-studied microorganisms in the rhizosphere[27]. The improvement of plant development using these microbial interventions has been widely demonstrated (Table 1). The utilization of PGPR can accomplish sustainable agriculture development as a biofertilizer inoculant[28]. Commonly, bacteria endorse plant growth in three unique ways: encouraging the uptake of soil nutrients, producing plant growth promoting hormones, and reducing or preventing plants from diseases[29]. The in-depth complex mechanisms of plant development by PGPR are still fragmentary. But the potential explanation includes biological nitrogen fixation, solubilization of minerals phosphate, potassium, and many others, sequestering iron, phytohormone production like cytokinin, auxin, gibberellins, abscisic acid (ABA), reduced levels of ethylene in roots for plant development by the production of ACC- deaminase, antibiotics, and resistance to environmental stresses[30].

      Various stresses arise from soil, impacting plant development and playing a significant role in sustainable agriculture production. These stresses can be characterized as biotic and abiotic. Abiotic stress is the essential driver of yield loss worldwide by over 30%[31]. According to research, climate change has a substantial impact on the composition, diversity, and function of plant-associated rhizobacteria, influencing plant health and productivity. Temperature, precipitation, and CO₂ levels can alter soil microbial populations, causing variations in plant-microbe interactions[32,33]. This can limit plant growth promoting benefits while increasing plant vulnerability to diseases. As climate change continues to affect ecosystems, understanding the effects on plant-microbe interactions becomes increasingly important[34,35]. Here, we illustrated the importance of adaptation techniques, such as microbial inoculants and biostimulants, for maintaining plant productivity in the face of changing environmental conditions. The most prevalent factors in plant growth and productivity are abiotic stresses caused by salinity, drought, and high temperatures[36]. The application of PGPR in plant abiotic stress management has been extensively considered through bacterial strains, for example, Pseudomonas fluorescens and P. putida that reduced the lethal impact of cadmium contamination on barley plants through bioremediation of cadmium particles from soil[37,38]. In addition, these bacteria have been shown to improve leaf water status, especially under salinity and other abiotic stress conditions[39]. Various pathogens incite biotic stresses, for example, fungi and protists, resulting in a critical decrease in crop yield[40,41]. Biotic stress severely affects plants, including population dynamics, biological system supplement cycling, natural habitat ecology, co-evolution, and agriculture plant health[42]. Plants inoculated overnight with PGPR cultures depicted tremendous protection from biotic stresses[43,44].

      Table 1.  PGPR-host plant-stress interactions.

      PGPR species Host plant Environmental stress Mechanisms of action Ref.
      Pseudomonas fluorescens Rice (Oryza sativa) Drought Induced root elongation, enhanced water retention, increased ABA production [45]
      Bacillus subtilis Maize (Zea mays) Pathogen-induced stress Production of antifungal compounds, induced systemic resistance [46]
      Azospirillum brasilense Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Salinity Improved ion homeostasis, enhanced antioxidant enzyme activity [47]
      Rhizobium sp. Alfalfa (Medicago sativa) Soil degradation, nutrient deficiency Increased nitrogen fixation, enhanced rhizosphere microbial diversity [48]
      Priestia aryabhattai Alfalfa (Medicago sativa) Drought Increased rhizosphere carbon sequestration, improved soil health [48]
      Pseudomonas putida Barley (Hordeum vulgare) Drought Production of exopolysaccharides, root microbiome modulation [49]
      Bacillus amyloliquefaciens Lettuce (Lactuca sativa) Salinity Phosphate solubilization, zinc uptake enhancement [50]
      Paenibacillus polymyxa Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) Heat stress Modulation of stress-responsive genes, phytohormone regulation [51]
      Bacillus velezensis Tomato
      (Solanum lycopersicum)
      Heavy metal stress Bioremediation, metal ion sequestration [52]
      Serratia marcescens Barley (Hordeum vulgare) Drought ACC deaminase production, reduced ethylene stress [53]
      Acinetobacter calcoaceticus Sunflower
      (Helianthus annuus)
      Heavy metal toxicity Cadmium and lead immobilization, production of metal-chelating siderophores [54]
      Enterobacter cloacae Tomato
      (Solanum lycopersicum)
      Drought Synthesis of osmo-protectants (proline, trehalose), increased antioxidant activity [55]
      Klebsiella variicola Wheat and maize Salinity Regulation of Na+/K+ balance, secretion of growth hormones [56]
      Bradyrhizobium japonicum Soybean (Glycine max) Heat stress Increased nitrogen fixation, stabilization of chlorophyll pigments [57]

      Climate changes the composition and functionality of rhizobacterial communities, which can improve or hamper plant-microbe interactions. Environmental stressors like elevated temperatures, precipitation patterns, and CO₂ levels can alter microbial community structures, favoring stress-tolerant taxa and decreasing diversity[58]. Certain bacterial phyla respond differently to environmental changes. Increased CO₂ levels and moderate warming generally lead to increased Proteobacteria abundance, likely due to their versatility in nitrogen fixation and plant growth stimulation[59]. Members belonging to Pseudomonas and Rhizobium improve nutrient absorption and protect plants from diseases, suggesting that moderate temperature shifts may temporarily boost plant-microbe interactions. However, prolonged or acute environmental stress can alter these interactions, causing unanticipated plant health and soil stability effects. Under drought and nutrient-poor conditions, Verrucomicrobia, a phylum responsible for soil carbon cycling and nutrient turnover, declines, threatening soil microbial network stability and ecosystem resilience[60,61]. Bacteroidetes, which decompose organic matter, also decrease in abundance during significant temperature swings, which may lower soil fertility and nutrient availability[62]. In contrast, Actinobacteria and Firmicutes, which include stress-tolerant genera like Streptomyces and Bacillus, often increase in abundance in arid and degraded soils due to their ability to produce secondary metabolites and antibiotics that help plants resist pathogens and abiotic stress[63]. In progressive soil deterioration, these taxa may compensate for plant defensive mechanisms. Multiple studies have found that harsh climate conditions lower microbial diversity, which reduces ecosystem resilience and plant development[64]. Disrupting mutualistic rhizobacterial relationships may decrease plant stress responses, making them more susceptible to infections and lowering plant productivity[65]. However, some PGPR strains (Pseudomonas and Rhizobium) have been shown to promote root colonization, suggesting that these rhizobacteria may ameliorate climate-induced stress on plants[66]. These modifications must be understood to develop climate-change-resistant soil, microbial health, and plant production methods. Biostimulants and microbial inoculants are being used in microbial biotechnology to prevent these alterations and improve plant-microbe interactions in changing environments[67]. The molecular basis of these microbial adaptations and their long-term effects on plant health and agricultural sustainability should be studied.

    • In the era of climate-related catastrophic events, exploring new mechanisms of bacterial plant growth development that can provide important nutrients to plants, such as fixed nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, and iron, is crucial[68]. Numerous cultivating soils do not contain an adequate quantity of at least one of these nutrients, so plant growth is halted[69]. Farmers have increasingly relied on chemical sources of these nutrients[70] to obtain higher plant yields. Beneficial and productive natural methods for providing nutrients to plants could be utilized to substitute for at least a part of the chemical nutrient fertilizers. The use of microbial technology is diminishing the requirement for agrochemicals (composts and pesticides) to improve soil fertility through mechanisms such as siderophores, hydrolytic catalysts, antibiotics production, and HCN[71]. The positive effects of rhizobacteria on plants involve complex interactions that can enhance plant growth and mitigate stress. These interactions can be broadly categorized into direct and indirect mechanisms of plant growth promotion. Direct activities fostering plant growth include producing phytohormones, solubilizing nutrients, and biological nitrogen fixation (Fig. 2). In contrast, factors such as systemic resistance against pathogens and niche diversification represent indirect mechanisms.

      Figure 2. 

      Ecological and plant benefiting services of plant growth promoting bacteria.

      PGPR can significantly alleviate the impact of climate change through improving carbon storage in soil or carbon sequestration and by reducing the carbon emission. Further, PGPR can also enhance the plant resistance towards climate induced abiotic and biotic stresses through defense activation and improving plant vigor. They also prevent plant from negative effects of toxic materials by soil bioremediation.

      The soil and plant-associated microbial partners are foreseen to play key roles in maintaining sustainability via the intricate interplay of mutualism and cooperation with their host plants. Among them, rhizobacteria are the free-living bacteria in the soil that develope a close relationship with the roots of host plants[72,73]. They influence plant development, growth, and health via direct or indirect mechanisms, which are even more critical in their establishment and survival under fluctuating climates. Understanding various PGPR-meditated mechanisms that influence plant growth and resilience is critical for their effective field applications as bioinoculants. Resilience against such stresses requires plants to adopt various physiological and molecular strategies, affecting general growth parameters. It is paramount to devise sustainable agricultural practices that enhance the resilience of plants against changing environments without affecting overall growth. The mechanisms of action of PGPR under normal and stressed conditions would be significant for their effective field applications. Moreover, the resilience of PGPR-mediated mechanisms under stressful environments must be comprehensively assessed.

    • PGPR can promote plant growth by controlling phytopathogens, essentially by generating metabolites adding to the antibiosis and antifungal properties utilized as defence activators[74,75]. The beneficial effects on plant growth are more significant when plants are grown in nutrient-poor or stressed soils. Some traits that can indirectly facilitate plant growth include the ability to solubilize phosphate and other minerals, fixation of atmospheric nitrogen, production of siderophores, and 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate (ACC) deaminases[76]. Changes in agricultural practices modulate the PGPR-induced modifications in the rhizosphere microbial community, affecting plant growth and fitness. However, details are still unclear regarding the interplay of the indigenous microbial community and PGPR in the modifying rhizosphere or bulk soil microbial community and, thus, how it governs plant growth or health (Fig. 2). Biocontrol strains release volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that stimulate plant development, suppress bacterial, fungal, and nematode pathogens, and establish systemic resistance in plants against phytopathogens[77]. VOCs are produced by bacteria from several genera, including Serratia Stenotrophomonas, Pseudomonas, Arthrobacter, and Bacillus, which are reported to influence plant development. The most efficient VOCs for preventing fungal development and increasing plant development are 2,3-butanediol, and acetoin produced by Bacillus sp.[78]. VOCs mediate increased disease resistance, abiotic stress tolerance, and plant biomass from PGPR strains directly or indirectly[79]. Release of VOCs is distinguishing feature of an extensive range of soil microbes and comprising cyclohexane, benzene, decane, 2-(benzyloxy) ethanamine, methyl, dodecane, tetradecane, benzene (1-methylnonadecyl), 1-chlorooctadecane, 2,6,10-trimethyl, and dotriacontane, though the amount and distinctiveness of the VOCs released differ between species[80].

      Potential rhizobacteria can ensure modulation of plant-microbe interactions via biochemical mechanisms creating protective environments around and within plant tissues, the induction of plant cellular signaling pathways affecting the growth of the tissue microbiome, and the alteration of plant defence responses towards particular biotic stresses [81,82]. Plant-induced modulation is well understood in general terms, however, many details remain to be elucidated. Because of the variety of PGPR currently being examined, the availability of models from simple to complex systems, and the refinement of analytical approaches, intricate details may soon be resolved[83]. The plant host perceives PGPR as beneficial microbes, although many other roles (neutral and pathogenic) exist within the microbe-plant interaction continuum. Therefore, this group of microbes has adaptations that allow modulation of the plant response to create net benefits. Many plants develop systemic resistance to environmental or biotic stresses when treated with PGPR[84]. Upon pathogen attack, the vascular system produces impulses and activates a defensive mechanism, triggering the release of a large number of defensive enzymes, including chitinase, 1,3-glucanase, polyphenol oxidase, phenylalanine ammonia-lyase, peroxidase, superoxide dismutase, lipoxygenase, and catalase, as well as certain proteinase inhibitors. ISR is not unique to a single pathogen, but it aids plants in managing a range of pathogens[85]. ISR includes ethylene hormone signaling in the plant, which induces host defence against various plant diseases[86]. Even though the majority of PGPR initiates ISR in plants and their use has the potential to revolutionize agriculture, fundamental research on PGPR and the application of existing tools and techniques to help plants from the lab to the field has been rare[87]. The efficiency of PGPR varies by crop; however, particular strains promote growth in various crops. PGPRs are powerful agents for increasing agricultural productivity.

    • Changing climate has a profound impact on plant physiology, influencing the availability and uptake of nutrients either directly or indirectly via soil changes. A comprehensive understanding of plant response to the changing climate and its implications on nutrient dynamics is essential[88]. This understanding is crucial for developing effective management strategies to avoid potential nutrient-related challenges that could undermine food security. It is a consensus among scientists that agricultural practices need to be more sustainable to ensure food security under the changing climate. Shifting agricultural practices involve complex changes in the global systems and ecosystems that influence the feedback relevance of nutrient cycling to the climate. The climate-induced changes in the biogeochemical cycles and their impact on global systems and ecosystems indicate a necessity for a better understanding of plant response to the changing climate, particularly focusing on the changes in nutrient dynamics[89].

      Biological nitrogen fixation occurs for the most part at mild temperatures by nitrogen-fixing microorganisms[90], and the nitrogenase complex is an intricate chemical that is a key component in N2 fixation[91]. The nitrogen fixation procedure requires the nitrogenase gene (Nif gene) symbiotic association in the rhizobium is subject to low oxygen concentration, controlled by another cluster of genes called fix genes, which are general for both symbiotic and free-living nitrogen fixation systems[92,93]. The rhizobacteria help plant growth by providing essential nutrients through inorganic phosphate solubilization and iron siderophores production, improving iron and phosphorous uptake[94,95]. PGPR within the soil employs distinctive methodologies for the utilization of inaccessible forms of phosphorus and also helps phosphorus assimilation[96]. Besides providing phosphorus to the plants, the phosphate solubilizing microbes also help develop plants by stimulating the proficiency of biological nitrogen fixation, improving the accessibility of other trace components by producing important plant growth promoting elements[97].

      Research on PGPR shows that they improve plant nutrient uptake, encouraging sustainable agriculture. Many PGPR species help acquire nutrients through biological nitrogen fixation, phosphate solubilization, siderophore synthesis for iron chelation, and root system regulation (Table 2). Azospirillum brasilense stimulates rice root growth and fixes atmospheric nitrogen[98,99], while P. fluorescens secretes organic acids to help wheat solubilize phosphorus[100,101]. In soybean roots, Bradyrhizobium japonicum forms nitrogen-fixing nodules that boost nitrogen assimilation[102]. Ammonia and siderophore release by other PGPR strains such as Bacillus subtilis in maize helps absorb nitrogen and iron[103]. Bacillus amyloliquefaciens increases phosphate and calcium availability in lettuce and tomato, whereas Rhizobium etli improves potassium uptake and root system architecture. Endophytic nitrogen fixation and hormone synthesis by Gluconacetobacter diazotrophicus in sugarcane boosts plant development under nutrient-limiting conditions[104]. However, PGPR's efficiency also depends on plant species and environmental conditions. Pseudomonas aeruginosa in bananas uses siderophore activity to solubilize iron and zinc[105]. Growing evidence shows that PGPR reduce chemical fertilizer dependency, improves soil health, and boost crop yield, making them crucial in sustainable agriculture systems[13]. Future research should optimize PGPR treatments in diverse agroecosystems to maximize benefits across crop species and soil conditions.

      PGPR can solubilize the potassium rock through organic acid synthesis and release[106]. Hence, the application of potassium solubilizing PGPR as biofertilizer for horticulture improvement can reduce the utilization of agrochemicals and backing ecofriendly crop production[107]. Although iron is the fourth most inexhaustible component on earth[108], it is just sparingly dissolvable that the measure of iron accessible for assimilation by living organisms is very low[109]. Both microbes and plants require a significant level of iron, and acquiring adequate iron is considerably more difficult within the rhizosphere, where parasites, microbes, and plants compete for iron[110]. To deal with such a restricted supply of iron, PGPR improves the iron availability through synthesizing siderophore[111]. The soil fertility, plant health, and productivity are interconnected. The health of the soil depends on the biological processes and availability of nutrients[112]. The soil enriched with organic amendments results in an increase in the microbial population, diversity, and microbial-induced biochemical activities, followed by the mineralization of nutrients to enhance plant growth and productivity[113,114]. On the other hand, the organic amendments induce changes in the microbial community that increase plant disease susceptibility as diseases lower plant growth and productivity by affecting plant health.

      Table 2.  PGPR strains, targeted nutrients, and their specific mechanisms of action.

      Crop PGPR species Nutrient enhanced Mechanism of action Ref.
      Rice (Oryza sativa) Azospirillum brasilense Nitrogen (N) Biological nitrogen fixation (BNF), production of auxins stimulating root growth [98,99]
      Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Pseudomonas fluorescens Phosphorus (P) Phosphate solubilization via organic acid production [100,101]
      Maize (Zea mays) Bacillus subtilis Nitrogen (N), Iron (Fe) Siderophore production for iron chelation, ammonia production for nitrogen supply [103]
      Soybean (Glycine max) Bradyrhizobium japonicum Nitrogen (N) Symbiotic nitrogen fixation in root nodules [102]
      Tomato
      (Solanum lycopersicum)
      Rhizobium etli Potassium (K), Phosphorus (P) Enhancement of root architecture, potassium and phosphate solubilization [115]
      Barley (Hordeum vulgare) Paenibacillus polymyxa Phosphorus (P), Zinc (Zn) Phosphate solubilization and zinc mobilization [116]
      Peanut (Arachis hypogaea) Rhizobium sp. Nitrogen (N), Phosphorus (P) Rhizosphere colonization promoting nutrient uptake [117]
      Sugarcane
      (Saccharum officinarum)
      Gluconacetobacter diazotrophicus Nitrogen (N) Endophytic nitrogen fixation and hormone production [104]
      Potato
      (Solanum tuberosum)
      Azotobacter chroococcum Nitrogen (N), Phosphorus (P) Nitrogen fixation and phosphatase enzyme production [118]
      Lettuce (Lactuca sativa) Bacillus amyloliquefaciens Calcium (Ca), Phosphorus (P) Solubilization of calcium and phosphorus, root growth promotion [50]
      Carrot (Daucus carota) Pseudomonas putida Phosphorus (P), Potassium (K) Mineral solubilization, root elongation stimulation [119]
      Chickpea (Cicer arietinum) Mesorhizobium ciceri Nitrogen (N) Formation of root nodules, nitrogen fixation [120]
      Cotton
      (Gossypium hirsutum)
      Bacillus megaterium Phosphorus (P), Sulfur (S) Phosphate solubilization and sulfur oxidation improving plant growth [121]
      Sunflower
      (Helianthus annuus)
      Azotobacter vinelandii Nitrogen (N), Phosphorus (P) Nitrogen fixation and mobilization of phosphorus in the rhizosphere [122]
      Banana (Musa spp.) Pseudomonas aeruginosa Iron (Fe), Zinc (Zn) Siderophore-mediated iron uptake, zinc solubilization [105]
      Apple (Malus domestica) Bacillus thuringiensis Phosphorus (P), Nitrogen (N) Phosphate solubilization, nitrogen fixation [123]
      Strawberry
      (Fragaria × ananassa)
      Pseudomonas stutzeri Iron (Fe), Calcium (Ca) Iron chelation through siderophore production, calcium mobilization [124]
      Grapes (Vitis vinifera) Bacillus velezensis Magnesium (Mg), Phosphorus (P) Root enhancement, improved magnesium uptake [125]
      Pepper
      (Capsicum annuum)
      Pseudomonas fluorescens Nitrogen (N), Sulfur (S) Sulfur oxidation, nitrogen fixation, biocontrol properties [126]
    • PGPR produces phytohormones, called plant growth regulators (PGRs)[127,128], that might be integrated into defined organs of plants and can be transported to different sites, where these trigger explicit morphological, physiological, and biochemical parts in plant growth development and improvement[95]. They are utilized as plant growth regulators and are potential options for increasing agriculture production. One of the prominent modes of action by PGPR for plant growth promotion is the production of a plant growth regulator or phytostimulator[129]. This is characterized by microorganisms that can produce or change the growth regulator concentration, for example, indole acetic acid (IAA), ethylene, gibberellic acid (GA), and cytokinin. The phytohormones, such as GA, auxins, and cytokinin, regulate plant growth and development and subsequently, other PGPR were found to produce IAA, the most widely studied phytohormone. The biochemical pathways for the biosynthesis of IAA and other phytohormones in PGPR shed light on the evolution of these pathways that plant hormones have co-evolved in rhizobacteria as adaptations to promote plant growth, an ancestral trait that has been independently examined by species of PGPR across taxonomic groups[130132]. Furthermore, in addition to biotic and abiotic signals, PGPR imparts a variety of chemical signals that elicit plant growth or defense responses (Fig. 3). An extensive range of root-secreted and exuded chemical signals from plants, including organic acids, phenolics, flavonoids, terpenes, mucilage, sugars, and amino acids, could influence microbial community structure and activity. Understanding these complex signaling mechanisms could provide critical knowledge for the sustainable use of PGPR in agricultural practices. Furthermore, this understanding could profoundly impact designing synthetic microbes that could elicit specific plant responses in a desired manner[133135].

      Figure 3. 

      Plant growth promoting and disease resistance mechanisms of PGPR.

      PGPR produce or modulate plant growth promoting hormones such as cytokinin, auxins and gibberellins, as well as improves nutrient uptake and assimilation through nitrogen fixation, phosphorus solubilization and siderophore production. PGPR also reduce toxic ethylene levels through ACC deaminase production and regulating stress related hormones. PGPR directly antagonize pathogens by producing antibiotics, enzymes and volatile organic compounds or indirectly through induced systemic resistance which is achieved by activation of JA/ET pathway against pathogen attack.

      Further, more than 30 separate growth promoting cytokinin compounds have been discovered in plants, plant-associated microbes, and in vitro environments, where most microbes can produce cytokinin in varying proportions[136138]. Cytokinin synthesis has been studied in a variety of plant-associated microbes. These bacteria belonging to the genera Bacillus, Pseudomonas, and Azospirillum were isolated from various plant species, including barley, canola, bean, and Arabidopsis[139]. In addition, gibberellins are a family of phytohormones that include up to 136 organized molecules. This group of phytohormones influences seedling growth, stem elongation, budding, and fruit development. PGPR with ACC improves crop development and yield[42,140], and its role in producing beta-glucanase, phosphatase, dehydrogenase, and antibiotic agents has also received attention[141]. The evolutionary co-dynamics of plants and PGPR under key mechanisms involve plant growth-promoting phytohormones or traits across diverse groups of bacteria. There is growing interest in the role of phytohormones in the plant growth-promoting and biocontrol activities of these bacteria. Changes in root morphology and architecture promote the establishment of beneficial interactions between plants and microorganisms in the soil, enhancing nutrient uptake and pathogen resistance.

    • The valuable employment of potential rhizobacteria for potential functions has explicit positive effects on crop efficiency and agriculture sustainability. Therefore, their useful implementation should be widely adopted in the fundamental agriculture framework. This is the demand of the climate change era to create awareness among the crop producers about the potential advantages where utilizing PGPR as opposed to cost ineffectual methodologies based on chemical fertilizers. The current studies on the impact of climate change on plants and PGPR emphasize co-evolutionary dynamics in host plants and the urgent requirement for sustainable agricultural methods. The presence of these rhizobacteria is crucial for the growth and development of plants as they improve the availability of nutrients and increase the plant's ability to withstand stress. However, climate change directly impacts PGPR population and potential activity, disrupting their interaction with ecosystem services. There is a need to prioritize the advancement of climate-specific agricultural methodologies and the assessment of the intricate interplay between PGPR and soil health, as well as the impact of changing surroundings on PGPR. Additionally, it is necessary to investigate the exploration of novel PGPR species and their potential long-term applicability in the context of climate change.

      PGPR holds transformative potential in addressing climate challenges through both natural and engineered mechanisms. Genetic advancements could tailor strains for precision adaptation e.g., ACC deaminase-overexpressing PGPR to combat drought or heat-tolerant variants engineered with extremophile genes. Such strains could reduce reliance on synthetic fertilizers, cutting agricultural green house gase emissions (30%–50% lower N₂O in rice fields using Azospirillum biofertilizers) while enhancing carbon sequestration via root-driven soil organic matter stabilization. Interdisciplinary integration pairing synthetic biology with artificial intelligence-driven soil sensors could optimize PGPR deployment in real-time, predicting plant-microbe interactions under shifting climates. Beyond crops, PGPR may aid ecosystem restoration, such as detoxifying heavy metals in degraded soils or reversing desertification via seed-coating technologies. However, scaling these solutions requires overcoming biosafety concerns (CRISPR-based 'kill switches' to control engineered strains) and socio-technical barriers, including farmer acceptance and equitable policy frameworks. Global collaboration, through initiatives like COP28-funded trials or open-access genomic databases, will be critical to unlocking the role of PGPR in sustainable intensification. By bridging agroecology, biotechnology, and circular economy principles, PGPR could emerge as cornerstones of climate-smart agriculture, ensuring food security while mitigating planetary crises.

      • This research was financially supported by the Yunnan Agricultural University Startup Fund (20232020003).

      • The author confirms sole responsibility for the following: study conception and design, data collection, analysis and interpretation of results, and manuscript preparation.

      • Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

      • The author declares that there is no conflict of interest.

      • Copyright: © 2025 by the author(s). Published by Maximum Academic Press on behalf of Yunnan Agricultural University. This article is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
    Figure (3)  Table (2) References (141)
  • About this article
    Cite this article
    Munir S. 2025. Evolution of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria under global climate change. Agrobiodiversity 2(2): 33−43 doi: 10.48130/abd-0025-0005
    Munir S. 2025. Evolution of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria under global climate change. Agrobiodiversity 2(2): 33−43 doi: 10.48130/abd-0025-0005

Catalog

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return