Evaluation of the bacteria formulation different inoculum densities on growth and development of Euphorbia pulcherrima

Figure 1

Figure 2

Bacterial isolates used in the study and some biochemical properties (Kotan et al_, 2014)

Isolate No	MIS diagnosis result	SIM	Location (in Turkey)	Host	Nitrogen	Phosphate
TV-91C	Bacillus megaterium	0.474	Van	Poaceae	+	W+
TV-113C	Kluyvera cryocrescens	0.688	Van	Garlic	+	+
RK-92	Pantoea agglomerans	0.889	Erzurum	Pear	+	S

Differences in the green leaves number, bract leaves number, plant height, main flower stalk length and size of bract crown of poinsettias subject to different doses of PGPR formulation in the pot experiment

Treatments	Green leaves (no.)	Bract leaves (no.)	Plant height (cm)	Main flower stalk length (cm)	Size of bract crown (cm)
	Means ± SD
Control	4.92 ± 0.58 bc*	9.25 ± 1.09 cd***	17.59 ± 1.18 cd**	7.87 ± 0.62 cd**	13.38 ± 1.16 b**
T1	4.47 ± 1.79 c	7.22 ± 0.84 e	15.87 ± 1.87 d	7.33 ± 1.98 d	12.30 ± 2.23 b
T2	7.14 ± 0.55 a	8.36 ± 0.88 de	16.85 ± 1.28 d	8.03 ± 0.79 cd	13.68 ± 2.12 b
T3	6.03 ± 0.68 abc	10.92 ± 0.88 b	19.35 ± 1.24 c	9.55 ± 1.06 bc	16.30 ± 1.17 a
T4	6.75 ± 0.90 ab	10.36 ± 0.38 bc	21.93 ± 1.05 b	11.37 ± 1.02 ab	16.55 ± 0.35 a
T5	7.92 ± 1.46 a	12.42 ± 0.80 a	24.99 ± 0.80 a	12.49 ± 0.85 a	18.10 ± 0.15 a
Mean	6.20 ± 1.55	9.75 ± 1.89	19.43 ± 3.42	9.44 ± 2.19	15.05 ± 2.43

The effect of different doses of PGPR formulation on bract diameter, main stem diameter, relative chlorophyll content, green leaf and bract leaf area in the pot experiment

Treatments	Bract diameter (cm)	Main stem diameter (mm)	Relative chlorophyll content (SPAD)	Green leaf area (cm2)	Bract leaf area (cm2)
	Means ± SD
Control	19.12 ± 1.46 bc*	4.42 ± 0.23 ns	42.00 ± 2.76 b*	10.34 ± 0.74 c***	67.16 ± 9.04 c**
T1	16.95 ± 2.14 c	4.93 ± 0.42	52.67 ± 2.46 a	8.66 ± 1.10 c	77.56 ± 2.36 b
T2	18.23 ± 2.90 bc	5.00 ± 0.45	50.27 ± 1.12 a	9.86 ± 0.76 c	78.07 ± 2.24 b
T3	19.45 ± 4.33 bc	5.19 ± 0.40	49.97 ± 6.07 a	15.14 ± 0.93 b	78.53 ± 2.14 b
T4	22.13 ± 0.51 ab	4.73 ± 0.73	50.27 ± 2.18 a	17.86 ± 1.51 a	86.95 ± 1.77 a
T5	25.33 ± 0.63 a	5.45 ± 0.16	48.73 ± 1.17 a	18.61 ± 1.39 a	87.29 ± 0.99 a
Mean	20.20 ± 3.49	4.95 ± 0.50	48.98 ± 4.31	13.41 ± 4.19	79.26 ± 7.77

The effect of different doses of PGPR formulation on plant fresh and dry weight, the total nitrogen content of leaf and root in the pot experiment

Treatments	Plant fresh weight (g · plant−1)	Plant dry weight (g · plant−1)	Total N of leaf (%)	Total N of root (%)
	Means ± SD
Control	16.00 ± 3.69 c***	2.56 ± 0.68 b***	5.84 ± 0.13 c***	1.85 ± 0.05 ns
T1	17.81 ± 4.94 c	2.91 ± 1.04 b	6.47 ± 0.07 b	1.90 ± 0.03
T2	14.10 ± 3.09 c	2.54 ± 0.80 b	6.80 ± 0.06 a	1.85 ± 0.04
T3	20.08 ± 4.23 c	3.29 ± 0.71 b	5.12 ± 0.30 e	1.86 ± 0.03
T4	28.86 ± 4.47 b	4.76 ± 0.82 a	5.46 ± 0.24 d	1.90 ± 0.07
T5	37.89 ± 4.80 a	6.07 ± 0.21 a	6.90 ± 0.06 a	1.95 ± 0.04
Mean	22.46 ± 9.30	3.69 ± 1.48	6.10 ± 0.70	1.88 ± 0.06

Concentrations of bacterial formulation used in the study and their treatments codes

Treatments	The amount taken from the suspension of each bacteria strain (mL)	The total amount of formulation (mL)	The amount of water (mL)
Control	0.0	0.0	1,000.0
T1	17.5	52.5	947.5
T2	35.0	105.0	895.0
T3	70.0	210.0	790.0
T4	140.0	420.0	580.0
T5	280.0	840.0	160.0

The effect of different doses of PGPR formulation on NRA and GS activity in the pot experiment

Treatments	NRA (EU g · tissue−1)	GS (μmol γ-glutamyl hydroxamate formed · g−1 · min−1)
	Means ± SD
Control	4.03 ± 0.98 d***	0.23 ± 0.01 c***
T1	6.32 ± 0.70 c	0.23 ± 0.00 c
T2	6.99 ± 0.31 bc	0.23 ± 0.00 c
T3	7.89 ± 0.94 b	0.26 ± 0.01 b
T4	7.07 ± 0.98 bc	0.27 ± 0.01 a
T5	9.63 ± 0.46 a	0.25 ± 0.01 b
Mean	6.99 ± 1.85	0.24 ± 0.01