==== Front ACS Omega ACS Omega ao acsodf ACS Omega 2470-1343 American Chemical Society 10.1021/acsomega.3c00870 Review Multifaceted Impacts of Plant-Beneficial Pseudomonas spp. in Managing Various Plant Diseases and Crop Yield Improvement Mehmood Najaf † Saeed Mahnoor † Zafarullah Sana † Hyder Sajjad *† Rizvi Zarrin Fatima † Gondal Amjad Shahzad ‡ Jamil Nuzhat § Iqbal Rashid *∥ https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1553-2248 Ali Baber ⊥ Ercisli Sezai *#∇ Kupe Muhammed # † Department of Botany, Government College Women University Sialkot, Sialkot 51310, Pakistan ‡ Department of Plant Pathology, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan 60000, Pakistan § Department of Botany, University of the Punjab, Quaid-i-Azam Campus, Lahore 54590, Pakistan ∥ Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture and Environment, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur Pakistan, Bahawalpur 63100, Pakistan ⊥ Department of Plant Sciences, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad 45320, Pakistan # Department of Horticulture, Faculty of Agriculture, Ataturk University, Erzurum 25240, Türkiye ∇ HGF Agro, Ata Teknokent, Erzurum TR-25240, Türkiye * Email: Sajjad.hyder@gcwus.edu.pk. * Email: rashid.iqbal@iub.edu.pk. * Email: sercisli@atauni.edu.tr. 16 06 2023 27 06 2023 8 25 2229622315 10 02 2023 18 05 2023 © 2023 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society 2023 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Permits the broadest form of re-use including for commercial purposes, provided that author attribution and integrity are maintained (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The modern agricultural system has issues with the reduction of agricultural productivity due to a wide range of abiotic and biotic stresses. It is also expected that in the future the entire world population may rapidly increase and will surely demand more food. Farmers now utilize a massive quantity of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides for disease management and to increase food production. These synthetic fertilizers badly affect the environment, the texture of the soil, plant productivity, and human health. However, agricultural safety and sustainability depend on an ecofriendly and inexpensive biological application. In contrast to synthetic fertilizers, soil inoculation with plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) is one of the excellent alternative options. In this regard, we focused on the best PGPR genera, Pseudomonas, which exists in the rhizosphere as well as inside the plant’s body and plays a role in sustainable agriculture. Many Pseudomonas spp. control plant pathogens and play an effective role in disease management through direct and indirect mechanisms. Pseudomonas spp. fix the amount of atmospheric nitrogen, solubilize phosphorus and potassium, and also produce phytohormones, lytic enzymes, volatile organic compounds, antibiotics, and secondary metabolites during stress conditions. These compounds stimulate plant growth by inducing systemic resistance and by inhibiting the growth of pathogens. Furthermore, pseudomonads also protect plants during different stress conditions like heavy metal pollution, osmosis, temperature, oxidative stress, etc. Now, several Pseudomonas-based commercial biological control products have been promoted and marketed, but there are a few limitations that hinder the development of this technology for extensive usage in agricultural systems. The variability among the members of Pseudomonas spp. draws attention to the huge research interest in this genus. There is a need to explore the potential of native Pseudomonas spp. as biocontrol agents and to use them in biopesticide development to support sustainable agriculture. document-id-old-9ao3c00870 document-id-new-14ao3c00870 ccc-price ==== Body pmc1 Introduction Agriculture is very important for animal and human food in the world,1 but a large number of crop losses occur each year due to pathogen invasion, which involves a wide variety of pathogens ranging from viruses to prokaryotic bacteria, nematodes, eukaryotic fungi, and oomycetes.2,3 On the other hand, it is predicted that the world’s population will reach near 9 billion in 2050, which would generate more burden on food production, space, and the environment.4 Since the beginning of the agricultural system, people also have been fighting against the various plant diseases, which significantly has led to the deployment and invention of synthetic fertilizers used to improve crop yield and control disease. These synthetic fertilizers pose a severe threat to the soil biota by disturbing environmental nutrient cycles, disrupting the biological communities existing in the environment, and having adverse health consequences.5 The environmental protection and health issues of these harmful chemical materials have increased the necessity of searching for substitutions to control plant diseases and pests.6 The application of biocontrol plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) has been proven to be ecofriendly and cost-effective and has a significant role in managing various diseases, as well as improving plant growth and productivity.7 One group of very significant bacteria that has become a focal point of research on biological control of plant diseases is the genus Pseudomonas (ubiquitous, rod-shaped γ-proteobacteria and Gram-negative bacteria having polar flagella).8 Using multilocus sequencing techniques, it has been estimated that the Pseudomonas genera is comprised of more than 100 species, including groups and subgroups.9 The genome size of Pseudomonas spp. usually varies from 4.6–7.1 Mb and possesses 57.8–66.6% GC content with 4237–6396 expected genes.10Pseudomonas spp. has valuable applications in the biotechnology, biological control, bioremediation, and plant growth promotion (PGP).11,12 The Pseudomonas genus is mostly used as a crop inoculant because of its abundant occurrence and versatile metabolic ability, which promote plant growth in many ways, including ACC deaminase activity, nutrient uptake, and antioxidant activities.13 The particular strains of Pseudomonas fluorescens have been used as seed inoculants on various crop plants to stimulate growth parameters and enhance crop output. These bacterial agents quickly inhabited roots of potato, radish, and sugar beet, which significantly increased the plant yield.14P. fluorescens may assist in stimulating cabbage growth-related processes, especially by promoting seedlings’ rapid growth and reducing transplant shock.15 Among the nutrients, nitrogen (N) plays an important role in the growth and productivity of the plants.16 Soil microbes transform atmospheric nitrogen into ammonia using enzyme nitrogenase. The members of Pseudomonas spp. have a reported nitrogen fixation ability.17 Similarly, phosphorus is the second most important nutrient for plant development and growth, but it is present in an unavailable form. Microbes associated with rice, wheat, maize, and legume crops are mainly reported with a P-solubilization ability, while some others belong to Burkholderia, Enterobacter, Halolamina, Pantoea, Pseudomonas, Citrobacter, and Azotobacter are also described.18 Along with this, potassium is also required for the development and establishment of plants. Various studies have highlighted the role of Pseudomonas spp. in solubilizing the complex soil minerals including potassium aluminum silicate.19,20 P. fluorescens and Pseudomonas aeruginosa are the Gram-negative bacteria that produce hydrogen cyanide (HCN), a secondary metabolite involved in disease inhibition.21 The antagonistic potential of P. fluorescens is exacerbated by the formation of HCN, which is promoted by iron availability in wet, O2-depleted soils. Iron is found in an abundant form but is not available to the plants22 and microbes. To get iron for growth and development, some bacteria manufacture low-molecular-weight iron complexes known as siderophores,27 which are helpful in limiting the phytopathogens.23 In the rhizosphere, bacteria produce phytohormones such as auxin, gibberellins, abscisic acid, ethylene, and cytokinins that stimulate plant growth.24 Similarly, antibiotics are small-molecule toxins that may kill or resist the development of other microorganisms.25 Several rhizospheric bacteria have also been shown to produce antibiotics as well as toxins26 including amphisine, phenazine, 2–4-diacetylphloroglucinol, pioluteorina, pyrrolonitrin, hydrogen cyanide (HCN), oomycine, polymyxin, circulin, colistin, tensin, tropolone, and cyclic lipopeptides.27Pseudomonas spp. usually produce antibiotics that indirectly support plant growth stimulation.28 Various studies have highlighted the active role of Pseudomonas spp. in suppressing various fungal pathogens,29−31 inducing systemic resistance,32 and producing gibberellic acid (GA) and jasmonic acid (JA) signals.33 Pseudomonas spp. are extensively studied in disease management strategies. The most common compounds that take part in biocontrol mechanism include phenazine-1-carboxamide, lipopeptides, 2, 4-diacetylphloroglucinol (DAPG), pyrrolnitrin, pyoluteorin, and phenazine-1-carboxylic acid (PCA).11Pseudomonas strains survive well in stress conditions and are very beneficial in the control of several diseases triggered by fungal phytopathogens,43 mainly damping-off disease caused by Pythium spp.,34Fusarium solani causing okra root rot,35Rhizoctonia solani associated with Rhizoctonia root-rot,36 and foliage blight disease caused by Phytophthora nicotianae.37 Plants’ ability to defend themselves is strengthened through priming as an adaptive technique. Activation of the induced defense mechanism is one of this phenomenon’s characteristics. Pathogens, arthropods, and abiotic signals operate as warning signs that create a prime. The plant may experience changes at the physiological, transcriptional, metabolic, and epigenetic levels in response to the stimulation. Priming functions as a kind of immunological memory for the plant because it can persist a long time, be maintained throughout the plant’s life cycle, and be passed down to next generations.38 The genus Pseudomonas holds complex enzymatic system and produces hydrolytic enzymes that play a vital role in the suppression of various plant diseases.11 Some important members of Pseudomonas, including P. aeruginosa, P. fluorescens, and Pseudomonas stutzeri, secrete chitinases and are considered as good biocontrol agents. Pseudomonas putida produces various mycolytic enzymes, including cellulase, lipase, protease, chitinase, and amylase, and develops innate resistance against Fusarium wilt disease in Solanum lycopersicum.39 Pseudomonads also secrete specific biosurfactants, especially biological rhamnolipids (RLs).40 RLs have antimicrobial activities against plant pathogens, control a variety of plant disease by stimulating plants defense response,41 and also possess efficient remediation abilities.42 As RLs breakdown the plasma membrane of fungal zoospores, the use of rhamnolipid-producing Pseudomonas spp. could help to manage damping-off disease in chilli and tomato plants.43 They also stimulate the immune system and develop local resistance in grapeseed against Botrytis cinerea and Leptosphaeria maculans.44 Pseudomonads aid plants growing under diverse abiotic pressure by producing exopolysaccharides.45 For example, Pseudomonas azotoformans and Pseudomonas argentinensis are reported to reduce the saline stress in the Brassica juncea, improve yields, and could be used as a good biofertilizer.46Pseudomonas aeruginosa has been reported to enhance the growth of Vigna radiata (mung beans) plants under drought conditions,47 while Pseudomonas poae and P. fluorescens species increased the number and plant biomass of petunia flower under drought and low-nutrient conditions.48 Some Pseudomonas spp. have also been promoted as commercial products of plant growth promotion (PGP) and biological control, such as biopesticides and biofertilizers.49 The Bio Save 10 LP and Bio Save 11 LP products obtained from Pseudomonas syringae strain ESC-10 are employed for the control of postharvest diseases of citrus fruit, apple, potatoes and stone fruits. Similarly, P. fluorescens A506 is used to make Blight Ban A506, which is registered as a biopesticide for the suppression of frost damage on pome fruits, peach, cherry, potato, strawberry, almond, and tomato. Blight Ban A506 is also used for the suppression of fire blight.50 Thus, multifaceted impacts have created a need to explore the potential of locally occurring Pseudomonas spp. against broad range of phytopathogens and bacteria-based bioproduct development. 2 The Current Situation of Plant Diseases Plant pathology faces lots of ever-growing challenges. In the present era, the crop yield has become challenged because of threats from plant diseases and the huge application of synthetic fertilizers. Crop productivity declines due to high plant disease rates that are often between 21 to 30% worldwide in some of the most important crops.50 Achieving the basic requirements of a rising population with little resources and without harming the atmosphere is biggest challenge for researchers and farmers.51 Ray and co-workers reported that depleting arable lands and less available resources decrease the ability the agricultural yield to flourish.52 Moreover, intensification, monocultures, and other high resource inputs (water, pesticides, and chemical fertilizer) in agriculture aim to attain maximum plant yield as the sole target, thus facilitating the progression of many plant diseases worldwide.53 Synthetic pesticides do not decompose into simpler and harmless elements, and ultimately they persist in the soil as lethal remains often associated with health problems in humans.54 Lucas suggested that several phytopathogens have developed resistance to chemical pesticides that have been in usage for a long period of time.55 Therefore, few plant diseases of economic significance have become very problematic to handle due to depleting essential resources;56 food market globalization and intensive crop production practices have worsened the condition.57 The rapidly increasing demand for substitutions to chemical fertilizers has given chances for the use of biocontrol practices.58 Providing adequate, nontoxic, and healthy food for society is always the most essential task of plant disease management. Therefore, plant disease management must ensure a good food supply by increasing the agricultural yield, decreasing food pollution, and also providing a variety of foods at reasonable prices.59 Furthermore, raising the public awareness about environment and human health concerns associated with man-made toxic chemicals is also causing a shift toward the highly sustainable management applications that rely less on artificial fertilizers and have no bad effects on the environment and natural resources.60 However, the utilization of agrarian products as phyto-stimulators, biocontrol agents, and biofertilizers with some suitable crop management practices is a fantastic choice in sustainable agricultural applications due to its environmentally safe nature. In this context, an effective and ecofriendly strategy is to use Pseudomonas spp. as one of the effective choices for the improvement of the plant growth and disease suppression to support sustainable agriculture. 3 Pseudomonas spp.: An Extremely Diverse Group Pseudomonas spp. are anaerobic, nonendosporic, motile, and rod shaped; they has one or many flagella, are Gram-negative in nature, and belong to the proteobacteria group.61 They are a saprophytic in nature, found in water, soil, and moist areas.62 They have been identified to act as both plant growth promoters (Pseudomonas fluorescens) and plant pathogens (P. syringae).63 The number of Pseudomonas isolates may change with the passage of time; the newest molecular diversity analysis (MDA) represents 144 species and remains as the largest group of microbes.64 However, the widespread occurrence of Pseudomonas spp. shows their adaptability through the physiological, environmental, and molecular diversity.65 The phylogenetic relatedness of Pseudomonas strains within the genus can be determined through the sequence analysis of conserved genes.66 According to Höfte and Altier, the biocontrol abilities of bacteria are strain-dependent and cannot link with phylogenetic variations.67 They directly act on the physiology, growth, and nutritional status of the plant they inhabit. Pseudomonas spp. also has the potential to withstand the high temperature up to 35–38 °C.68 Numerous Pseudomonas spp. including P. aeruginosa, Pseudomonas chlororaphis, P. putida, and P. fluorescens are well-known for their capacity to improve plant growth and lessen a variety of plant diseases.69 These are extensively found to be associated with the roots of plants and give advantage to plants by fending off plant pathogens. Several traits of Pseudomonas spp. enable them to serve as plant growth promoters and biocontrol agents. These traits include aggressive rhizosphere competence, quick colonization, formation of several root exudates, bioactive substances (such as vitamins, VOCs, siderophores, and antibiotics), and stress responses70 (Figure 1). In case of P. fluorescens, genes of the tryptophan synthase-α chain (trpA) and tryptophan synthase-β chain (trpB) generate indole as an intermediate product, which via the expression of tryptophan 2-monooxygenase (iaaM) catalyzes indole-3-acetamide to IAA using iaaH,71 increasing plant growth. Some plant hormones, such as indole acetic acid (IAA), cytokinins, gibberellins, and ethylene production inhibitors are produced by fluorescent Pseudomonas, which help to improve the plant roots capability to absorb water and certain nutrients.72 Figure 1 Schematic representation of the mechanisms of action of Pseudomonas spp. in the rhizosphere. 4 Pseudomonas spp. as Plant-Growth-Promoting Rhizobacteria Plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) are beneficial rhizospheric microbes that are free-living and engaged in promoting plant growth and development. PGPR inhabit the rhizosphere and roots of the plant, growing in the spaces between the root hairs and rhizodermal tissues.73 PGPR are not only linked with the root to have advantageous impacts on plant growth and development but are also responsible for the obliteration of plant pathogenic microorganisms. These bacteria are being used at the field level and have long been well-known to increase agricultural yield in normal and stressed soils due to their ecofriendly nature.74 They enhance the plant growth through establishing induced systemic resistance (ISR), competitive omission, and antibiosis and defending the plants against biotic agents.75 They raise the level of antioxidant enzyme and protecting the plant cells from an oxidative stress.76 Thus, PGPR act as one of the most significant ingredients in the formulation of biofertilizers. The rhizosphere is a soil zone under the influence of plant roots that is a challenging and heterogeneous environment shaped by plant rhizo-deposition77 and colonized by many microorganisms, including plant-associated Pseudomonas spp. Pseudomonas spp. are very ubiquitous microbes in the rhizospheric zone that possess the characteristics to be well-suited to thePGPR category (Figure. 1).78Pseudomonas spp. have various PGPR qualities, including (i) fast in vitro growth and the capacity for biomass production; (ii) colonizing and dominating in the spermosphere, rhizosphere, and inside the plant’s body; (iii) the production of bioactive metabolites (antibiotics, growth-promoting substances, siderophores, and volatiles); (iv) quick use of seed and root exudates; (v) violent competition with other microorganisms; and (vi) an environmental stress resistance ability. Due to the production of the above stated compounds, they are responsible for the plant growth promotion and innate resistance of some soils to toxic pathogens.79 It is well proven that the plant growth is enhanced through the application of these beneficial bacterial populations (Table 1). The P. fluorescence (FLPs) strain was used as an inoculant in the combination of microbial rich fertilizer to improve the growth parameters and yield of chickpea plants.80 Similarly, P. aeruginosa isolated from rhizospheric soil, shoots, and roots of sugar cane provides a remarkable improvement in fresh and dry mass of sugar cane.62 Specific strains of P. fluorescens and P. putida have been used as seed inoculants on crop plants to stimulate their growth and enhance crop yields. P. aeruginosa was utilized in along with B. subtilis and T. harzianum to combat Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, leading to plant health improvement by eliciting systemic resistance and proteome level changes.81P. azotoformans considerably enhanced plant nutrient (calcium, manganese and potassium) uptake in contrast to the mutant strain of P. azotoformans.82 Table 1 Role of Pseudomonas as a Better Plant Growth Promoter bacterial strain targeted plant species beneficial impact on plant references P. fluorescens, P. fulva, P. putida, and Pseudomonas spp. maize improve the plant growth and productivity by abolishing the growth of toxic plant pathogens (83−85) cold-tolerant Pseudomonas fluorescens strain pea good plant growth enhancer and biocontrol agent (86) Pseudomonas strain Pseudomonas aeruginosa tomato positively modulated sugar production, improved the sweetness of tomatoes, and significantly enhanced fruit yield (87,88) P. putida and P. fluorescens Hyoscyamus niger reduced the damaging effects of water deficit stress and increased the root length and no. of leaves (89) P. putida tomato improves growth and yield of fresh and dried tomato fruits under seawater irrigation stress (90) P. nitroreducens Arabidopsis thaliana, Lactuca sativa exhibited remarkable improvement in growth, particularly in regard to biomass (91) P. putida and P. fluorescens Oryza sariva increase the grain iron content to combat with the problem of iron shortage in rice crop (92) P. fluorescens Rubus (blackberries) improves plant yield, fruit quality, and flowering buds (93) P. fluorescens and P. putida pepper and spinach increase length of the plants and also improve vegetable quality (94) P. fluorescencs and P. putida turmeric increased the plant biomass, stem length, no. of leaves, and curcumin contents (95) Pseudomonas spp. soybean and wheat enhanced soil enzyme and nutrient uptake activity, also increased grain size and total plant yield (96−98) P. putida artichoke promotes phosphate solubilization (99) P. fluorescens rice shows plant growth promotional activity in rice crop under both in vitro and in vivo conditions (100) P. fluorescens mustard augmented overall plant growth and yield and reduced the symptoms of stem blight disease in mustard plant (101) Pseudomonas spp. onion stimulate growth and increase the mineral concentration of the onion (102) P. aeruginosa chilli enhancement effect on all growth parameters (103) Pseudomonas spp. chickpea produced siderophores and IAA and improved plant growth, nodulation, chlorophyll content, and leghemoglobin (104) Azospirillum and P. fluorescens wheat promoted the elongation of roots in crops (105) P. chlororaphis tobacco growth-promoting effect and has also been described to develop systemic resistance (106) 5 Direct Mechanisms 5.1 Biological Nitrogen Fixation The total nitrogen present in the atmosphere is 78%, but still it is not available to plants. One of the most efficient and ecofriendly ways to increase crop plant growth and productivity has proven to be the employment of N2-fixing microorganisms as biofertilizers. For sustainable agriculture and high yield, the use of biological nitrogen fixation is the best alternative to chemical fertilizers. Rhizobacteria are useful for fixing the nitrogen and make it obtainable to the plants.107 However, an enzyme nitrogenase is used by PGPR to convert nitrogen into ammonia, which is the usable form for the plants.108 The symbiotic bacteria, for example, rhizobia, and nonsymbiotic bacteria, for example, Azocarus (Anabaena, Nostoc), Gluconacetobacter diazotrophicus, Azotobacter, Azospirillum, cyanobacteria, etc., fix the atmospheric nitrogen into an available form.109 In 1955, Anderson reported the nitrogen fixation by the genus Pseudomonas.110 The structure of the gene that produced the nitrogenase enzyme and the optimal condition at which it is useful for nitrogen fixation were investigated using P. stutzeri, which was isolated from Chinese rice fields.111P. fluorescens, as well as fluorescent pseudomonads, were reported to stimulate nodulation in a chickpea plant.112 5.2 Solubilization of P Phosphorus is the most important macronutrient after N for the growth and development of plants. A higher amount of P is present in an insoluble form in the soil but not available to plants. Monobasic and dibasic are the only forms in which P is available to plants.108 P-based fertilizers are frequently used to overcome the deficiency of P and to enhance the crop production.113 Microbes in the rhizosphere that convert the insoluble forms of P into available forms are usually known as orthophosphates. The use of these P-solubilizing bacteria (PSB) plays significant role in making P available to the plants. The P-solubilizing bacteria can dissolve the insoluble P by producing organic acids with low molecular weights. Several bacteria produced citric and gluconic acid.153 Oteino reported that bacterial genera including Bacillus, Enterobacter, Rhodococcus, Mesorhizobium, Flavobacterium, Rhizobium, Pseudomonas, Erwinia, Burkholderia, Microbacterium, Beijerinckia, Serratia, and Arthrobacter can solubilize phosphates.114 5.3 Production of HCN HCN is a volatile compound that has antibacterial115 as well as antifungal characteristics.116 HCN is a very toxic compound used against phytopathogens. To inhibit phytopathogens and increase yield, most of the PGPR produced HCN.117 HCN production is the trait of P. aeruginosa that is already well-known in disease inhibition.118 A secondary metabolite, HCN produced by Pseudomonas entomophila, and entomopathogenic bacteria, has been linked to biological control and pathogenesis in many other bacteria.119 In a recent study, HCN-producing fluorescent Pseudomonas and non-HCN-producing Bacillus licheniformis in a mixed culture were reported to improve the vegetative growth and photosynthetic parameters in a wheat crop.120 5.4 Production of Siderophore Iron is found in its native state as ferric ions and Fe+3, which are slightly soluble; therefore, these forms are used neither by plants nor by microorganisms. Some extracellular compounds have been identified to be secreted by PGPR, usually known as siderophores. Kumar and co-researchers reported that siderophores are small iron-containing molecules with a high affinity for chelating chemicals released by the plant and microorganisms, acting as highly soluble Fe3+-binding chelating agents.113 David et al. reported that siderophores producing Pseudomonas spp. are important for boosting plant growth and combating a variety of plant diseases.121 Because of its function in both biological disease control and plant pathogen virulence, siderophore formation by plant-associated microbes is of much interest. The production of siderophores that takes place by bacteria like Pseudomonas produces pyoveridins; Agrobacterium tumefaciens, Erwinia chrysanthemi, and Enterobacteriacea generate catechols; Erwinia carotovora, Enterobacter cloacae, and other fungi make hydroxamates; and Rhizobium meliloti produces rhizobactin.122 5.5 Phytohormone Production Phytohormones are very essential for plant development. Most important hormones are gibberellins, indole-3-acetic acid (IAA), and cytokinins. The most prevalent and well-studied auxin, IAA, has a crucial role in the differentiation and development of tubers and seeds, as well as cell division. It also controls vegetative development and initiates the production of the lateral and adventitious root.123 Auxin is produced by different bacterial genera like Pseudomonas, Xanthomonas, and Rhizobium, as well as Bacillus cereus, Enterobacter cloacae, Bradyrhizobium japonicum, Serratia marcescens, Burkholderia, Azotobacter, Alcaligenes faecalis, and Mycobacterium sp., etc., which help in plant growth and development. Similar to this, cytokinins play an essential role in cell enlargement, cell expansion, and cell division.124 Gibberellin changes the morphology of plants, especially in stem tissues, and extension of cells takes place. Ethylene hormone is in gaseous form and is usually known as a wounding hormone because any physical or chemical perturbation is the reason for its production. The root growth is inhibited by the production of ethylene. Therefore, PGPR play an important in reducing ethylene production by mediating the phytohormones, maintaining ion homeostasis, and regulating the expression of stress-responsive genes.125 5.6 Production of Antibiotics Many distinct types of microbes produce toxic compounds that are hazardous to other pathogen microbes. However, it is advantageous to plant growth and development. These are antibacterial or microbial toxins that can be harmful to or eliminate other bacteria even in low quantities.126 Kumar et al. evaluated that DAPG acts as an antibiotic toward fungus, bacteria, helminths, and other parasites because Pseudomonas spp. synthesize pyrrolnitrinis.123Pseudomonas spp. produce DAPG, which is involved in the inhibition of phytopathogens. A strong antibiotic phenazine of P. fluorescens has been utilized to combat all G. gramini infections of wheat.127 Fluorescent Pseudomonas produces antibiotics and acts as a biocontrol agent.157 Pioluteorine, phenazine-1-carboxylic acid 2,4-diacetylphloroglucinol (Phl), and pyocyanin are some of the potential antibiotics synthesized by P. fluorescens.128 These antibiotics increase plant growth, suppress phytopathogens, and also enhance the soil fertility (Figure 2). Figure 2 Antibiotics production by Pseudomonas spp. and their impacts on plants. 6 Indirect Mechanisms 6.1 Antifungal Activity PGPR stimulate the plant development, which prevents the spread of phytopathogens.129 Bacteria produce antifungal antibiotics, which help in the growth inhibition of pathogenic fungi. For example, P. fluorescens produces 2, 4-diacetylphloroglucinol. Some PGPR breakdown the fusaric acid produced by the Fusarium spp. associated with wilt disease and therefore prevent the pathogenesis. Pseudomonas stutzeri produces enzymes that can break down the cells of Fusarium solani. Recently, P. fluorescens was suggested as biocontrol agents because they protect plants against several fungal diseases, like black root-rot of tobacco, root-rot of wheat, and root-rot of a pea, etc. In a recent study, P. aeruginosa was characterized to produce certain metabolites, bioactive compounds, and antifungal compounds like 2,4-diacetylphloroglucinol (2,4-DAPG), pyoluteorin, and pyrrolnitrin that make this bacteria effective against a broad range of phytopathogenic fungal agents.130 Similarly, P. stutzeri isolated from Withania somnifera seeds was found effective in the suppression of the mycelial growth of F. oxysporum var. ciceri and R. solani.73 6.2 Induced Systemic Resistance (ISR) In the rhizosphere of plants, beneficial microbes induce systematic resistance as a defense in response to pathogenic attacks.131 Microbes assist in structural changes that promote defense mechanisms via the accumulation of biochemical and phenolic compounds.132 In a study, decreased susceptibility to wilt disease in carnation plants and foliar disease in cucumber due to the induction of systematic resistance was observed.133Pseudomonas strains also assist in inducing systematic resistance. Pseudomonas spp. like P. putida and P. fluorescens protect against pathogens in plants like tomato, sugar cane, and oak.134 ISR induction on plants by PGPR result in substantial modifications in the plants structure and functions that lead to resistance against invading pathogens.135 6.3 Rhizoremediation and Stress Control Islam and co-researchers discussed that plants are frequently exposed to several stresses both abiotic and biotic that ultimately have an impact on plant development and survival.136 Plants and microbes are potentially used in phytoremediation to eliminate harmful metals efficiently and economically from the polluted environment.137 Heavy metals (HMs) are harmful to plant growth138 and establishment, and certain microbes detoxify them. When the microbes are added to the contaminated soils, they lower the deleterious effects of metals on plants growth. A recent study has proved that the inoculation of Sedum alfredii with P. fluorescens improved the net photosynthetic rates, intercellular CO2 concentration, transpiration rate, and stomatal conductance and upregulated the photosynthetic genes, which promote both the growth and Cd uptake ability of the plant.139 Similarly, application of copper-tolerant siderophore- and ammonia-producing P. lurida on Helianthus annuus significantly improved the growth and phytoremediation ability of plants grown under Cu contaminated soil.140Pseudomonas spp. are also reported to enhance plant growth and improve the ability of the plants to survive under drought conditions,141 heat shock,142 and high salinity.143 The direct and indirect modes of action of PGPR is presented in Figure 3. Figure 3 Direct and indirect roles of Pseudomonas spp. in growth promotion and disease suppression. 6.4 Role of Pseudomonas Species in Plant Disease Management According to current estimates, a significant amount of food products and crops are lost each year due to various diseases caused by pathogens. These plant diseases are the major factor affecting food production and human societal development.144 Generally, cereal crops are more commonly affected by soil-borne diseases. For plant disease control, the application of biological control agents has been recognized as an effective method.145 The efficient control of diseases with the help of PGPR has been testified in many crop plants.146 PGPR as biocontrol agents are reported to have a remarkable ability to increase crop production and tolerate abiotic and biotic stresses.147 The term biocontrol is often employed for managing plant diseases that occur during the storage of food and at various plant growth stages. The studies on biocontrol by rhizobacteria are usually focused on controlling many pathogenic microbes.148 Numerous bacterial isolates are known that act as biocontrol agents. Among several biocontrol agent, Pseudomonas spp. have been broadly studied as more dominant bacteria possessing the potential to defend plants against various notorious plant pathogens (Table 2)149 and promote plant growth under stress conditions.150Pseudomonas bacteria has ability to lessen the disease occurrence by developing inducible plant defense mechanisms, which make plants more resistant against invading pathogens.151 Bacterial strains prevent pathogenic growth using various mechanisms such as by secreting the antibiotics and HCN; producing cell-wall-degrading enzymes like β-1,3-glucanase, chitinase, toxins, biosurfactants, and important metabolites; and by competing for minerals.152 The earliest known mechanism of biocontrol includes the production of beneficial compounds like siderophores, which proficiently sequester Fe (iron) and kill pathogens.153 Disease control properties are also associated with various secondary metabolites coded by genes present in cores and flexible parts of the bacterial genome.154 Through genome sequencing, it is predicted that approximately 6% of the genome of P. fluorescens Pf-5 secretes secondary metabolites, which indicates the direct link between secondary metabolite production and genetic elements155 Table 2 List of Pseudomonas Strains That Take Part in Disease Management bacterial strain plants role of bacterial strain in disease management references P. fluorescens tomato significantly inhibited the virulence traits of Ralstonia solanacearum that cause tomato wilt disease (164) P. putida and P. aeruginosa rice these isolates effectively reduced the disease incidence of sheath blight and developed resistance to Rhizoctonia solani (165) P. aeruginosa cowpea increase plant productivity and reduce the symptoms of blight disease in cowpea caused by bacteria (Xanthomonas campestris) (166) P. fluorescens tobacco reduce the growth of tobacco mosaic virus by making an antibiotic protein (167) P. fluorescens (Pf1 and TDK1) ground nut shows efficacy against the collar rot pathogen and leafminer insect (168) P. fluorescens mung bean has biocontrol potential against the root rotting of fungi and also promotes plant growth (169) Pseudomonas cucumber combated cucumber damping off disease and used in integrated disease control (170) P. fluorescens strain turmeric directly or indirectly involved in disease resistance in turmeric against turmeric rhizome rot (171) P. fluorescens M, P. putida L, and P. aeruginosa J, B apple orchards lessen the symptoms of apple replant disease and ensure the good health of plants (172) P. fluorescens cabbage combating black rot of cabbage (173) P. aeruginosa chilli pepper managing anthracnose in chilli pepper by fighting against Colletotrichum truncatum and Colletotrichum capsici (174−176) P. fluorescens, P. putida and P. cepacia tomato management of tomato early blight pathogen (Alternaria solani) (177) Pseudomonas strains cucurbit controlling the powdery mildew disease by developing systemic resistance in the host plant (178) P. fluorescens tomato very effective in stopping the infection of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) leaves by P. infestans and notably reduced the expansion of late blight lesions. (179) P. fluorescens maize control corn sheath blight by inhibiting the growth of Rhizoctonia solani (180) P. fluorescens Pf1 and Py15 mulberry plant protect the mulberry plant from root rot disease induced by Macrophomina phaseolina (181) P. aeruginosa, P. syringae, and P. fluorescens tomato rested species reduced the incidence of tomato bacterial wilt caused by Ralstonia solanacearum and promoted the growth of the tested tomato genotypes (182) P. protegens, P. donghuensis, and P. aurantiaca cotton control Verticillium wilt disease by producing effective antipathogenic metabolites against Verticillium dahlia (52, 183, 184) P. chlororaphis wheat antimicrobial properties against Gram-positive bacteria and actinomycetes (185) P. koreensis MG209738 and B. subtilis MF497446 maize have an inhibitory effect on late wilt disease caused by Cephalosporium maydis in the maize plant and lead to plant growth promotion (186) P. putida corn increase in shoot and root weight of corn plants inoculated with the strain of P. putida that is famous due to its anti-fungal properties (187) Pseudomonas annual bluegrass, bermuda grass, and rice produce growth inhibition compounds that prevent the Fusarium pathogen infection (188) Pseudomonas spp. pine seedlings decrease the symptoms of pine wilt sickness induced by pine wooden nematode (Bursaphelenchus xylophilus) (189) The biocontrol ability of Pseudomonas spp. has been reported in some important plants (tomato, wheat, and chickpea).156 Rhizobacteria produce a variety of secondary metabolites, antibiotics, and bioactive compounds that make them excellent biocontrol agents. A research study has reported the antimicrobial traits of a siderophore-producing Pseudomonas strain against Rhizoctonia solani and Sclerotium rolfsii.157P. fluorescens produced 2,4-DAPG, which controls and manages take-all disease in Triticum aestivum.158 Orozco-Mosqueda et al. showed that the trehalose production by the Pseudomonas UW4 played a significantly role in protecting tomato plants against salt stress.159 Hydrogen cyanide-producing P. chlororaphis exhibits nematocidal activity against Meloidogyne hapla nematodes by decreasing the number of galls in tomato plants and by killing juveniles both in vitro and inside the plants.160 A P. putida strain was revealed to decrease the damage instigated by Pythium ultimum on tomatoes and also increase the growth of the infected plants161,199. Many other recent studies have highlighted the beneficial impacts of Pseudomonas spp. on improving the plant growth by suppressing the colonization of phytopathogens.43,162,163 7 Production and Effects of Bacterial Volatiles Low-molecular-weight volatile organic substances promote plant development.190 The importance of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in inducing resistance in host plants is comparable to the function they play in insect resistance.43 Microorganisms interact with plants in distinctive ways.191 Volatile natural compounds of microbial origin possess antimicrobial properties, promote plant growth, and serve as alerts by producing a variety of signaling molecules.192 Most research on the consequences of bacterial fluctuations on flora have been accomplished thought the use of a bifurcated Petri dish, where in the two compartments are separated through a plastic rim. This permits the exchange of volatile compounds while also preventing the spread of nonvolatile metabolites via the medium. In addition to CO2, generation that probably contributes fairly to growth promotion was discovered in closed Petri dishes.193 The use of P. chlororaphis showed that butanediol no longer only promotes plant development but also induces systemic resistance and drought tolerance194 Intriguingly, beneficial microbes are well-known to produce a variety of dynamic volatiles that protect the plants from phytopathogens, and gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC-MS) has helped in profiling the microbial volatile organic compounds (VOCs). A recent study has highlighted the potential role of microbial volatile organic compounds (VOCs) produced by endophytic P. putida associated with black pepper in suppressing the mycelial growth of various fungal pathogens.195 Similar to this, the volatile profile of P. chlororaphis subsp. Aureofaciens revealed that 3-methyl-1-butanol, phenylethyl alcohol, and 2-methyl-1-butanol were the most abundant VOCs, which showed strong inhibition toward C. fimbriata associated with black rot disease in sweet potato.196 SEM analysis has revealed that VOCs affect the morphological and structural features of B. cinerea and thus suppress fungal growth.197 8 Regulation of Secondary Metabolism and Biocontrol The two-component system GacS/GacA in Pseudomonads is essential for controlling how biological control components are expressed in a variety of pseudomonads.38 The GacS sensor kinase is activated by unknown inputs, and the phosphorus relay then activates the GacA response regulator. When cells attain large population densities, positively activated GacA regulates the transcription of short regulatory RNAs. These short ribonucleic acids attach to distinct proteins, RsmA and RsmE, and by activating specific genes they relieve translational repression. The GacS/GacA system regulates 241 genes in P. aeruginosa, with nearly whole overlap with genes under the control of small regulatory RNA.198 A competitive nonpathogenic root colonizer, P. chlororaphis strain O6, served as another example of the GacS/GacA signaling pathway’s regulatory strength. As advantageous features, the O6 strain generates several secondary metabolites, like phenazines, formonitrile (HCN), siderophore, and pyrrolnitrin. Abiotic stresses including drought and salt as well as P. chlororaphis induced systemic resistance in roots through colonization,199 the induction of triggered systemic resistance200 via the upregulation of the volatile 2,3 butanediol,160 and the expression of RpoS and, therefore, different genes structured in this opportunity σ-factor. A recent past study has revealed the pathways through which beneficial bacterial metabolites confer protection against pests and pathogens. During the root colonization, metabolites are produced that are controlled by the global regulatory Gac/Rsm signaling cascade, which is linked with the other regulatory pathways. The Gac/Rsm regulation aids in expressing the genes that encode these beneficial traits in P. chlororaphis.201 It is interesting to note that 4-carbamoyl acetic acid, another systemic resistance inducer in plants, is not always under GacS regulation.106 Proteomic analyzes of the characteristic of regulatory mutants were used to find out which pathways are coregulated. Recent studies on GacS variants revealed new proteins with as yet poorly defined functions in bioregulation. One of these proteins, PspB, is a serine protease that is connected to the DNA repair proteins that frame shifting and aggregation (a putative single-strand binding protein, Ssb, and recombination-related protein, RdgC); isoprenoid production including synthetic proteins, GATase1 ES1, and glucose 1 thymidylyl phosphate transferase; RmlA, probably concerned in hair-related proteins; polyketide metabolism; and cell membrane organization (CpaC and LysM mandatory peptidoglycans), also in outer membrane protein (OprF).202 These findings have highlighted the intricacy of the regulons involved in the appearance of the biological regulation phenotypes within a single agent. Other important regulators are also expected to exist in Pseudomonads spp. and other bacteria with efficient biological control traits.203 9 Plant Metabolism Interaction Induces Resistance and Priming Plants depend on immunogenicity to defend themselves against pathogenic attack. This acquired immunity completely depends on and encourages protective reactions. Preformed defenses are nonspecific and include structural barriers like the cell wall and cytoskeleton that keep viruses and parasites at bay, as well as chemicals with effects.204 The pathogen’s surface pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) or proteins (effectors) that the pathogen has translocated inside the host cell are recognized to activate the induced defenses.205 For example, in the case of microbial infection, plant immune response in the form of hypersensitive cell death is an important event to prevent the spread of attacking pathogens,206 the production of free radicals,207 plasma membrane defenses,208 and phytoalexin synthesis.209 On the other hand, the next opportunity in the protection response process is the transcription of pathogenesis response proteins210 and a kind of planned cell death (also known as hypersensitivity reaction (HR), which restricts the microbial ability to spread).211 For a long time, it is been counseled that the function of basic metabolism for the duration of plant pathogen relation is to aid the cell energy demand for plants. Because of the amount of gene production from various defense pathways, energy is required when carrying out the plant protection responses.212 Additionally, defensive reactions seem to manipulate health value because, like in Arabidopsis, plants that integrate specific protection reactions are undersized and feature decreased fertility compared to mutant plants with deficient protective signaling pathways, which have higher fertility.213 Anyhow, it seems that in order to create a strength level that is favorable to defense, the up-regulation of the associated protection pathways is compensated with the aid of using the down-regulation of the genes involved in different defense-associated pathways. Supporting this idea was the fact that genes concerned in photosynthesis and chlorophyll production are down -regulated in response to pathogen-derived elicitors, both pathogenic and nonpathogenic infections, and both virulent and avirulent infections.214 Utilizing fluorescence imaging of chlorophyll in special interactions between plant microbes, changes in photosynthesis have been reported regionally at the site of infection and in surrounding tissues and decreases in photosynthesis became quicker and greater after inoculation with an a virulent strain.215 However, because light responses all through photosynthesis produce chloroplast ROS that may be utilized for protection responses, the overregulation of photosynthesis is unreasonable.216 There is no experimental proof to explain why it occurs. However, two potential pathways have been put forward: (1) photosynthesis suppression brought on by pathogenic effectors217 and (2) sugar signal moderation causes regulation. In any way of the mechanism, it is likely that down-regulating photosynthesis reduces the amount of energy required when other mechanisms that provide this energy are up-regulated. For instance, boosting the activity of cell wall invertase, respiratory metabolism, and glucose transporters can produce energy.218 Formation of plant secondary metabolites like phytoalexins and the expression of protection-associated genes can both be further enhanced by this metabolic switch from supply to sink.219 Protection tactics for dangerous surroundings have a reasonable cost. The epigenetic law of priming could permit plants to shield their offspring from recurrent biotic stress instead of undergoing costly irreversible genetic fixation of the trait and its associated costs. More information on this process will open possibilities to enhance sickness resistance in agricultural crops. In order to protect crops and reduce the use of pesticides and other harmful chemicals to treat diseases, it is vital to create sustainable methods of pest and disease control in the twenty-first century.220 10 Lytic Enzymes and Plant Disease Control The one of the best biocontrol mechanisms used by Pseudomonas spp. to eradicate soil-borne pathogens is the formation of cell-wall-degrading enzymes (Table 3).221 Hydrolytic enzymes that break down the cell wall include of β-1,3-glucanase, protease, cellulose, and chitinase produced by biostimulant strains of PGPR, and they directly suppress the pathogens proliferation.222 Chitinase and β-1,3-glucanase activity have the potential to substantially destroy the chitin chain, which is an insoluble linear polymer of α-1, 4-N-acetylglucosamine.223 Table 3 Role of Lytic Enzymes in Plant Disease Control bacteria plant disease management by lytic enzymes references P. stutzeri ashwagandha Secrete Chitinase, protease and lipase enzymes against Fusarium oxysporum and Rhizoctonia solani (73) P. putida tomato Enzymes of the lipoxygenase pathway are very effective against Botrytis cinerea (151) P. fluorescence maize produce amylase that causes a reduction in both root and foliar diseases during the maize growing season (233) P. chlororaphis canola plants formed chitinase and β-1,3-glucanase and used to control Sclerotinia stem rot of canola (11,234) P. putida bean secrete lipase, protease, and chitinase effective against common bean rust disease caused by Uromyces appendiculatus (235) P. fluorescens tomato suppression of wilt disease of tomato caused by Ralstonia solanacearum by secreting the many enzymes, especially peroxidase, lipoxygenase, polyphenol oxidase, phenylalanine ammonia lyase, etc. (236) P. aeruginosa sugar cane secrete hydrolases and oxidoreductases enzymes to control sugar-smut disease (62) P. aeruginosa chilli release polyphenol oxidase, phenylalanine ammonia lyase, amylase, per-oxidase etc. these enzymes eradicate the chilli anthracnose infection by inducing systemic resistance in chilli (176) Pseudomonas spp. P. fluorescens cucumber combat the cucumberroot rot and Pythium damping-off disease by producing β-1,3-glucanase and protease. these enzymes have an antagonistic property (237) P. fluorescens safflower liberate peroxidase, PAL, and β-1,3-glucanase used against M. phaseolina root rot of safflower disease (238) P. aeruginosa peanut production of the chitinase enzymes triggered the lysis, perforation, and fragmentation of the hyphae of pathogen S. sclerotiorum, which cause stem rot of peanut (239) Within the Pseudomonas genus, certain species secrete β-1,3 glucanases that contribute to the destruction of many pathogens: in P. cepacia, the β-1,3 glucanase reduces the disease incited by the toxic pathogens, e.g., S. rolfsii, P. ultimum, and R. solani.223Pseudomonasstrain K32 is HM-resistant, and its biological control ability is verified against six Oryza sativa fungal pathogens: Paecilomyce ssp., A. parasiticus, A. flavus6Cladosporium herbarum6Alternaria alternate, and Rhizopus stolonifer. The inhibitory activity was ascribed to the production of β-1,3-glucanase, chitinase, and protease enzymes.224 Apart from showing the formation of β-glucanases and chitinase enzymes, Pseudomonas spp. obstruct the proliferation of R. solani and P. capsici, which are the most dangerous crop pathogens across the globe.225 In P. chlororaphis, quorum sensing (QS) regulates the exoenzyme production, antifungal substances, and biofilm formation.226 QS is a cell-to-cell communication system that depends on cell density that regulates bacterial gene expression through signaling molecules (autoinducers), such as biofilm formation, bacterial virulence, and pigment production227 Saritha et al. showed that P. putida discharges various important substances such as siderophores, hydrogen cyanide (HCN), chitinase, protease, urease and ACC-deaminase that impede mycelial growth of S. rolfsii6F. oxysporum, and C. fimbriata and as a result ensure the plant’s good health.228Pseudomonas fluorescens strains also have aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylic acid- or ACC-deaminase activity229 that significantly controls the quantity of plant ACC-deaminase left behind for the biosynthesis of ethylene.128 Moreover, ACC-deaminase decreases undesirable effects of the stress brought by ethylene on plants by diminishing its quantity,230 although it has been noted that a rapid decrease in ethylene levels can reduce seed emergence.231 The expression of ACC deaminase by the endophyte, P. migulae 8R6 can make Madagascar periwinkle more resistant to phytoplasma infection.232 11 Pseudomonas Species Producing Rhamnolipids (Biosurfactants) The rhamnolipids (RLs) are a special class of biosurfactants, and quorum sensing (QS) molecules regulate their secretion. Surfactants are very significant in QS molecules or cell-to-cell interaction, cellular differentiation, bacterial cell movement, and making of water canals, all which are properties of the Pseudomonas genus. These natural substances are secreted by the microbial cells240 and have numerous benefits as compared to synthetic surfactants, having very little toxicity, excellent ecofriendly properties, biodegradability, acceptable surface activity at high pH, temperatures, and salinity levels, and the capability to be produced from the renewable feedstock.241 They are extensively used in pharmaceuticals, agriculture, pesticide removal, the food industry, household cleaning, and improvement in oil recovery.242 In agriculture, RLs effectively take part in disease management by diminishing the growth of phytopathogens. These biosurfactants also have antiviral, antifungal, and antibacterial potential.243 The benefits and market potential of RLs have been extensively studied,244,245 e.g., the virucidal effects of RLs were recalled when COVID-19 emerged as global issue.246 RLs are also employed in the removal of HMs like As, Cr, Pb, Cd, and Ni from soils due to their anionic character and make the soil stress-free.247 RLs are primarily formed by P. aeruginosa, although their secretion by some other Pseudomonas species has also been reported.247P. aeruginosa produces the majority of the glycolipid-type rhamnolipids, which are the most extensively studied biosurfactants.248,249 This is due to their good surface activities, high yields after relatively shorter incubation periods, and ease microbe culviation. However, in P. aeruginosa, three QS systems exist including las, rhl, and pqs systems, which are responsible for regulating the RLs production.250,251 The P. aeruginosa rhamnolipids illustrates a vast variety of the microbes such as Micrococcus luteus, Escherichia coli, S. epidermidis, A. faecalis, Mycobacterium phlei, and Serratia marcescens.252 Moreover, P. aeruginosa RLs also exhibited antifungal potential against Penicillium chrysogenum, Aureobasidium pullulans, Aspergillus niger, and Chaetomium globosum. Similarly, RLs produced by a P. aeruginosa strain (DS9) were reported to exhibit antifungal activity against Fusarium sacchari instigating Pokkahboeng disease.253 Similarly, in another research report, the antifungal property of RLs against seven plant pathogens was surveyed. The outcomes reveal the high ability of RLs derived from P. aeruginosa (ZJU211) to fight three Ascomycota, two Oomycetes, and two Mucor species.254 The very first report on the insecticidal activity of RLs was reported by Kim.255 They described that the rhamnolipid formed by Pseudomonas strain EP-3 has disruption ability against Myzus persicae (green peach aphid). The biofilm resistance against antimicrobial agents is becoming a worldwide problem,256 whereas RLPs have prohibiting effect on the biofilm formation.257 12 Plant Protection against Abiotic Stress PGPR belonging to various taxonomic groups colonize the plant rhizosphere and mediate stress responses by employing multiple mechanisms. These beneficial becteria facilitate the acquisition of essential nutrients or modulate the production of plant hormones and thus develop in plants the ability to withstand the abiotic stresses.48 In addition to promoting tomato plant development in the absence of stress conditions, the endophytes P. brassicacearum exhibit YsS6 and P. migulae 8R6, both of which display ACC deaminase activity, and also caused biomass accumulation to be considerably colder, drier, and higher in chlorophyll and more blooms and shoots in tomato vegetation grown under treated under salt stress conditions.258 Liu and his co-workers recently discovered that inoculating a tomato plant with ACC deaminase-producing P. azotoformans CHB 1107 improved the dry weight of the plant shoots and roots and significantly decreased the plant’s reaction to salt stress by emitting less ethylene. These advantageous outcomes disappeared as P. azotoformans CHB 1107 M was used to vaccinate plants (acdS variant). Furthermore, it considerably improved plant uptake of potassium, manganese, and calcium in contrast to the P. azotoformans CHB 1107 acdS variant.82 The ability of Pseudomonas spp. to express ACC deaminase and decrease the ethylene concentration in plants is associated with its capacity to minimize heavy metal quantity in certain plant tissues.259P. seudomonas also exhibited greater resistance to other abiotic stressors when foreign ACC deaminase genes were expressed. Similar to this, inoculation of freeze-stressed tomato plants with P. frederiksbergensis OS211-acdS (carries the ACC deaminase and pRKACC plasmids) lowered ethylene emissions, reduced the ACC quantity, and decreased ACC oxidase activity. P. frederiksbergensis promoted plant development more than the uncultivated strain without ACC deaminase,260 evidencing the useful impact of ACC deaminase expression. HM pollutants, salinity, drought, and low/excessive temperature are vital climate stressors that have an effect on regular plant physiological and biochemical processes, thereby significantly lowering plant development and productivity. The creation of numerous plant-useful metabolites may also amplify the impacts of environmental stress in plants, as well as to the useful activities of PBPs in plant development and biological manipulate activity. The sections that follow focus on the advantageous mechanisms of connection among PBPs and plants and how these relationships promote plant development and improvement in response to various forms of environmental stress.261 Under drought conditions, the genes related to the synthesis of compatible solutes, exopolysaccharides, and secretion systems (type II, III, IV, and VI) were observed to be upregulated in P. fluorescens, which aided in alleviating plant stress.141 The potential of Pseudomonas spp. could be effectively used to enhance the plants’ ability to survive under abiotic stress conditions. 13 Commercial Products Based on Pseudomonas spp. With the rapidly increasing interest in ecofriendly biocontrol of soil-borne plant pathogens, many companies currently have developed biological control agents, biofertilizers, and biofungicides as commercial products under several trade names (Table.4). Several reports have explained the potential applications of bacterial inoculants for the maintenance of natural agriculture, for instance, biofertilization, biostimulant, phytostimulation, and bioremediation.262 The basic aim of PGPR-based biocontrol products is to support sustainable approaches for the plant disease management. The two biggest potential markets for biocontrol products are now Europe and the United States, with South America coming in third.263 Many rhizobacteria have been scrutinized at the laboratory level, and a few of them are successfully commercialized globally.264,265 Table 4 List of Commercially Available Pseudomonas spp.-Based Biocontrol Productsa biocontrol species product name application plants target pathogen species manufacturing company Pseudomonas syringae ESC-10 and ESC-11 Bio-Save 10LP, 110 lyophilized based products, frozen cell pellets added to H2O to make a homogeneous suspension of liquid. it is applied to postharvest fruit as a spray, drip, or drench process potatoes, cherries, and pome fruit Geotrichum candidum, Mucor pyroformis, Penicillium and Botrytis cinerea EcoScience Corporation (Longwoord, FL) Pseudomonas aureofaciens Tx-1 BioJect Spot-Less applied liquid as spray droplets turf dollar spot Eco Soil Systems Inc. Pseudomonas chlororaphis strain Cedemon applied seed treatment as a seed dressing method barley and oat plants includes spot blotch, leaf spot, leaf stripe, net-blotch, and Fusarium spp. BioAgri (Sweden and Uppsala) Pseudomonas fluorescens A506 BlightBan A506 (EPA registered) at bloom time, applied wettable powder as a spray used blueberry, pear, almond, tomato, cherry, apple, apricot, peach, potato and strawberry russet-inducing microbes and Erwinia amylovora NuFarm Inc. (Burr Ridge, IL) Pseudomonas chlororaphis 63–28 AtEze* liquid applied as a drench greenhouse grown vegetables and ornamental plants species Fusarium oxysporu, Rhizoctonia solani, and Pythium sp. Eco Soil Systems Inc. (San Diego, CA) Pseudomonas fluorescens A506, 1629RS FROSTBN* applied early in the growing season liquid as spray tomato, almond, potato, and some fruit plants frost-forming microbes Frost Technology Corporation P. syringae EPA registered 1992       Plant Health Technologies (CA and Lathrop) a The Information about the products is adapted from a list generated by Dr. D. Fravel, USDA-ARS 2000 and updated by the APS Biological Control Committee (http://www.oardc.ohio-state.edu/apbscc). The applications of Pseudomonas inoculants as PGPR in Europe need authorization under the appropriate directives. These significant directives have been reviewed by many researchers.265,266 Furthermore, plant protection products protect the plants against damage causing agents, have a direct impact on plants, and are used against undesirable plants such as herbicides. However, European legislatures have concerns with the usage and registration of plant protection commercial products that are addressed in Council Directive titled “The Plant Protection Directive”, and its implementation is under the power of EFSA (European Food Safety Authority). This gives a complete framework for generating an official inventory of compounds that cause no hazard to the ecosystem. These beneficial compounds are authorized for utilization and subsequently can be marketed in any part of the world. In the 1990s, numerous Pseudomonas strains were approved as registered biopesticide products by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). These Pseudomonas spp. are enlisted on USEPA biopesticide Web site and discussed in detail267 (Table 4). 14 Conclusion Rapidly growing plant pathogens and climate changes bring severe changes in food security and crops yield. In the present scenario, plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) are some of the good suitable choices for the enhancement of plant growth and disease management over the consumption of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Among many PGPR and biocontrol agents, Pseudomonas spp. play a crucial role in controlling the viability and crop-destruction activities of phytopathogens. Their biocontrol activity is directly associated with the production of antibiotics, such as DAPG, PHZs, PRN, PLT, and other hydrolytic enzymes. Advanced knowledge on plant protection features of P. fluorescens antagonists such as genes contributing to rhizosphere competence and suppressing plant diseases, along with factors affecting root colonization, is required for the management of phytopathogens. 15 Future Prospective Sustainable agriculture is the basic requirement of the world in current times because of the harmful consequences of chemicals used in agriculture. However, a knowledge gap still exists regarding plant–microbial interactions under different stress circumstances, mainly biotic stress. Currently, various products in the market are advertised and sold as biofertilizers and biopesticides. Due to the need to decrease the use of chemical fertilizers, the world’s demand for more of such products and organically grown food is increasing. The positive effects have already been mentioned, and the development and production of biofertilizers and biopesticides could be an appropriate solution for developing countries, which badly suffer from shortages of food. The great potential for the use of biological products in agriculture and food production is clear because it contributes to agricultural sustainability and gives solutions to issues regarding the environmental impact of existing agricultural practices. However, future research demands rhizo-engineering based on the favorable identification and partitioning of new biomolecules, which may make the distinctive settings for interactions between plants and microbes. The application and investigation of multistrain bacterial inoculants over a single strain could be an effective means of disease suppression and management. Moreover, genetic modifications for increasing the biocontrol efficiency of microbes can also be an emerging research field for future disease management. For example, the transformation of strains with augmented levels of antimicrobial activity and growth-increasing metabolites can be good options. Author Contributions Conceptualization: N.M., M.S., B.A., S.Z., S.H., and Z.F.R. Data curation: N.F., A.S.G., R.I., and B.A. Formal analysis: M.K., S.E., and B.A. Investigation: N.M., M.S., S.Z., S.H., and Z.F.R. Resources: M.K. and S.E. Software: B.A., M.K., S.E., and R.I. Supervision: S.H. Validation: S.H. and Z.F.R. Visualization: N.J., A.S.G., and R.I. Writing, original draft: N.M., M.S., S.Z., S.H., Z.F.R., and B.A. The authors declare no competing financial interest. ==== Refs References Saini A. ; Manuja S. ; Kumar S. ; Hafeez A. ; Ali B. ; Poczai P. Impact of Cultivation Practices and Varieties on Productivity, Profitability, and Nutrient Uptake of Rice (Oryza sativa L.) and Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Cropping System in India. Agriculture 2022, 12 , 1678 10.3390/agriculture12101678. Solanki M. K. ; Solanki A. C. ; Rai S. ; Srivastava S. ; Kashyap B. K. ; Divvela P. K. ; Kumar S. ; Yandigeri M. ; Kashyap P. L. ; Srivastava A. K. ; et al. Functional Interplay between Antagonistic Bacteria and Rhizoctonia solani in the Tomato Plant Rhizosphere. Front. Microbiol. 2022, 13 , 990850 10.3389/fmicb.2022.990850.36225362 Jamiołkowska A. Natural compounds as elicitors of plant resistance against diseases and new biocontrol strategies. Agronomy 2020, 10 (2 ), 173 10.3390/agronomy10020173. Amna Ali B. ; Azeem M. A. ; Qayyum A. ; Mustafa G. ; Ahmad M. A. ; Javed M. T. ; Chaudhary H. J. Bio-Fabricated Silver Nanoparticles: A Sustainable Approach for Augmentation of Plant Growth and Pathogen Control. In Sustainable Agriculture Reviews, Vol. 53 ; Faizan M. , Hayat S. , Yu F. , Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp 345–371. 10.1007/978-3-030-86876-5_14. Mazid M. ; Khan T. A. Future of bio-fertilizers in Indian agriculture: an overview. Int. J. Agric. Food. Res. 2014, 3 (3 ), 10–23. 10.24102/ijafr.v3i3.132. Asad M. ; Khan R. R. ; Aljuboory A. B. ; Rashid M. H. ; Kumar U. ; Haq I. U. ; Hafeez A. ; Noureldeen A. ; Alharbi K. Toxic and antifeedant effects of different pesticidal plant extracts against beet armyworm (Spodoptera exigua). Phyton-International Journal of Experimental Botany 2023, 92 (4 ), 1161–1172. 10.32604/phyton.2023.026513. Zainab N. ; Amna ; Khan A. A. ; Azeem M. A. ; Ali B. ; Wang T. ; Shi F. ; Alghanem S. M. ; Hussain Munis M. F. ; Hashem M. ; Alamri S. ; Abdel Latef A. A. H. ; Ali O. M. ; Soliman M. H. ; Chaudhary H. J. PGPR-Mediated Plant Growth Attributes and Metal Extraction Ability of Sesbania sesban L. in Industrially Contaminated Soils. Agronomy 2021, 11 , 1820 10.3390/agronomy11091820. Singh A. ; Jain A. ; Sarma B. ; Upadhyay R. ; Singh H. Rhizosphere microbes facilitate redox homeostasis in Cicer arietinum against biotic stress. Annals of Applied Biology 2013, 163 (1 ), 33–46. 10.1111/aab.12030. Markande A. R. ; Kapagunta C. ; Patil P. S. ; Nayak B. B. Effective remediation of fish processing waste using mixed culture biofilms capable of simultaneous nitrification and denitrification. Journal of Basic Microbiology 2016, 56 (9 ), 1046–1050. 10.1002/jobm.201500723.27213464 Stover C. K. ; Pham X. Q. ; Erwin A. ; Mizoguchi S. ; Warrener P. ; Hickey M. ; Brinkman F. ; Hufnagle W. ; Kowalik D. ; Lagrou M. ; et al. Complete genome sequence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO1, an opportunistic pathogen. Nature 2000, 406 (6799 ), 959–964. 10.1038/35023079.10984043 Dimkić I. ; Janakiev T. ; Petrović M. ; Degrassi G. ; Fira D. Plant-associated Bacillus and Pseudomonas antimicrobial activities in plant disease suppression via biological control mechanisms-A review. Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology 2022, 117 , 101754 10.1016/j.pmpp.2021.101754. da Silva Faccioli Y. E. ; da Silva G. O. ; da Silva R. d. C. F. S. ; Sarubbo L. A. Application of a biosurfactant from Pseudomonas cepacia CCT 6659 in bioremediation and metallic corrosion inhibition processes. J. Biotechnol. 2022, 351 , 109–121. 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2022.04.009.35500704 Chandra D. ; Srivastava R. ; Glick B. R. ; Sharma A. K. Drought-tolerant Pseudomonas spp. improve the growth performance of finger millet (Eleusine coracana (L.) Gaertn.) under non-stressed and drought-stressed conditions. Pedosphere 2018, 28 (2 ), 227–240. 10.1016/S1002-0160(18)60013-X. Saranraj P. ; Sayyed R. ; Kokila M. ; Sudha A. ; Sivasakthivelan P. ; Devi M. D. ; Naz R. ; Yasmin H. , Plant Growth-Promoting and Biocontrol Metabolites Produced by Endophytic Pseudomonas fluorescence. In Secondary Metabolites and Volatiles of PGPR in Plant-Growth Promotion; Sayyed R. Z. , Uarrota V. G. , Eds.; Springer, 2022; pp 349–381. Karungi J. ; Kyamanywa S. ; Ekbom B. Organic soil fertility amendments and tritrophic relationships on cabbage in Uganda: Experiences from on-station and on-farm trials. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2010, 5 (21 ), 2862–2867. Rafiq M. ; Saqib M. ; Jawad H. ; Javed T. ; Hussain S. ; Arif M. ; Ali B. ; Bazmi M. S. A. ; Abbas G. ; Aziz M. ; et al. Improving quantitative and qualitative characteristics of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) through nitrogen application under semiarid conditions. Phyton 2023, 92 (4 ), 1001–1017. 10.32604/phyton.2023.025781. Singh P. ; Singh R. K. ; Li H.-B. ; Guo D.-J. ; Sharma A. ; Verma K. K. ; Solanki M. K. ; Upadhyay S. K. ; Lakshmanan P. ; Yang L.-T. ; et al. Nitrogen fixation and phytohormone stimulation of sugarcane plant through plant growth promoting diazotrophic Pseudomonas. Biotechnol. Genet. Eng. Rev. 2023, 10.1080/02648725.2023.2177814. Gaba S. ; Singh R. N. ; Abrol S. ; Yadav A. N. ; Saxena A. K. ; Kaushik R. Draft genome sequence of Halolamina pelagica CDK2 isolated from natural salterns from Rann of Kutch, Gujarat, India. Genome Announc. 2017, 5 (6 ), e01593-16 10.1128/genomeA.01593-16.28183764 Gupta V. ; Buch A. Pseudomonas aeruginosa predominates as multifaceted rhizospheric bacteria with combined abilities of P-solubilization and biocontrol. J. Pure Appl. Microbiol 2019, 13 (1 ), 319–328. 10.22207/JPAM.13.1.35. Gandhi R. ; Prittesh P. ; Jinal H. N. ; Chavan S. M. ; Paul D. ; Amaresan N. Evaluation of the effect of potassium solubilizing bacterial strains on the growth of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). J. Plant Nutr. 2023, 46 , 1479 10.1080/01904167.2022.2074859. Qessaoui R. ; Zanzan M. ; Ajerrar A. ; Lahmyed H. ; Boumair A. ; Tahzima R. ; Alouani M. ; Mayad E. H. ; Chebli B. ; Walters S. A. ; et al. Pseudomonas isolates as potential biofungicides of green mold (Penicillium digitatum) on orange fruit. Int. J. Fruit Sci. 2022, 22 (1 ), 142–150. 10.1080/15538362.2021.2018671. Zafar M. ; Ahmed S. ; Munir M. K. ; Zafar N. ; Saqib M. ; Sarwar M. A. ; Iqbal S. ; Ali B. ; Akhtar N. ; Ali B. ; Hussain S. ; Saeed M. ; Al-Sadoon M. K. ; Gulnaz A. Application of Zinc, Iron and Boron enhances productivity and grain biofortification of Mungbean. Phyton 2023, 92 (4 ), 983–999. 10.32604/phyton.2023.025813. Mehmood S. ; Khatoon Z. ; Amna ; Ahmad I. ; Muneer M. A. ; Kamran M. A. ; Ali J. ; Ali B. ; Chaudhary H. J. ; Munis M. F. H. Bacillus sp. PM31 harboring various plant growth-promoting activities regulates Fusarium dry rot and wilt tolerance in potato. Arch. Agron. Soil Sci. 2023, 69 , 197–211. 10.1080/03650340.2021.1971654. Ali B. ; Hafeez A. ; Javed M. A. ; Afridi M. S. ; Abbasi H. A. ; Qayyum A. ; Batool T. ; Ullah A. ; Marc R. A. ; Jaouni S. K. A. ; et al. Role of endophytic bacteria in salinity stress amelioration by physiological and molecular mechanisms of defense: A comprehensive review. S. Afr. J. Botany 2022, 151 , 33–46. 10.1016/j.sajb.2022.09.036. Bakker P. A. ; Berendsen R. L. ; Doornbos R. F. ; Wintermans P. C. ; Pieterse C. M. The rhizosphere revisited: root microbiomics. Frontiers in plant science 2013, 4 , 165 10.3389/fpls.2013.00165.23755059 Nakkeeran S. ; Marimuthu T. ; Raguchander T. , Exploring DAPG and phenazine producing PGPR strains and fungal antagonists for the management of diseases of Noni (Morinda citrifolia L). WNRF Technical Bulletin 11; World Noni Research Foundation, 2013; pp 289–312 Ali B. ; Hafeez A. ; Ahmad S. ; Javed M. A. ; Sumaira ; Afridi M. S. ; Dawoud T. M. ; Almaary K. S. ; Muresan C. C. ; Marc R. A. ; et al. Bacillus thuringiensis PM25 ameliorates oxidative damage of salinity stress in maize via regulating growth, leaf pigments, antioxidant defense system, and stress responsive gene expression. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13 , 921668 10.3389/fpls.2022.921668.35968151 Kumudini B. S. ; Jayamohan N. S. ; Patil S. V. Integrated mechanisms of plant disease containment by rhizospheric bacteria: Unraveling the signal cross talk between plant and fluorescent Pseudomonas. Agriculturally important microbes for sustainable agriculture 2017, 263–291. 10.1007/978-981-10-5343-6_9. Win K. T. ; Kobayashi M. ; Tanaka F. ; Takeuchi K. ; Oo A. Z. ; Jiang C.-J. Identification of Pseudomonas strains for the biological control of soybean red crown root rot. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12 , 14510 10.1038/s41598-022-18905-2.36008526 Wang Z. ; Zhong T. ; Chen K. ; Du M. ; Chen G. ; Chen X. ; Wang K. ; Zalán Z. ; Takács K. ; Kan J. Antifungal activity of volatile organic compounds produced by Pseudomonas fluorescens ZX and potential biocontrol of blue mold decay on postharvest citrus. Food Control 2021, 120 , 107499 10.1016/j.foodcont.2020.107499. Li X. ; Wang Q. ; Li H. ; Wang X. ; Zhang R. ; Yang X. ; Jiang Q. ; Shi Q. Revealing the Mechanisms for Linalool Antifungal Activity against Fusarium oxysporum and Its Efficient Control of Fusarium Wilt in Tomato Plants. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2023, 24 (1 ), 458 10.3390/ijms24010458. Song G. C. ; Im H. ; Jung J. ; Lee S. ; Jung M. Y. ; Rhee S. K. ; Ryu C. M. Plant growth-promoting archaea trigger induced systemic resistance in Arabidopsis thaliana against Pectobacterium carotovorum and Pseudomonas syringae. Environmental Microbiology 2019, 21 (3 ), 940–948. 10.1111/1462-2920.14486.30461142 Yang H.-R. ; Yuan J. ; Liu L.-H. ; Zhang W. ; Chen F. ; Dai C.-C. Endophytic Pseudomonas fluorescens induced sesquiterpenoid accumulation mediated by gibberellic acid and jasmonic acid in Atractylodes macrocephala Koidz plantlets. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture (PCTOC) 2019, 138 , 445–457. 10.1007/s11240-019-01640-4. Song Q. ; Deng X. ; Song R. ; Song X. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria promote growth of seedlings, regulate soil microbial community, and alleviate damping-off disease caused by Rhizoctonia solani on Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica. Plant Disease 2022, 106 (10 ), 2730–2740. 10.1094/PDIS-11-21-2562-RE.36094426 Sharma H. ; Haq M. A. ; Koshariya A. K. ; Kumar A. ; Rout S. ; Kaliyaperumal K. Pseudomonas fluorescens” as an Antagonist to Control Okra Root Rotting Fungi Disease in Plants. J. Food Quality 2022, 2022 , 5608543 10.1155/2022/5608543. Omidinasab M. ; Darvishnia M. Biological control of Rhizoctonia solani by Pseudomonas strains isolated from the rhizosphere. J. Microbial World 2018, 10 (4 ), 386–393. Yang X. ; Hong C. Biological control of Phytophthora blight by Pseudomonas protegens strain 14D5. European Journal of Plant Pathology 2020, 156 (2 ), 591–601. 10.1007/s10658-019-01909-6. Lapouge K. ; Schubert M. ; Allain F. H. T. ; Haas D. Gac/Rsm signal transduction pathway of γ-proteobacteria: from RNA recognition to regulation of social behaviour. Molecular microbiology 2008, 67 (2 ), 241–253. 10.1111/j.1365-2958.2007.06042.x.18047567 Jayamohan N. S. ; Patil S. V. ; Kumudini B. S. Seed priming with Pseudomonas putida isolated from rhizosphere triggers innate resistance against Fusarium wilt in tomato through pathogenesis-related protein activation and phenylpropanoid pathway. Pedosphere 2020, 30 (5 ), 651–660. 10.1016/S1002-0160(20)60027-3. Fernandez M. ; Godino A. ; Principe A. ; López Ramirez V. ; Quesada J. M. ; Rigo V. ; Espinosa-Urgel M. ; Morales G. M. ; Fischer S. Characterization of the bacteriocins and the PrtR regulator in a plant-associated Pseudomonas strain. J. Biotechnol. 2020, 307 , 182–192. 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2019.11.003.31697976 Crouzet J. ; Arguelles-Arias A. ; Dhondt-Cordelier S. ; Cordelier S. ; Pršić J. ; Hoff G. ; Mazeyrat-Gourbeyre F. ; Baillieul F. ; Clément C. ; Ongena M. ; et al. Biosurfactants in plant protection against diseases: Rhamnolipids and lipopeptides case study. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2020, 8 , 1014 10.3389/fbioe.2020.01014.33015005 Mehnaz S. ; Bechthold A. ; Gross H. Draft genome sequence of Pseudomonas chlororaphis subsp. aurantiaca ARS-38, a bacterial strain with plant growth promotion potential, isolated from the rhizosphere of cotton in Pakistan. Microbiology Resource Announcements 2020, 9 (3 ), e01398-19 10.1128/MRA.01398-19.31948966 Saranraj P. ; Sayyed R. ; Kokila M. ; Salomi V. ; Sivasakthivelan P. ; Manigandan M. ; Mawar R. , Evolving Concepts of Biocontrol of Phytopathogens by Endophytic Pseudomonas Fluorescence. In Plant Growth Promoting Microorganisms of Arid Region; Mawar R. , Sayyed R. Z. , Sharma S. K. , Sattiraju K. S. , Eds.; Springer, 2023; pp 365–388. Monnier N. ; Cordier M. ; Dahi A. ; Santoni V. ; Guénin S. ; Clément C. ; Sarazin C. ; Penaud A. ; Dorey S. ; Cordelier S. ; et al. Semipurified rhamnolipid mixes protect Brassica napus against Leptosphaeria maculans early infections. Phytopathology 2020, 110 (4 ), 834–842. 10.1094/PHYTO-07-19-0275-R.31880985 Sandhya V. ; Ali S. Z. The production of exopolysaccharide by Pseudomonas putida GAP-P45 under various abiotic stress conditions and its role in soil aggregation. Microbiology 2015, 84 (4 ), 512–519. 10.1134/S0026261715040153.27169240 Phour M. ; Sindhu S. S. Amelioration of salinity stress and growth stimulation of mustard (Brassica juncea L.) by salt-tolerant Pseudomonas species. Applied Soil Ecology 2020, 149 , 103518 10.1016/j.apsoil.2020.103518. Sarma R. K. ; Saikia R. Alleviation of drought stress in mung bean by strain Pseudomonas aeruginosa GGRJ21. Plant and soil 2014, 377 (1 ), 111–126. 10.1007/s11104-013-1981-9. Nordstedt N. P. ; Chapin L. J. ; Taylor C. G. ; Jones M. L. Identification of Pseudomonas Spp. that increase ornamental crop quality during abiotic stress. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 10 , 1754 10.3389/fpls.2019.01754.32047507 Schapira J. ; Rumbold K. ; Bolhar R. ; Master S. ; Le Bras L. Rhizosphere competence and abiotic stress tolerance of commercially sold Pseudomonas fluorescens biofertilizers: Implications for their bioremediation potential. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 2022, 21 (8 ), 396–407. Al-Zaban M. I. ; Alhag S. K. ; Dablool A. S. ; Ahmed A. E. ; Alghamdi S. ; Ali B. ; Al-Saeed F. A. ; Saleem M. H. ; Poczai P. Manufactured Nano-Objects Confer Viral Protection against Cucurbit Chlorotic Yellows Virus (CCYV) Infecting Nicotiana benthamiana. Microorganisms 2022, 10 , 1837 10.3390/microorganisms10091837.36144438 Agaras B. C. ; Scandiani M. ; Luque A. ; Fernández L. ; Farina F. ; Carmona M. ; Gally M. ; Romero A. ; Wall L. ; Valverde C. Quantification of the potential biocontrol and direct plant growth promotion abilities based on multiple biological traits distinguish different groups of Pseudomonas spp. isolates. Biological Control 2015, 90 , 173–186. 10.1016/j.biocontrol.2015.07.003. Yasin M. ; Anwar F. ; Noorani H. ; Muhammad S. ; Mahmood A. ; Javed T. ; Ali B. ; Alharbi K. ; Saleh I. A. ; Abu-Harirah H. A. Evaluating Non-Composted Red Cotton Tree (Bombax ceiba) Sawdust Mixtures for Raising Okra (Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Moench) in Pots. Agronomy 2023, 13 , 97 10.3390/agronomy13010097. Zhan J. ; Thrall P. H. ; Papaïx J. ; Xie L. ; Burdon J. J. Playing on a pathogen’s weakness: using evolution to guide sustainable plant disease control strategies. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol 2015, 53 (1 ), 19–43. 10.1146/annurev-phyto-080614-120040.25938275 El-Nahhal I. ; El-Nahhal Y. Pesticide residues in drinking water, their potential risk to human health and removal options. Journal of Environmental Management 2021, 299 , 113611 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113611.34526283 Lucas J. Advances in plant disease and pest management. Journal of Agricultural Science 2011, 149 (S1 ), 91–114. 10.1017/S0021859610000997. Bailey K. Canadian innovations in microbial biopesticides. Canadian Journal of Plant Pathology 2010, 32 (2 ), 113–121. 10.1080/07060661.2010.484195. Fones H. N. ; Bebber D. P. ; Chaloner T. M. ; Kay W. T. ; Steinberg G. ; Gurr S. J. Threats to global food security from emerging fungal and oomycete crop pathogens. Nature Food 2020, 1 (6 ), 332–342. 10.1038/s43016-020-0075-0.37128085 Gay H. Before and after Silent Spring: From chemical pesticides to biological control and integrated pest management—Britain, 1945–1980. Ambix 2012, 59 (2 ), 88–108. 10.1179/174582312X13345259995930.23057183 Ahmad M. ; Nadeem S. M. ; Naveed M. ; Zahir Z. A. Potassium-solubilizing bacteria and their application in agriculture. Potassium solubilizing microorganisms for sustainable agriculture 2016, 293–313. 10.1007/978-81-322-2776-2_21. Donley N. The USA lags behind other agricultural nations in banning harmful pesticides. Environ. Health 2019, 18 , 44 10.1186/s12940-019-0488-0.31170989 Yadav S. ; Yadav S. ; Kaushik R. ; Saxena A. K. ; Arora D. K. Genetic and functional diversity of fluorescent Pseudomonas from rhizospheric soils of wheat crop. Journal of Basic Microbiology 2014, 54 (5 ), 425–437. 10.1002/jobm.201200384.23681594 Singh P. ; Singh R. K. ; Guo D.-J. ; Sharma A. ; Singh R. N. ; Li D.-P. ; Malviya M. K. ; Song X.-P. ; Lakshmanan P. ; Yang L.-T. ; et al. Whole genome analysis of sugarcane root-associated endophyte Pseudomonas aeruginosa B18—A plant growth-promoting bacterium with antagonistic potential against Sporisorium scitamineum. Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12 , 628376 10.3389/fmicb.2021.628376.33613496 Reinhardt J. A. ; Baltrus D. A. ; Nishimura M. T. ; Jeck W. R. ; Jones C. D. ; Dangl J. L. De novo assembly using low-coverage short read sequence data from the rice pathogen Pseudomonas syringae pv.. oryzae. Genome research 2009, 19 (2 ), 294–305. 10.1101/gr.083311.108.19015323 Raghavendra M. ; Chandra Nayaka S. ; Nuthan B. , Role of rhizosphere microflora in potassium solubilization. In Potassium solubilizing microorganisms for sustainable agriculture; Meena V. S. , Maurya B. R. , Verma J. P. , Meena R. S. , Eds.; Springer, 2016; pp 43–59. Sah S. ; Singh R. Phylogenetical coherence of Pseudomonas in unexplored soils of Himalayan region. 3 Biotech 2016, 6 , 170 10.1007/s13205-016-0493-8. Chubukova O. ; Khakimova L. ; Akimova E. ; Vershinina Z. Phylogeny and Properties of New Pseudomonas spp. from the rhizosphere of Southern Ural leguminous plants. Microbiology 2022, 91 (5 ), 489–496. 10.1134/S0026261722800244. Höfte M. ; Altier N. Fluorescent pseudomonads as biocontrol agents for sustainable agricultural systems. Research in Microbiology 2010, 161 (6 ), 464–471. 10.1016/j.resmic.2010.04.007.20457252 Kashid S. ; Joshi K. ; More S. ; Shinde A. ; Nene S. Enhanced Productivity of Fragrance Compounds: Biotransformation of d-limonene Using Whole Cell Immobilization of Pseudomonas putida and Rhodococcus erythropolis. J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. E 2023, 104 , 83 10.1007/s40034-022-00252-6. Raaijmakers J. M. ; Mazzola M. Diversity and natural functions of antibiotics produced by beneficial and plant pathogenic bacteria. Annual review of phytopathology 2012, 50 , 403–424. 10.1146/annurev-phyto-081211-172908. Shahid M. ; Singh U. B. ; Ilyas T. ; Malviya D. ; Vishwakarma S. K. ; Shafi Z. ; Yadav B. ; Singh H. V. Bacterial Inoculants for Control of Fungal Diseases in Solanum lycopersicum L.(Tomatoes): A Comprehensive Overview. Rhizosphere Microbes 2022, 40 , 311–339. 10.1007/978-981-19-5872-4_15. Gaweska H. M. ; Taylor A. B. ; Hart P. J. ; Fitzpatrick P. F. Structure of the flavoprotein tryptophan 2-monooxygenase, a key enzyme in the formation of galls in plants. Biochemistry 2013, 52 (15 ), 2620–2626. 10.1021/bi4001563.23521653 Markande A. R. ; Mikaelyan A. ; Nayak B. B. ; Patel K. D. ; Vachharajani N. B. ; Vennila A. ; Rajendran K. V. ; Purushothaman C. S. Analysis of midgut bacterial community structure of Neanthes chilkaensis from polluted mudflats of Gorai, Mumbai, India. Adv. Microbiol. 2014, 4 (13 ), 906 10.4236/aim.2014.413101. Ali B. ; Wang X. ; Saleem M. H. ; Azeem M. A. ; Afridi M. S. ; Nadeem M. ; Ghazal M. ; Batool T. ; Qayyum A. ; Alatawi A. ; et al. Bacillus mycoides PM35 Reinforces Photosynthetic Efficiency, Antioxidant Defense, Expression of Stress-Responsive Genes, and Ameliorates the Effects of Salinity Stress in Maize. Life 2022, 12 , 219 10.3390/life12020219.35207506 Ali B. ; Wang X. ; Saleem M. H. ; Sumaira ; Hafeez A. ; Afridi M. S. ; Khan S. ; Zaib-Un-Nisa ; Ullah I. ; Amaral Júnior A. T. ; et al. PGPR-Mediated Salt Tolerance in Maize by Modulating Plant Physiology, Antioxidant Defense, Compatible Solutes Accumulation and Bio-Surfactant Producing Genes. Plants 2022, 11 , 345 10.3390/plants11030345.35161325 Afridi M. S. ; Ali S. ; Salam A. ; César Terra W. ; Hafeez A. ; Sumaira ; Ali B. ; S. AlTami M. ; Ameen F. ; Ercisli S. ; Marc R. A. ; Medeiros F. H. V. ; Karunakaran R. Plant Microbiome Engineering: Hopes or Hypes. Biology 2022, 11 , 1782 10.3390/biology11121782.36552290 Afridi M. S. ; Javed M. A. ; Ali S. ; De Medeiros F. H. V. ; Ali B. ; Salam A. ; Sumaira ; Marc R. A. ; Alkhalifah D. H. M. ; Selim S. ; Santoyo G. New opportunities in plant microbiome engineering for increasing agricultural sustainability under stressful conditions. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13 , 899464 10.3389/fpls.2022.899464.36186071 Muhammad H. ; Fahad S. ; Saud S. ; Hassan S. ; Nasim W. ; Ali B. ; Hammad H. M. ; Bakhat H. F. ; Mubeen M. ; Khan A. Z. ; Liu K. ; Harrison M. T. ; AbdElgawad H. ; Abdel-Maksoud M. A. A Paradigm Shift towards Beneficial Microbes Enhancing the Efficiency of Organic and Inorganic Nitrogen Sources for a Sustainable Environment. Land 2023, 12 , 680 10.3390/land12030680. Sivasakthi S. ; Usharani G. ; Saranraj P. Biocontrol potentiality of plant growth promoting bacteria (PGPR)-Pseudomonas fluorescens and Bacillus subtilis: A review. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2014, 9 (16 ), 1265–1277. Morris C. E. ; Lamichhane J. R. ; Nikolić I. ; Stanković S. ; Moury B. The overlapping continuum of host range among strains in the Pseudomonas syringae complex. Phytopathol. Res. 2019, 1 , 4 10.1186/s42483-018-0010-6. Rokhzadi A. ; Asgharzadeh A. ; Darvish F. ; Nour-Mohammadi G. ; Majidi E. Influence of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria on dry matter accumulation and yield of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) under field conditions. American-Eurasian J. Agric Environ. Sci. 2008, 3 (2 ), 253–257. Jain A. ; Singh A. ; Singh S. ; Singh V. ; Singh H. B. Comparative proteomic analysis in pea treated with microbial consortia of beneficial microbes reveals changes in the protein network to enhance resistance against Sclerotinia sclerotiorum. Journal of plant physiology 2015, 182 , 79–94. 10.1016/j.jplph.2015.05.004.26067380 Liu C.-H. ; Siew W. ; Hung Y.-T. ; Jiang Y.-T. ; Huang C.-H. 1-Aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate (ACC) deaminase gene in Pseudomonas azotoformans is associated with the amelioration of salinity stress in tomato. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2021, 69 (3 ), 913–921. 10.1021/acs.jafc.0c05628.33464897 Adeniji A. A. ; Babalola O. O. Evaluation of Pseudomonas fulva PS9. 1 and Bacillus velezensis NWUMFkBS10. 5 as Candidate Plant Growth Promoters during Maize-Fusarium Interaction. Plants 2022, 11 (3 ), 324 10.3390/plants11030324.35161305 Dadnia M. R. ; Moaveni P. Response of corn (Zea mays L.) production in response to PGPRs under different rates of phosphorus. Res. Crops 2011, 12 (2 ), 352–355. Jarak M. ; Mrkovački N. ; Bjelić D. ; Jošić D. ; Hajnal-Jafari T. ; Stamenov D. Effects of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on maize in greenhouse and field trial. Afr. J. Microbiol. Res. 2012, 6 (27 ), 5683–5690. 10.5897/AJMR12.759. Negi Y. K. ; Garg S. ; Kumar J. Cold-tolerant fluorescent Pseudomonas isolates from Garhwal Himalayas as potential plant growth promoting and biocontrol agents in pea. Curr. Sci. 2005, 89 , 2151–2156. Bona E. ; Cantamessa S. ; Massa N. ; Manassero P. ; Marsano F. ; Copetta A. ; Lingua G. ; D’Agostino G. ; Gamalero E. ; Berta G. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and plant growth-promoting pseudomonads improve yield, quality and nutritional value of tomato: a field study. Mycorrhiza 2017, 27 (1 ), 1–11. 10.1007/s00572-016-0727-y.27539491 Dashti N. H. ; Ali N. Y. ; Cherian V. M. ; Montasser M. S. Application of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) in combination with a mild strain of Cucumber mosaic virus (CMV) associated with viral satellite RNAs to enhance growth and protection against a virulent strain of CMV in tomato. Canadian Journal of plant pathology 2012, 34 (2 ), 177–186. 10.1080/07060661.2012.685495. Ghorbanpour M. ; Hatami M. ; Khavazi K. Role of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on antioxidant enzyme activities and tropane alkaloid production of Hyoscyamus niger under water deficit stress. Turk. J. Biol. 2013, 37 (3 ), 350–360. 10.3906/biy-1209-12. Shen M. ; Kang Y. J. ; Wang H. L. ; Zhang X. S. ; Zhao Q. X. Effect of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPRs) on plant growth, yield, and quality of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) under simulated seawater irrigation. J. Gen. Appl. Microbiol. 2012, 58 (4 ), 253–262. 10.2323/jgam.58.253.22990485 Trinh C. S. ; Lee H. ; Lee W. J. ; Lee S. J. ; Chung N. ; Han J. ; Kim J. ; Hong S.-W. ; Lee H. Evaluation of the plant growth-promoting activity of Pseudomonas nitroreducens in Arabidopsis thaliana and Lactuca sativa. Plant cell reports 2018, 37 (6 ), 873–885. 10.1007/s00299-018-2275-8.29541882 Sharma A. ; Shankhdhar D. ; Shankhdhar S. Enhancing grain iron content of rice by the application of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria. Plant, Soil and Environment 2013, 59 (2 ), 89–94. 10.17221/683/2012-PSE. García-Seco D. ; Bonilla A. ; Algar E. ; García-Villaraco A. ; Mañero J. G. ; Ramos-Solano B. Enhanced blackberry production using Pseudomonas fluorescens as elicitor. Agronomy for sustainable development 2013, 33 (2 ), 385–392. 10.1007/s13593-012-0103-z. Hou M. P. ; Oluranti B. O. Evaluation of plant growth promoting potential of four rhizobacterial species for indigenous system. Journal of Central South University 2013, 20 (1 ), 164–171. 10.1007/s11771-013-1472-4. Kumar A. ; Vandana ; Singh M. ; Singh P. P. ; Singh S. K. ; Singh P. K. ; Pandey K. D. Isolation of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria and their impact on growth and curcumin content in Curcuma longa L. Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol. 2016, 8 , 1–7. 10.1016/j.bcab.2016.07.002. Ullah S. ; Bano A. ; Ullah A. ; Shahid M. A. ; Khan N. A comparative study of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) and sowing methods on nutrient availability in wheat and rhizosphere soil under salinity stress. Rhizosphere 2022, 23 , 100571 10.1016/j.rhisph.2022.100571. Sharma S. K. ; Johri B. N. ; Ramesh A. ; Joshi O. P. ; Sai Prasad S. Selection of plant growth-promoting Pseudomonas spp. that enhanced productivity of soybean-wheat cropping system in central India. Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology 2011, 21 (11 ), 1127–1142. 10.4014/jmb.1012.12018.22127123 Shaharoona B. ; Jamro G. ; Zahir Z. ; Arshad M. ; Memon K. Effectiveness of various Pseudomonas spp. and Burkholderia caryophylli containing ACC-deaminase for improving growth and yield of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2007, 17 (8 ), 1300–1307.18051598 Jahanian A. ; Chaichi M. ; Rezaei K. ; Rezayazdi K. ; Khavazi K. The effect of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) on germination and primary growth of artichoke (Cynara scolymus). Int. J. Agric. Crop Sci. 2012, 4 (14 ), 923–929. Kandasamy S. ; Loganathan K. ; Muthuraj R. ; Duraisamy S. ; Seetharaman S. ; Thiruvengadam R. ; Ponnusamy B. ; Ramasamy S. Understanding the molecular basis of plant growth promotional effect of Pseudomonas fluorescens on rice through protein profiling. Proteome Sci. 2009, 7 , 47 10.1186/1477-5956-7-47.20034395 Aeron A. ; Khare E. ; Jha C. K. ; Meena V. S. ; Aziz S. M. A. ; Islam M. T. ; Kim K. ; Meena S. K. ; Pattanayak A. ; Rajashekara H. ; et al. Revisiting the plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria: lessons from the past and objectives for the future. Arch. Microbio. 2020, 202 (4 ), 665–676. 10.1007/s00203-019-01779-w. Novello G. ; Cesaro P. ; Bona E. ; Massa N. ; Gosetti F. ; Scarafoni A. ; Todeschini V. ; Berta G. ; Lingua G. ; Gamalero E. The effects of plant growth-promoting bacteria with biostimulant features on the growth of a local onion cultivar and a commercial zucchini variety. Agronomy 2021, 11 (5 ), 888 10.3390/agronomy11050888. Linu M. ; Asok A. K. ; Thampi M. ; Sreekumar J. ; Jisha M. Plant growth promoting traits of indigenous phosphate solubilizing Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from Chilli (Capsicum annuum L.) Rhizosphere. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2019, 50 (4 ), 444–457. 10.1080/00103624.2019.1566469. Wani P. ; Khan M. ; Zaidi A. Co-inoculation of nitrogen-fixing and phosphate-solubilizing bacteria to promote growth, yield and nutrient uptake in chickpea. Acta Agronomica Hungarica 2007, 55 (3 ), 315–323. 10.1556/AAgr.55.2007.3.7. Combes-Meynet E. ; Pothier J. F. ; Moënne-Loccoz Y. ; Prigent-Combaret C. The Pseudomonas secondary metabolite 2, 4-diacetylphloroglucinol is a signal inducing rhizoplane expression of Azospirillum genes involved in plant-growth promotion. Molecular plant-microbe interactions 2011, 24 (2 ), 271–284. 10.1094/MPMI-07-10-0148.21043573 Kang B. R. ; Yang K. Y. ; Cho B. H. ; Han T. H. ; Kim I. S. ; Lee M. C. ; Anderson A. J. ; Kim Y. C. Production of indole-3-acetic acid in the plant-beneficial strain Pseudomonas chlororaphis O6 is negatively regulated by the global sensor kinase GacS. Current microbiology 2006, 52 (6 ), 473–476. 10.1007/s00284-005-0427-x.16732458 Verma P. ; Yadav A. N. ; Kumar V. ; Singh D. P. ; Saxena A. K. , Beneficial plant-microbes interactions: biodiversity of microbes from diverse extreme environments and its impact for crop improvement. In Plant-microbe interactions in agro-ecological perspectives; Singh D. P. , Singh H. B. , Pabha R. , Eds.; Springer, 2017; pp 543–580. Adnan M. ; Fahad S. ; Saleem M. H. ; Ali B. ; Mussart M. ; Ullah R. ; Arif M. ; Ahmad M. ; Shah W. A. ; Romman M. ; et al. Comparative efficacy of phosphorous supplements with phosphate solubilizing bacteria for optimizing wheat yield in calcareous soils. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12 , 11997 10.1038/s41598-022-16035-3.35835850 Aasfar A. ; Bargaz A. ; Yaakoubi K. ; Hilali A. ; Bennis I. ; Zeroual Y. ; Meftah Kadmiri I. Nitrogen fixing Azotobacter species as potential soil biological enhancers for crop nutrition and yield stability. Frontiers in microbiology 2021, 12 , 628379 10.3389/fmicb.2021.628379.33717018 Panpatte D. G. ; Jhala Y. K. ; Shelat H. N. ; Vyas R. V. , Pseudomonas fluorescens: a promising biocontrol agent and PGPR for sustainable agriculture. In Microbial inoculants in sustainable agricultural productivity; Singh D. P. , Singh H. B. , Prabha R. , Eds.; Springer: 2016; pp 257–270. Desnoues N. ; Lin M. ; Guo X. ; Ma L. ; Carreño-Lopez R. ; Elmerich C. Nitrogen fixation genetics and regulation in a Pseudomonas stutzeri strain associated with rice. Microbiology 2003, 149 (8 ), 2251–2262. 10.1099/mic.0.26270-0.12904565 Shrivastava S. ; Egamberdieva D. ; Varma A. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) and medicinal plants: The state of the art. Plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) and medicinal plants 2015, 42 , 1–16. 10.1007/978-3-319-13401-7_1. Ahmad M. ; Ishaq M. ; Shah W. A. ; Adnan M. ; Fahad S. ; Saleem M. H. ; Khan F. U. ; Mussarat M. ; Khan S. ; Ali B. ; et al. Managing Phosphorus Availability from Organic and Inorganic Sources for Optimum Wheat Production in Calcareous Soils. Sustainability 2022, 14 , 7669 10.3390/su14137669. Oteino N. ; Lally R. D. ; Kiwanuka S. ; Lloyd A. ; Ryan D. ; Germaine K. J. ; Dowling D. N. Plant growth promotion induced by phosphate solubilizing endophytic Pseudomonas isolates. Front. Microbiol. 2015, 6 , 745 10.3389/fmicb.2015.00745.26257721 Ajilogba C. F. ; Babalola O. O. Integrated management strategies for tomato Fusarium wilt. Biocontrol Sci. 2013, 18 (3 ), 117–127. 10.4265/bio.18.117.24077535 Mahmud A. A. ; Upadhyay S. K. ; Srivastava A. K. ; Bhojiya A. A. Biofertilizers: A Nexus between soil fertility and crop productivity under abiotic stress. Current Research in Environmental Sustainability 2021, 3 , 100063 10.1016/j.crsust.2021.100063. Rijavec T. ; Lapanje A. Hydrogen cyanide in the rhizosphere: not suppressing plant pathogens, but rather regulating availability of phosphate. Front. Microbiol. 2016, 7 , 1785 10.3389/fmicb.2016.01785.27917154 Mozumder A. B. ; Chanda K. ; Chorei R. ; Prasad H. K. An Evaluation of Aluminum Tolerant Pseudomonas aeruginosa A7 for In Vivo Suppression of Fusarium Wilt of Chickpea Caused by Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. ciceris and Growth Promotion of Chickpea. Microorganisms 2022, 10 (3 ), 568 10.3390/microorganisms10030568.35336143 Ryall B. ; Mitchell H. ; Mossialos D. ; Williams H. Cyanogenesis by the entomopathogenic bacterium Pseudomonas entomophila. Letters in applied microbiology 2009, 49 (1 ), 131–135. 10.1111/j.1472-765X.2009.02632.x.19486283 Ansari F. A. ; Ahmad I. Fluorescent Pseudomonas-FAP2 and Bacillus licheniformis interact positively in biofilm mode enhancing plant growth and photosynthetic attributes. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9 , 4547 10.1038/s41598-019-40864-4.30872708 David B. V. ; Chandrasehar G. ; Selvam P. N. , Pseudomonas fluorescens: a plant-growth-promoting rhizobacterium (PGPR) with potential role in biocontrol of pests of crops. In Crop improvement through microbial biotechnology; Prasad R. , Gill S. S. , Tuteja N. , Eds.; Elsevier, 2018; pp 221–243. Bouizgarne B. , Bacteria for plant growth promotion and disease management. In Bacteria in agrobiology: disease management; Maheshwari D. K. , Ed.; Springer: 2013; pp 15–47. Kumar A. ; Verma H. ; Singh V. K. ; Singh P. P. ; Singh S. K. ; Ansari W. A. ; Yadav A. ; Singh P. ; Pandey K. , Role of Pseudomonas sp. in sustainable agriculture and disease management. In Agriculturally important microbes for sustainable agriculture; Meena V. S. , Mishra P. K. , Bisht J. K. , Pattanayak A. , Eds.; Springer, 2017; pp 195–215. Zahir Z. A. ; Arshad M. ; Frankenberger W. Plant growth promoting. Advances in agronomy 2003, 81 , 97 10.1016/S0065-2113(03)81003-9. Ji J. ; Yuan D. ; Jin C. ; Wang G. ; Li X. ; Guan C. Enhancement of growth and salt tolerance of rice seedlings (Oryza sativa L.) by regulating ethylene production with a novel halotolerant PGPR strain Glutamicibacter sp. YD01 containing ACC deaminase activity. Acta Physiol. Plant. 2020, 42 , 42 10.1007/s11738-020-3034-3. Tariq M. ; Khan A. ; Asif M. ; Khan F. ; Ansari T. ; Shariq M. ; Siddiqui M. A. Biological control: a sustainable and practical approach for plant disease management. Acta Agric. Scand. B. 2020, 70 (6 ), 507–524. 10.1080/09064710.2020.1784262. Shaikh S. ; Sayyed R. , Role of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria and their formulation in biocontrol of plant diseases. In Plant microbes symbiosis: applied facets; Arora N. K. , Ed.; bSpringer: 2014; pp 337–351. Shaikh S. ; Yadav N. ; Markande A. R. Interactive potential of Pseudomonas species with plants. J. App. Biol. Biotech. 2020, 8 (6 ), 101–111. 10.7324/JABB.2020.80616. Saharan B. ; Nehra V. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria: a critical review. Life Sci. Med. Res. 2011, 21 , 30. Khan M. S. ; Gao J. ; Zhang M. ; Xue J. ; Zhang X. Pseudomonas aeruginosa Ld-08 isolated from Lilium davidii exhibits antifungal and growth-promoting properties. PLoS One 2022, 17 (6 ), e0269640 10.1371/journal.pone.0269640.35714148 Jain A. ; Das S. Insight into the interaction between plants and associated fluorescent Pseudomonas spp. Int. J. Agron. 2016, 2016 , 4269010 10.1155/2016/4269010. Galileya Medison R. ; Banda Medison M. ; Tan L. ; Sun Z. ; Zhou Y. Efficacy of Beneficial Microbes in Sustainable Management of Plant Parasitic Nematodes: A Review. Int. J. Plant Soil Sci. 2021, 33 , 119–139. 10.9734/ijpss/2021/v33i2330728. Singh H. Management of plant pathogens with microorganisms. Proc. Indian Natn. Sci. Acad. 2014, 80 , 443–454. 10.16943/ptinsa/2014/v80i2/55120. Santoyo G. ; Orozco-Mosqueda M. d. C. ; Govindappa M. Mechanisms of biocontrol and plant growth-promoting activity in soil bacterial species of Bacillus and Pseudomonas: a review. Biocontrol Science and Technology 2012, 22 (8 ), 855–872. 10.1080/09583157.2012.694413. Kannojia P. ; Choudhary K. K. ; Srivastava A. K. ; Singh A. K. , PGPR bioelicitors: induced systemic resistance (ISR) and proteomic perspective on biocontrol. In PGPR amelioration in sustainable agriculture; Singh A. K. , Kumar A. , Singh P. K. , Eds.; Elsevier, 2019; pp 67–84. Ali J. ; Jan I. ; Ullah H. ; Fahad S. ; Saud S. ; Adnan M. ; Ali B. ; Liu K. ; Harrison M. T. ; Hassan S. ; Kumar S. ; Khan M. A. ; Kamran M. ; Alwahibi M. S. ; Elshikh M. S. Biochemical Response of Okra (Abelmoschus esculentus L.) to Selenium (Se) under Drought Stress. Sustainability 2023, 15 , 5694 10.3390/su15075694. Ma J. ; Ali S. ; Saleem M. H. ; Mumtaz S. ; Yasin G. ; Ali B. ; Al-Ghamdi A. A. ; Elshikh M. S. ; Vodnar D. C. ; Marc R. A. ; et al. Short-term responses of Spinach (Spinacia oleracea L.) to the individual and combinatorial effects of Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium and silicon in the soil contaminated by boron. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13 , 983156 10.3389/fpls.2022.983156.36212291 Ma J. ; Saleem M. H. ; Ali B. ; Rasheed R. ; Ashraf M. A. ; Aziz H. ; Ercisli S. ; Riaz S. ; Elsharkawy M. M. ; Hussain I. ; et al. Impact of foliar application of syringic acid on tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) under heavy metal stress-insights into nutrient uptake, redox homeostasis, oxidative stress, and antioxidant defense. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13 , 950120 10.3389/fpls.2022.950120.36092395 Wu Y. ; Ma L. ; Liu Q. ; Sikder M. M. ; Vestergård M. ; Zhou K. ; Wang Q. ; Yang X. ; Feng Y. Pseudomonas fluorescens promote photosynthesis, carbon fixation and cadmium phytoremediation of hyperaccumulator Sedum alfredii. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 726 , 138554 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138554.32305763 Kumar A. ; Tripti ; Voropaeva O. ; Maleva M. ; Panikovskaya K. ; Borisova G. ; Rajkumar M. ; Bruno L. B. Bioaugmentation with copper tolerant endophyte Pseudomonas lurida strain EOO26 for improved plant growth and copper phytoremediation by Helianthus annuus. Chemosphere 2021, 266 , 128983 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.128983.33272662 Nishu S. D. ; No J. H. ; Lee T. K. Transcriptional response and plant growth promoting activity of Pseudomonas fluorescens DR397 under drought stress conditions. Microbiol. Spectr. 2022, 10 (4 ), e00979-22 10.1128/spectrum.00979-22.35863006 Malik S. S. ; Sudalaimuthuasari N. ; Kundu B. ; AlMaskari R. S. ; Mundra S. Contrasting genome patterns of two pseudomonas strains isolated from the date palm rhizosphere to assess survival in a hot arid environment. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2022, 38 (11 ), 207 10.1007/s11274-022-03392-4.36008694 Berni R. ; Hausman J.-F. ; Villas-Boas S. ; Guerriero G. Impact of Pseudomonas sp. SVB-B33 on Stress-and Cell Wall-Related Genes in Roots and Leaves of Hemp under Salinity. Horticulturae 2022, 8 (4 ), 336 10.3390/horticulturae8040336. Palmgren M. G. ; Edenbrandt A. K. ; Vedel S. E. ; Andersen M. M. ; Landes X. ; Østerberg J. T. ; Falhof J. ; Olsen L. I. ; Christensen S. B. ; Sandøe P. ; et al. Are we ready for back-to-nature crop breeding?. Trends in plant science 2015, 20 (3 ), 155–164. 10.1016/j.tplants.2014.11.003.25529373 Gade R. ; Koche M. D. , Enhancing the growth and disease suppression ability of Pseudomonas fluorescens. In New and Future Developments in Microbial Biotechnology and Bioengineering; Singh H. B. , Vaishnav A. , Eds.; Elsevier, 2022; pp 351–368. Berg G. ; Smalla K. Plant species and soil type cooperatively shape the structure and function of microbial communities in the rhizosphere. FEMS microbiology ecology 2009, 68 (1 ), 1–13. 10.1111/j.1574-6941.2009.00654.x.19243436 Ghadamgahi F. ; Tarighi S. ; Taheri P. ; Saripella G. V. ; Anzalone A. ; Kalyandurg P. B. ; Catara V. ; Ortiz R. ; Vetukuri R. R. Plant Growth-Promoting Activity of Pseudomonas aeruginosa FG106 and its ability to act as a biocontrol agent against potato, tomato and taro pathogens. Biology 2022, 11 (1 ), 140 10.3390/biology11010140.35053136 Flores-Vargas R. ; O’hara G. Isolation and characterization of rhizosphere bacteria with potential for biological control of weeds in vineyards. Journal of applied microbiology 2006, 100 (5 ), 946–954. 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2006.02851.x.16629995 Sekar J. ; Prabavathy V. R. Novel Phl-producing genotypes of finger millet rhizosphere associated pseudomonads and assessment of their functional and genetic diversity. FEMS Microbiology Ecology 2014, 89 (1 ), 32–46. 10.1111/1574-6941.12354.24819774 Jegan S. ; Baskaran V. ; Ganga V. ; Kathiravan R. ; Prabavathy V. , Rhizomicrobiome–a biological software to augment soil fertility and plant induced systemic tolerance under abiotic stress. Microbes for plant stress management; Bagyaraj D. J. , Jamaluddin , Eds.; New India Publishing Agency: New Delhi, India, 2016; pp 25–53. Akram A. ; Ongena M. ; Duby F. ; Dommes J. ; Thonart P. Systemic resistance and lipoxygenase-related defence response induced in tomato by Pseudomonas putidastrain BTP1. BMC Plant Biol. 2008, 8 , 113 10.1186/1471-2229-8-113.19000301 Kumar V. ; Kumar A. ; Pandey K. D. ; Roy B. K. Isolation and characterization of bacterial endophytes from the roots of Cassia tora L. Annals of microbiology 2015, 65 (3 ), 1391–1399. 10.1007/s13213-014-0977-x. Raaijmakers J. M. ; Vlami M. ; De Souza J. T. Antibiotic production by bacterial biocontrol agents. Antonie van leeuwenhoek 2002, 81 (1 ), 537–547. 10.1023/A:1020501420831.12448749 Gross H. ; Loper J. E. Genomics of secondary metabolite production by Pseudomonas spp. Natural product reports 2009, 26 (11 ), 1408–1446. 10.1039/b817075b.19844639 Paulsen I. T. ; Press C. M. ; Ravel J. ; Kobayashi D. Y. ; Myers G. S. ; Mavrodi D. V. ; DeBoy R. T. ; Seshadri R. ; Ren Q. ; Madupu R. ; et al. Complete genome sequence of the plant commensal Pseudomonas fluorescens Pf-5. Nat. Biotechnol. 2005, 23 (7 ), 873–878. 10.1038/nbt1110.15980861 Pérez-Montaño F. ; Alías-Villegas C. ; Bellogín R. ; Del Cerro P. ; Espuny M. ; Jiménez-Guerrero I. ; López-Baena F. J. ; Ollero F. ; Cubo T. Plant growth promotion in cereal and leguminous agricultural important plants: from microorganism capacities to crop production. Microbiological research 2014, 169 (5–6 ), 325–336. 10.1016/j.micres.2013.09.011.24144612 Mullins A. J. ; Murray J. A. ; Bull M. J. ; Jenner M. ; Jones C. ; Webster G. ; Green A. E. ; Neill D. R. ; Connor T. R. ; Parkhill J. ; et al. Genome mining identifies cepacin as a plant-protective metabolite of the biopesticidal bacterium Burkholderia ambifaria. Nat. Microbiol. 2019, 4 (6 ), 996–1005. 10.1038/s41564-019-0383-z.30833726 Yang M. ; Mavrodi D. V. ; Mavrodi O. V. ; Thomashow L. S. ; Weller D. M. Exploring the pathogenicity of Pseudomonas brassicacearum Q8r1–96 and other strains of the Pseudomonas fluorescens complex on tomato. Plant disease 2020, 104 (4 ), 1026–1031. 10.1094/PDIS-09-19-1989-RE.31994984 Orozco-Mosqueda M. D. C. ; Duan J. ; DiBernardo M. ; Zetter E. ; Campos-García J. ; Glick B. R. ; Santoyo G. The production of ACC deaminase and trehalose by the plant growth promoting bacterium Pseudomonas sp. UW4 synergistically protect tomato plants against salt stress. Front. Microbiol. 2019, 10 , 1392 10.3389/fmicb.2019.01392.31275294 Kang B. R. ; Anderson A. J. ; Kim Y. C. Hydrogen cyanide produced by Pseudomonas chlororaphis O6 exhibits nematicidal activity against Meloidogyne hapla. plant pathology journal 2018, 34 (1 ), 35 10.5423/PPJ.OA.06.2017.0115.29422786 Gravel V. ; Martinez C. ; Antoun H. ; Tweddell R. Control of greenhouse tomato root rot [Pythium ultimum] in hydroponic systems, using plant-growth-promoting microorganisms. Canadian Journal of Plant Pathology 2006, 28 (3 ), 475–483. 10.1080/07060660609507322. Tao C. ; Li R. ; Xiong W. ; Shen Z. ; Liu S. ; Wang B. ; Ruan Y. ; Geisen S. ; Shen Q. ; Kowalchuk G. A. Bio-organic fertilizers stimulate indigenous soil Pseudomonas populations to enhance plant disease suppression. Microbiome 2020, 8 , 137 10.1186/s40168-020-00892-z.32962766 Vicentini S. N. C. ; de Carvalho G. ; Krug L. D. ; Nunes T. C. ; da Silva A. G. ; Moreira S. I. ; Gonçalves L. M. d. D. P. ; Silva T. C. ; Ceresini P. C. Bioprospecting Fluorescent Pseudomonas from the Brazilian Amazon for the Biocontrol of Signal Grass Foliar Blight. Agronomy 2022, 12 (6 ), 1395 10.3390/agronomy12061395. Raza W. ; Ling N. ; Liu D. ; Wei Z. ; Huang Q. ; Shen Q. Volatile organic compounds produced by Pseudomonas fluorescens WR-1 restrict the growth and virulence traits of Ralstonia solanacearum. Microbiological research 2016, 192 , 103–113. 10.1016/j.micres.2016.05.014.27664728 Elsharkawy M. M. ; Sakran R. M. ; Ahmad A. A. ; Behiry S. I. ; Abdelkhalek A. ; Hassan M. M. ; Khedr A. A. Induction of Systemic Resistance against Sheath Blight in Rice by Different Pseudomonas Isolates. Life 2022, 12 (3 ), 349 10.3390/life12030349.35330100 Kanthaiah K. ; Velu R. K. Characterization of the bioactive metabolite from a plant growth promoting rhizobacteria Pseudomonas aeruginosa VRKK1 and exploitation of antibacterial behaviour against Xanthomonas campestris a causative agent of bacterial blight disease in cowpea. Arch. Phytopathol. Plant Prot. 2022, 55 , 797 10.1080/03235408.2018.1557883. Shen L. ; Wang F. ; Yang J. ; Qian Y. ; Dong X. ; Zhan H. Control of tobacco mosaic virus by Pseudomonas fluorescens CZ powder in greenhouses and the field. Crop Prot. 2014, 56 , 87–90. 10.1016/j.cropro.2013.11.020. Senthilraja G. ; Anand T. ; Kennedy J. ; Raguchander T. ; Samiyappan R. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) and entomopathogenic fungus bioformulation enhance the expression of defense enzymes and pathogenesis-related proteins in groundnut plants against leafminer insect and collar rot pathogen. Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology 2013, 82 , 10–19. 10.1016/j.pmpp.2012.12.002. Noreen R. ; Ali S. A. ; Hasan K. A. ; Sultana V. ; Ara J. ; Ehteshamul-Haque S. Evaluation of biocontrol potential of fluorescent Pseudomonas associated with root nodules of mungbean. Crop Prot. 2015, 75 , 18–24. 10.1016/j.cropro.2015.04.018. Zohara F. ; Akanda M. A. M. ; Paul N. C. ; Rahman M. ; Islam M. T. Inhibitory effects of Pseudomonas spp. on plant pathogen Phytophthora capsici in vitro and in planta. Biocatalysis and Agricultural Biotechnology 2016, 5 , 69–77. 10.1016/j.bcab.2015.12.009. Prabhukarthikeyan S. ; Manikandan R. ; Durgadevi D. ; Keerthana U. ; Harish S. ; Karthikeyan G. ; Raguchander T. Bio-suppression of turmeric rhizome rot disease and understanding the molecular basis of tripartite interaction among Curcuma longa, Pythium aphanidermatum and Pseudomonas fluorescens. Biological control 2017, 111 , 23–31. 10.1016/j.biocontrol.2017.05.003. Singh N. ; Sharma D. ; Kumari S. ; Kaushal R. Characterization of Fluorescent Pseudomonas sp. from rhizospheric soil of different declining apple orchards of Shimla and Sirmaur districts of Himachal Pradesh. Agric. Res. J. 2019, 56 (4 ), 688–697. 10.5958/2395-146X.2019.00107.8. Umesha S. ; Roohie R. K. Role of Pseudomonas fluorescens and INA against black rot of cabbage. Journal of Phytopathology 2017, 165 (4 ), 265–275. 10.1111/jph.12558. Sandani H. ; Ranathunge N. ; Lakshman P. ; Weerakoon W. Biocontrol potential of five Burkholderia and Pseudomonas strains against Colletotrichum truncatum infecting chilli pepper. Biocontrol Science and Technology 2019, 29 (8 ), 727–745. 10.1080/09583157.2019.1597331. Lahkar J. ; Goswami D. ; Deka S. ; Ahmed G. Novel approaches for application of biosurfactant produced by Pseudomonas aeruginosa for biocontrol of Colletotrichum capsici responsible for anthracnose disease in chilli. European journal of plant pathology 2018, 150 (1 ), 57–71. 10.1007/s10658-017-1252-3. Jisha M. ; Linu M. ; Sreekumar J. Induction of systemic resistance in chilli (Capsicum annuum L.) by Pseudomonas aeruginosa against anthracnose pathogen Colletotrichum capsici. J. Trop. Agric. 2019, 56 (2 ), 153–166. Abiodun J. ; Osaretin B. I. ; Elizabeth T. A. ; Benson O. A. ; Ajibola P. A. Effectiveness of Pseudomonas species in the management of tomato early blight pathogen Alternaria solani. Afr. J. Microbiol. Res. 2017, 11 (23 ), 972–976. 10.5897/AJMR2017.8564. García-Gutiérrez L. ; Romero D. ; Zeriouh H. ; Cazorla F. M. ; Torés J. A. ; de Vicente A. ; Pérez-García A. Isolation and selection of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria as inducers of systemic resistance in melon. Plant and soil 2012, 358 (1 ), 201–212. 10.1007/s11104-012-1173-z. Tran H. ; Ficke A. ; Asiimwe T. ; Höfte M. ; Raaijmakers J. M. Role of the cyclic lipopeptide massetolide A in biological control of Phytophthora infestans and in colonization of tomato plants by Pseudomonas fluorescens. New Phytologist 2007, 175 (4 ), 731–742. 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2007.02138.x.17688588 Soesanto L. ; Pradiptha C. N. ; Mugiastuti E. Raw Secondary metabolites of chitosan-enriched Pseudomonas fluorescens P60 to control corn sheath blight. Biosaintifika: Journal of Biology & Biology Education 2021, 13 (1 ), 113–120. 10.15294/biosaintifika.v13i1.28775. Ganeshamoorthi P. ; Anand T. ; Prakasam V. ; Bharani M. ; Ragupathi N. ; Samiyappan R. Plant growth promoting rhizobacterial (PGPR) bioconsortia mediates induction of defense-related proteins against infection of root rot pathogen in mulberry plants. Journal of Plant Interactions 2008, 3 (4 ), 233–244. 10.1080/17429140802088097. Mohammed A. F. ; Oloyede A. R. ; Odeseye A. O. Biological control of bacterial wilt of tomato caused by Ralstonia solanacearum using Pseudomonas species isolated from the rhizosphere of tomato plants. Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection 2020, 53 (1–2 ), 1–16. 10.1080/03235408.2020.1715756. Tao X. ; Zhang H. ; Gao M. ; Li M. ; Zhao T. ; Guan X. Pseudomonas species isolated via high-throughput screening significantly protect cotton plants against verticillium wilt. AMB Express 2020, 10 , 193 10.1186/s13568-020-01132-1.33118043 Ni H. ; Kong W.-L. ; Zhang Y. ; Wu X.-Q. Effects of volatile organic compounds produced by Pseudomonas aurantiaca ST-TJ4 against Verticillium dahliae. Journal of Fungi 2022, 8 (7 ), 697 10.3390/jof8070697.35887453 Jain R. ; Pandey A. A phenazine-1-carboxylic acid producing polyextremophilic Pseudomonas chlororaphis (MCC2693) strain, isolated from mountain ecosystem, possesses biocontrol and plant growth promotion abilities. Microbiological research 2016, 190 , 63–71. 10.1016/j.micres.2016.04.017.27394000 Ghazy N. ; El-Nahrawy S. Siderophore production by Bacillus subtilis MF497446 and Pseudomonas koreensis MG209738 and their efficacy in controlling Cephalosporium maydis in maize plant. Archives of microbiology 2021, 203 (3 ), 1195–1209. 10.1007/s00203-020-02113-5.33231747 Mehnaz S. ; Lazarovits G. Inoculation effects of Pseudomonas putida, Gluconacetobacter azotocaptans, and Azospirillum lipoferum on corn plant growth under greenhouse conditions. Microbial Ecology 2006, 51 (3 ), 326–335. 10.1007/s00248-006-9039-7.16598630 Verma S. K. ; Kingsley K. L. ; Bergen M. S. ; Kowalski K. P. ; White J. F. Fungal disease prevention in seedlings of rice (Oryza sativa) and other grasses by growth-promoting seed-associated endophytic bacteria from invasive Phragmites australis. Microorganisms 2018, 6 (1 ), 21 10.3390/microorganisms6010021.29518024 Nascimento F. X. ; Vicente C. S. ; Barbosa P. ; Espada M. ; Glick B. R. ; Mota M. ; Oliveira S. Evidence for the involvement of ACC deaminase from Pseudomonas putida UW4 in the biocontrol of pine wilt disease caused by Bursaphelenchus xylophilus. BioControl 2013, 58 (3 ), 427–433. 10.1007/s10526-012-9500-0. Grof-Tisza P. ; Karban R. ; Rasheed M. U. ; Saunier A. ; Blande J. D. Risk of herbivory negatively correlates with the diversity of volatile emissions involved in plant communication. Proc. R. Soc. B. 2021, 288 (1961 ), 20211790 10.1098/rspb.2021.1790. Velázquez-Becerra C. ; Macías-Rodríguez L. I. ; López-Bucio J. ; Altamirano-Hernández J. ; Flores-Cortez I. ; Valencia-Cantero E. A volatile organic compound analysis from Arthrobacter agilis identifies dimethylhexadecylamine, an amino-containing lipid modulating bacterial growth and Medicago sativa morphogenesis in vitro. Plant and soil 2011, 339 (1 ), 329–340. 10.1007/s11104-010-0583-z. Rees C. A. ; Burklund A. ; Stefanuto P.-H. ; Schwartzman J. D. ; Hill J. E. Comprehensive volatile metabolic fingerprinting of bacterial and fungal pathogen groups. Journal of breath research 2018, 12 (2 ), 026001 10.1088/1752-7163/aa8f7f.28952968 Kai M. ; Crespo E. ; Cristescu S. M. ; Harren F. J. ; Francke W. ; Piechulla B. Serratia odorifera: analysis of volatile emission and biological impact of volatile compounds on Arabidopsis thaliana. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2010, 88 (4 ), 965–976. 10.1007/s00253-010-2810-1.20717666 Cho S. M. ; Kang B. R. ; Han S. H. ; Anderson A. J. ; Park J.-Y. ; Lee Y.-H. ; Cho B. H. ; Yang K.-Y. ; Ryu C.-M. ; Kim Y. C. 2R, 3R-butanediol, a bacterial volatile produced by Pseudomonas chlororaphis O6, is involved in induction of systemic tolerance to drought in Arabidopsis thaliana. Molecular plant-microbe interactions 2008, 21 (8 ), 1067–1075. 10.1094/MPMI-21-8-1067.18616403 Agisha V. N. ; Kumar A. ; Eapen S. J. ; Sheoran N. ; Suseelabhai R. Broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity of volatile organic compounds from endophytic Pseudomonas putida BP25 against diverse plant pathogens. Biocontrol Science and Technology 2019, 29 (11 ), 1069–1089. 10.1080/09583157.2019.1657067. Zhang Y. ; Li T. ; Liu Y. ; Li X. ; Zhang C. ; Feng Z. ; Peng X. ; Li Z. ; Qin S. ; Xing K. Volatile organic compounds produced by Pseudomonas chlororaphis subsp. aureofaciens SPS-41 as biological fumigants to control Ceratocystis fimbriata in postharvest sweet potatoes. Journal of agricultural and food chemistry 2019, 67 (13 ), 3702–3710. 10.1021/acs.jafc.9b00289.30860830 Zhong T. ; Wang Z. ; Zhang M. ; Wei X. ; Kan J. ; Zalán Z. ; Wang K. ; Du M. Volatile organic compounds produced by Pseudomonas fluorescens ZX as potential biological fumigants against gray mold on postharvest grapes. Biological Control 2021, 163 , 104754 10.1016/j.biocontrol.2021.104754. Jean-Pierre F. ; Tremblay J. ; Déziel E. Broth versus surface-grown cells: differential regulation of RsmY/Z small RNAs in Pseudomonas aeruginosa by the Gac/HptB system. Front. Microbiol. 2017, 7 , 2168 10.3389/fmicb.2016.02168.28119684 Cho S. M. ; Anderson A. J. ; Kim Y. C. Extracellular polymeric substances of Pseudomonas chlororaphis O6 induce systemic drought tolerance in plants. Research in Plant Disease 2018, 24 (3 ), 242–247. 10.5423/RPD.2018.24.3.242. Nam H. S. ; Anderson A. J. ; Kim Y. C. Biocontrol efficacy of formulated Pseudomonas chlororaphis O6 against plant diseases and root-knot nematodes. plant pathology journal 2018, 34 (3 ), 241 10.5423/PPJ.NT.12.2017.0264.29887780 Anderson A. J. ; Kang B. R. ; Kim Y. C. The Gac/Rsm signaling pathway of a biocontrol bacterium, Pseudomonas chlororaphis O6. Research in Plant Disease 2017, 23 (3 ), 212–227. 10.5423/RPD.2017.23.3.212. Kim Y. C. ; Leveau J. ; McSpadden Gardener B. B. ; Pierson E. A. ; Pierson L. S. III ; Ryu C.-M. The multifactorial basis for plant health promotion by plant-associated bacteria. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2011, 77 (5 ), 1548–1555. 10.1128/AEM.01867-10.21216911 Kobayashi D. Y. ; Reedy R. M. ; Palumbo J. D. ; Zhou J.-M. ; Yuen G. Y. A clp gene homologue belonging to the Crp gene family globally regulates lytic enzyme production, antimicrobial activity, and biological control activity expressed by Lysobacter enzymogenes strain C3. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2005, 71 (1 ), 261–269. 10.1128/AEM.71.1.261-269.2005.15640196 Mysore K. S. ; Ryu C.-M. Nonhost resistance: how much do we know?. Trends in plant science 2004, 9 (2 ), 97–104. 10.1016/j.tplants.2003.12.005.15102376 Bonardi V. ; Dangl J. L. How complex are intracellular immune receptor signaling complexes?. Front. Plant Sci. 2012, 3 , 237 10.3389/fpls.2012.00237.23109935 Higaki T. ; Kurusu T. ; Hasezawa S. ; Kuchitsu K. Dynamic intracellular reorganization of cytoskeletons and the vacuole in defense responses and hypersensitive cell death in plants. Journal of plant research 2011, 124 (3 ), 315–324. 10.1007/s10265-011-0408-z.21409543 Torres M. A. ROS in biotic interactions. Physiologia plantarum 2010, 138 (4 ), 414–429. 10.1111/j.1399-3054.2009.01326.x.20002601 Hardham A. R. ; Jones D. A. ; Takemoto D. Cytoskeleton and cell wall function in penetration resistance. Current opinion in plant biology 2007, 10 (4 ), 342–348. 10.1016/j.pbi.2007.05.001.17627866 Ahuja I. ; Kissen R. ; Bones A. M. Phytoalexins in defense against pathogens. Trends in plant science 2012, 17 (2 ), 73–90. 10.1016/j.tplants.2011.11.002.22209038 van Loon L. C. ; Rep M. ; Pieterse C. M. Significance of inducible defense-related proteins in infected plants. Annual review of phytopathology 2006, 44 , 135–162. 10.1146/annurev.phyto.44.070505.143425. Coll N. S. ; Epple P. ; Dangl J. L. Programmed cell death in the plant immune system. Cell Death & Differentiation 2011, 18 (8 ), 1247–1256. 10.1038/cdd.2011.37.21475301 Scheideler M. ; Schlaich N. L. ; Fellenberg K. ; Beissbarth T. ; Hauser N. C. ; Vingron M. ; Slusarenko A. J. ; Hoheisel J. r. D. Monitoring the switch from housekeeping to pathogen defense metabolism in Arabidopsis thaliana using cDNA arrays. J. Biol. Chem. 2002, 277 (12 ), 10555–10561. 10.1074/jbc.M104863200.11748215 Heil M. ; Baldwin I. T. Fitness costs of induced resistance: emerging experimental support for a slippery concept. Trends in plant science 2002, 7 (2 ), 61–67. 10.1016/S1360-1385(01)02186-0.11832276 Bilgin D. D. ; Zavala J. A. ; Zhu J. ; Clough S. J. ; Ort D. R. ; DeLUCIA E. H. Biotic stress globally downregulates photosynthesis genes. Plant, cell & environment 2010, 33 (10 ), 1597–1613. 10.1111/j.1365-3040.2010.02167.x. Scharte J. ; SCHÖN H. ; Weis E. Photosynthesis and carbohydrate metabolism in tobacco leaves during an incompatible interaction with Phytophthora nicotianae. Plant, Cell & Environment 2005, 28 (11 ), 1421–1435. 10.1111/j.1365-3040.2005.01380.x. Zurbriggen M. D. ; Carrillo N. ; Tognetti V. B. ; Melzer M. ; Peisker M. ; Hause B. ; Hajirezaei M. R. Chloroplast-generated reactive oxygen species play a major role in localized cell death during the non-host interaction between tobacco and Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria. Plant Journal 2009, 60 (6 ), 962–973. 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2009.04010.x. Truman W. ; de Zabala M. T. ; Grant M. Type III effectors orchestrate a complex interplay between transcriptional networks to modify basal defence responses during pathogenesis and resistance. Plant J. 2006, 46 (1 ), 14–33. 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2006.02672.x.16553893 Essmann J. ; Schmitz-Thom I. ; Schon H. ; Sonnewald S. ; Weis E. ; Scharte J. RNA interference-mediated repression of cell wall invertase impairs defense in source leaves of tobacco. Plant physiology 2008, 147 (3 ), 1288–1299. 10.1104/pp.108.121418.18502974 Bolton M. D. Primary metabolism and plant defense—fuel for the fire. Molecular plant-microbe Interactions 2009, 22 (5 ), 487–497. 10.1094/MPMI-22-5-0487.19348567 Ahmad S. ; Gordon-Weeks R. ; Pickett J. ; Ton J. Natural variation in priming of basal resistance: from evolutionary origin to agricultural exploitation. Mol. Plant. Pathol. 2010, 11 (6 ), 817–827. 10.1111/j.1364-3703.2010.00645.x.21029325 Kobayashi D. Y. ; Reedy R. M. ; Bick J. ; Oudemans P. V. Characterization of a Chitinase gene from Stenotrophomonas maltophilia strain 34S1 and its involvement in biological control. Applied and environmental microbiology 2002, 68 (3 ), 1047–1054. 10.1128/AEM.68.3.1047-1054.2002.11872449 Masood S. ; Bano A. , Mechanism of potassium solubilization in the agricultural soils by the help of soil microorganisms. In Potassium solubilizing microorganisms for sustainable agriculture; Meena V. S. , Maurya B. R. , Verma J. P. , Meena R. S. , Eds.; Springer, 2016; pp 137–147. Labuschagne N. ; Pretorius T. ; Idris A. , Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria as biocontrol agents against soil-borne plant diseases. In Plant growth and health promoting bacteria; Maheshwari D. K. , Ed.; Springer, 2010; pp 211–230. Pramanik K. ; Mandal S. ; Banerjee S. ; Ghosh A. ; Maiti T. K. ; Mandal N. C. Unraveling the heavy metal resistance and biocontrol potential of Pseudomonas sp. K32 strain facilitating rice seedling growth under Cd stress. Chemosphere 2021, 274 , 129819 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.129819.33582538 Arora N. K. ; Khare E. ; Oh J. H. ; Kang S. C. ; Maheshwari D. K. Diverse mechanisms adopted by fluorescent Pseudomonas PGC2 during the inhibition of Rhizoctonia solani and Phytophthora capsici. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2008, 24 (4 ), 581–585. 10.1007/s11274-007-9505-5. Arrebola E. ; Tienda S. ; Vida C. ; De Vicente A. ; Cazorla F. M. Fitness features involved in the biocontrol interaction of Pseudomonas chlororaphis with host plants: the case study of PcPCL1606. Front. Microbiol. 2019, 10 , 719 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00719.31024497 Li Q. ; Mao S. ; Wang H. ; Ye X. The Molecular Architecture of Pseudomonas aeruginosa Quorum-Sensing Inhibitors. Marine Drugs 2022, 20 (8 ), 488 10.3390/md20080488.36005489 Saritha B. ; Panneerselvam P. ; Ganeshamurthy A. Antagonistic potential of mycorrhiza associated Pseudomonas putida against soil borne fungal pathogens. Plant Arch. 2015, 15 (2 ), 763–768. Mathee K. ; Narasimhan G. ; Valdes C. ; Qiu X. ; Matewish J. M. ; Koehrsen M. ; Rokas A. ; Yandava C. N. ; Engels R. ; Zeng E. ; et al. Dynamics of Pseudomonas aeruginosa genome evolution. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2008, 105 (8 ), 3100–3105. 10.1073/pnas.0711982105.18287045 Glick B. R. ; Todorovic B. ; Czarny J. ; Cheng Z. ; Duan J. ; McConkey B. Promotion of plant growth by bacterial ACC deaminase. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 2007, 26 (5–6 ), 227–242. 10.1080/07352680701572966. Chaudhuri A. ; Kar R. K. Effect of ethylene synthesis and perception inhibitor and ABA on seed germination of Vigna radiata. World J. Agric. Sci. 2008, 4 , 879–883. Gamalero E. ; Marzachì C. ; Galetto L. ; Veratti F. ; Massa N. ; Bona E. ; Novello G. ; Glick B. ; Ali S. ; Cantamessa S. ; et al. An 1-Aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate (ACC) deaminase-expressing endophyte increases plant resistance to flavescence dorée phytoplasma infection. Plant Biosyst. 2017, 151 (2 ), 331–340. 10.1080/11263504.2016.1174172. Atalla S. M. ; Abdel-Kader M. M. ; El-Gamal N. G. ; El-Mougy N. S. Using maize wastes, fermented by co-cultures of Trichoderma harzianum and Pseudomonas fluorescens, as grain dressing against m maize diseases under field conditions. Egypt. J. Biol. Pest Control 2020, 30 , 37 10.1186/s41938-020-00236-x. Fernando W. ; Nakkeeran S. ; Zhang Y. ; Savchuk S. Biological control of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) de Bary by Pseudomonas and Bacillus species on canola petals. Crop Prot. 2007, 26 (2 ), 100–107. 10.1016/j.cropro.2006.04.007. Abo-Elyousr K. A. ; Abdel-Rahim I. R. ; Almasoudi N. M. ; Alghamdi S. A. Native endophytic Pseudomonas putida as a biocontrol agent against common bean rust caused by Uromyces appendiculatus. Journal of Fungi 2021, 7 (9 ), 745 10.3390/jof7090745.34575783 Suresh P. ; Shanmugaiah V. ; Rajagopal R. ; Muthusamy K. ; Ramamoorthy V. Pseudomonas fluorescens VSMKU3054 mediated induced systemic resistance in tomato against Ralstonia solanacearum. Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology 2022, 119 , 101836 10.1016/j.pmpp.2022.101836. Khabbaz S. ; Zhang L. ; Cáceres L. ; Sumarah M. ; Wang A. ; Abbasi P. Characterisation of antagonistic Bacillus and Pseudomonas strains for biocontrol potential and suppression of damping-off and root rot diseases. Annals of Applied Biology 2015, 166 (3 ), 456–471. 10.1111/aab.12196. Rai V. Screening of Pseudomonas fluorescens isolates for biological control of Macrophomina phaseolina root-rot of safflower. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2011, 6 (29 ), 6256–6266. Gupta C. ; Kumar B. ; Dubey R. ; Maheshwari D. Chitinase-mediated destructive antagonistic potential of Pseudomonas aeruginosa GRC1 against Sclerotinia sclerotiorum causing stem rot of peanut. BioControl 2006, 51 (6 ), 821–835. 10.1007/s10526-006-9000-1. Hajfarajollah H. ; Mehvari S. ; Habibian M. ; Mokhtarani B. ; Noghabi K. A. Rhamnolipid biosurfactant adsorption on a plasma-treated polypropylene surface to induce antimicrobial and antiadhesive properties. RSC Adv. 2015, 5 (42 ), 33089–33097. 10.1039/C5RA01233C. Hajfarajollah H. ; Eslami P. ; Mokhtarani B. ; Akbari Noghabi K. Biosurfactants from probiotic bacteria: A review. Biotechnology and Applied Biochemistry 2018, 65 (6 ), 768–783. 10.1002/bab.1686.30120889 Sarubbo L. A. ; Maria da Gloria C. S. ; Durval I. J. B. ; Bezerra K. G. O. ; Ribeiro B. G. ; Silva I. A. ; Twigg M. S. ; Banat I. M. Biosurfactants: Production, properties, applications, trends, and general perspectives. Biochem. Eng. J. 2022, 181 , 108377 10.1016/j.bej.2022.108377. Zhao F. ; Wang B. ; Yuan M. ; Ren S. Comparative study on antimicrobial activity of mono-rhamnolipid and di-rhamnolipid and exploration of cost-effective antimicrobial agents for agricultural applications. Microb. Cell. Fact. 2022, 21 , 221 10.1186/s12934-022-01950-x.36274139 Akbari S. ; Abdurahman N. H. ; Yunus R. M. ; Fayaz F. ; Alara O. R. Biosurfactants—a new frontier for social and environmental safety: a mini review. Biotechnology Research and Innovation 2018, 2 (1 ), 81–90. 10.1016/j.biori.2018.09.001. Liu G. ; Zhong H. ; Yang X. ; Liu Y. ; Shao B. ; Liu Z. Advances in applications of rhamnolipids biosurfactant in environmental remediation: a review. Biotechnology and bioengineering 2018, 115 (4 ), 796–814. 10.1002/bit.26517.29240227 Bakkar M. R. ; Faraag A. H. I. ; Soliman E. R. ; Fouda M. S. ; Sarguos A. M. M. ; McLean G. R. ; Hebishy A. M. ; Elkhouly G. E. ; Raya N. R. ; Abo-Zeid Y. Rhamnolipids nano-micelles as a potential hand sanitizer. Antibiotics 2021, 10 (7 ), 751 10.3390/antibiotics10070751.34206211 Mishra S. ; Lin Z. ; Pang S. ; Zhang Y. ; Bhatt P. ; Chen S. Biosurfactant is a powerful tool for the bioremediation of heavy metals from contaminated soils. Journal of Hazardous Materials 2021, 418 , 126253 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.126253.34119972 Bazsefidpar S. ; Mokhtarani B. ; Panahi R. ; Hajfarajollah H. Overproduction of rhamnolipid by fed-batch cultivation of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in a lab-scale fermenter under tight DO control. Biodegradation 2019, 30 (1 ), 59–69. 10.1007/s10532-018-09866-3.30600422 Rahman P. K. ; Pasirayi G. ; Auger V. ; Ali Z. Production of rhamnolipid biosurfactants by Pseudomonas aeruginosa DS10–129 in a microfluidic bioreactor. Biotechnology and applied biochemistry 2010, 55 (1 ), 45–52. 10.1042/BA20090277.19958287 Lovaglio R. ; Silva V. ; Ferreira H. ; Hausmann R. ; Contiero J. Rhamnolipids know-how: looking for strategies for its industrial dissemination. Biotechnology advances 2015, 33 (8 ), 1715–1726. 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2015.09.002.26384475 Dobler L. ; Vilela L. F. ; Almeida R. V. ; Neves B. C. Rhamnolipids in perspective: gene regulatory pathways, metabolic engineering, production and technological forecasting. New biotechnology 2016, 33 (1 ), 123–135. 10.1016/j.nbt.2015.09.005.26409933 Costa-Gutierrez S. B. ; Lami M. J. ; Santo M. C. C.-D. ; Zenoff A. M. ; Vincent P. A. ; Molina-Henares M. A. ; Espinosa-Urgel M. ; de Cristóbal R. E. Plant growth promotion by Pseudomonas putida KT2440 under saline stress: role of eptA. Applied microbiology and biotechnology 2020, 104 (10 ), 4577–4592. 10.1007/s00253-020-10516-z.32221691 Goswami D. ; Handique P. J. ; Deka S. Rhamnolipid biosurfactant against Fusarium sacchari—the causal organism of pokkah boeng disease of sugarcane. Journal of Basic Microbiology 2014, 54 (6 ), 548–557. 10.1002/jobm.201200801.23687052 Sha R. ; Jiang L. ; Meng Q. ; Zhang G. ; Song Z. Producing cell-free culture broth of rhamnolipids as a cost-effective fungicide against plant pathogens. Journal of basic microbiology 2012, 52 (4 ), 458–466. 10.1002/jobm.201100295.22052667 Kim S. K. ; Kim Y. C. ; Lee S. ; Kim J. C. ; Yun M. Y. ; Kim I. S. Insecticidal activity of rhamnolipid isolated from Pseudomonas sp. EP-3 against green peach aphid (Myzus persicae). J. Agric. Food Chem. 2011, 59 (3 ), 934–938. 10.1021/jf104027x.21192722 Wood T. L. ; Gong T. ; Zhu L. ; Miller J. ; Miller D. S. ; Yin B. ; Wood T. K. Rhamnolipids from Pseudomonas aeruginosa disperse the biofilms of sulfate-reducing bacteria. npj Biofilms Microbiomes 2018, 4 , 22 10.1038/s41522-018-0066-1.30302271 Magalhães L. ; Nitschke M. Antimicrobial activity of rhamnolipids against Listeria monocytogenes and their synergistic interaction with nisin. Food Control 2013, 29 (1 ), 138–142. 10.1016/j.foodcont.2012.06.009. Ali S. ; Charles T. C. ; Glick B. R. Amelioration of high salinity stress damage by plant growth-promoting bacterial endophytes that contain ACC deaminase. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 2014, 80 , 160–167. 10.1016/j.plaphy.2014.04.003.24769617 Ravanbakhsh M. ; Kowalchuk G. A. ; Jousset A. Optimization of plant hormonal balance by microorganisms prevents plant heavy metal accumulation. Journal of hazardous materials 2019, 379 , 120787 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2019.120787.31247392 Subramanian P. ; Krishnamoorthy R. ; Chanratana M. ; Kim K. ; Sa T. Expression of an exogenous 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate deaminase gene in psychrotolerant bacteria modulates ethylene metabolism and cold induced genes in tomato under chilling stress. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 2015, 89 , 18–23. 10.1016/j.plaphy.2015.02.003.25686701 Rajkumar M. ; Bruno L. B. ; Banu J. R. Alleviation of environmental stress in plants: The role of beneficial Pseudomonas spp. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology 2017, 47 (6 ), 372–407. 10.1080/10643389.2017.1318619. Bloemberg G. V. ; Lugtenberg B. J. Molecular basis of plant growth promotion and biocontrol by rhizobacteria. Current opinion in plant biology 2001, 4 (4 ), 343–350. 10.1016/S1369-5266(00)00183-7.11418345 Barratt B. ; Moran V. ; Bigler F. ; Van Lenteren J. The status of biological control and recommendations for improving uptake for the future. BioControl 2018, 63 (1 ), 155–167. 10.1007/s10526-017-9831-y. O’Brien P. A. Biological control of plant diseases. Australasian Plant Pathology 2017, 46 (4 ), 293–304. 10.1007/s13313-017-0481-4. Rosier A. ; Medeiros F. H. ; Bais H. P. Defining plant growth promoting rhizobacteria molecular and biochemical networks in beneficial plant-microbe interactions. Plant and Soil 2018, 428 (1 ), 35–55. 10.1007/s11104-018-3679-5. Morrissey J. P. ; Walsh U. F. ; O’donnell A. ; Moënne-Loccoz Y. ; O’gara F. Exploitation of genetically modified inoculants for industrial ecology applications. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 2002, 81 (1 ), 599–606. 10.1023/A:1020522025374.12448755 Fravel D. Commercialization and implementation of biocontrol 2005, 43 , 337–59. 10.1146/annurev.phyto.43.032904.092924.