Skip to main content
Download PDF
Download ePub

Salinity stress and PGPR effects on essential oil changes in Rosmarinus officinalis L.

Agriculture & Food Security volume 8, Article number: 2 (2019) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Medicinal plant species have been used by the ancestors around the world since ancient times. Rosmarinus officinalis is one of the most used medicinal plants, which belongs to the family Lamiaceae. To investigate the effects of different levels of salinity stress along with the induction of bacterial growth stimulation on the amount of essential oil composition in R. officinalis, an experiment was conducted in a randomized complete block design with 12 treatments and five replications. Salinity treatments included 0 (control), 2.5 (T1), 5 (T2), 7.5 (T3), 10 (T4) and 12.5 (T5) NaCl g/L, and the bacterium was pseudomonas fluorescence.

Results

The percentage of essential oils showed a significant relationship with increasing salinity either alone or in composition with plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) inoculation treatments and it increased with increasing salinity levels to treatment 4 (T4, 10 g/L NaCl) but decreased with further increases in salinity levels in treatments without using PGPR and it was constant in treatment with using PGPR. Phellandrene, one of the main compounds of essential oils, showed a trend like the whole amount of essential oils in both group of treatments.

Conclusion

Abiotic and biotic factors may influence the different mechanisms and limit the interactions between plant and beneficial bacteria, resulting in less-than-acceptable performance in plant growth promotion and management of diseases. In this context, the results revealed that the application of PGPRs can help improve the essential oil yield in R. officinalis even in salinity conditions.

Introduction

Medicinal plants species and aromatic plants have been used by the ancestors around the world since ancient times [32]. Rosmarinus officinalis L. (rosemary) belongs to the family Labiatae or Lamiaceae and occurs as a shrub, under the shrub or herbaceous [3]. It is a dense aromatic plant with dark green lavender-like leaves and is a native of the Mediterranean region. The flowering tops and the rosemary leaves mainly contain flavonoids, phenolic acids, especially rosmarinic acid (choleretic activities), and an essential oil (containing pinene, camphene, cineole, borneol and camphor) to which it must have stimulatory effects [34]. Rosemary oils have been widely used for centuries as an ingredient in cosmetics, soaps, perfumes, deodorants, both for flavoring and for preservation of food products [2], and they have also many therapeutics and help the distribution of drugs and antiseptics [35]. Rosemary is used for treating different diseases in traditional medicine, including depression, insomniac and arthritic pains [28, 47].

According to Beattie [6], bacteria that reduce the incidence or severity of plant diseases are often referred to as biocontrol agents, whereas those that exhibit antagonistic activity toward a pathogen are defined as antagonists. The idea of using bacteria to sustain land productive for future generations is not new, and the utilization of bacteria to stimulate plant growth in agriculture has been practiced for millennia. There is increasing evidence that beneficial microbes can enhance plants’ tolerance to adverse environmental stresses such as salinity stress [18], drought stress [46], weed infestation [4], nutrient deficiency and heavy metal contaminations [42]. PGPR, as biocontrol agents, can act through various mechanisms, regardless of their role in direct growth promotion, such as by the known production of auxin phytohormone [38], a decrease in plant ethylene levels [21] or nitrogen-fixing associated with roots [13]. Studies on the effect of salinity and PGPR on a plant have been neglected. Therefore, the present study aims to determine the changes in amount and performance of essential oils under the salinity stress either alone or in combination with PGPR bacteria in R. officinalis.

Materials and methods

To investigate the effects of different levels of salinity stress along with the induction of bacterial growth stimulation on the amount of essential oils composition of R. officinalis, an experiment was conducted in a completely randomized block design with 12 treatments and five replications in the greenhouse of the Natural Resources Faculty at the University of Kashan. Salinity treatments in this experiment included 0 (control), 2.5 (T1), 5 (T2), 7.5 (T3), 10 (T4) and 12.5 (T5) gram NaCl per liter. A fresh culture of bacteria was used to prepare the suspension or inoculum. The bacterium in this experiment was Pseudomonas fluorescens, a strain of CHAO; nutrient broth medium was required to prepare the CHAO suspension. In the Soil Laboratory of the University of Tehran, the pure bacteria of CHAO were cultured in a solid nutrient agar medium and were located at a laboratory normal temperature for 36–48 h. Then, several lobes were removed from the new bacteria and cultivated in Nb (nutrient broth) fluid medium for 48 h on a shaker at 150–250 rpm and then were centrifuged at 4500 g for 10 min. The white cells of bacteria accumulated at the bottom of tubes were removed from the nutrient environment in this way, and they were mixed with distilled water. Some of the bacterial suspensions were placed into the spectrophotometer (Model 2100-UV) at 600 nm with the absorption of one (OD600 = 1) resulted in a concentration of 109 cfu/ml [44]. The cuttings of R. officinalis were transferred to plastic pots after 6 months when they were deployed and rooted. Soil characteristics were examined before starting the treatments presented in Table 1. Then, all plants (in the PGPR and salinity treatments) were inoculated with PGPR growth-stimulating bacteria and after that salinity stress was applied to the plants. The time of stress lasted 4 months in salinity stress either alone or in combination with PGPR. For all treatments, all planted seedlings were harvested and aerial parts of seedlings were dried and powdered as standard. The essential oils were separately extracted by the Clevenger device. Isolation and identification of rosemary essential oil compounds were performed by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC/MS) machine in the laboratory. Statistical analyses were performed with mean comparison of Duncan’s multiple range method using SPSS software version 24.0.

Table 1 Characteristics of soil used in the study
Full size table

Results and discussion

Based on the analysis of variance, the percentage of essential oils in R. officinalis showed a significant relationship (p < 0.01) with increasing salinity either alone or in composition with PGPR inoculation treatments (Table 2). The results showed that the amount of essential oils increases with increasing salinity levels to treatment 4 (T4, 10 g/L NaCl) but decreased with further increases in salinity levels (Table 3, Figs. 1 and 2). These results were confirmed by Ghorbani et al. [20] studying Nitraria schoberi and Panahi et al. [36] studying Salsola orientalis, explaining that the moderate salinity levels can improve the growth parameters and the plant will be injured by increasing salinity levels.

Table 2 Analysis of variance for the impact of salinity either alone or in composition with PGPR on percentage of essential oils in Rosmarinus officinalis
Full size table
Table 3 Average percentage of essential oils of Rosmarinus officinalis in different treatments of salinity alone and in composition with PGPR
Full size table
Fig. 1
figure 1

Percentage of essential oils of Rosmarinus officinalis without PGPR (A) and with PGPR (B)

Full size image
Fig. 2
figure 2

Diagram of salinity alone and in composition with PGPR

Full size image

In the other side, the results of treatments along with PGPR inoculation showed that the amount of essential oils increases with increasing salinity levels to treatment 4 (T4, 10 g/L NaCl) and it is constant with further increases in salinity levels (Table 3, Figs. 1 and 2). The highest amount of essential oils in R. officinalis is 0.882 and 0.784 in treatment 4 (T4) without using PGPR and in treatment 4 and 5 (T4, T5) with using PGPR, respectively (Table 3). The synergistic effects of combined inoculation of PGPRs have also been reported in various medicinal and aromatic plants (MAPs), for example in Azadirachta indica [43], Saracaasoca [25], Phyllanthus amarus [14], Alpinia galanga and Coleus amboinicus [31], Ocimum basilicum [23], Calendula officinalis [24] and Silybum marianum [15]. Beneficial rhizosphere bacteria are of two general types, those forming a symbiotic relationship with the plant and those that are free-living in the soil and root [5, 7, 27]. On the other hand, various PGPR strains have been also proven to be able to increase nutrient availability in the rhizosphere [8].

Based on the analysis of variance, the percentage of main compounds of essential oils in R. officinalis showed a significant relationship (p < 0.01) with increasing salinity either alone or in composition with PGPR inoculation treatments (Tables 4 and 5). The results showed that the amount of phellandrene content increases with increasing salinity levels to treatment 4 (T4, 10 g/L NaCl) but decreased with further increases in salinity levels (Fig. 3a) in treatments without PGPR inoculation. But in another group (treatments with both salinity and PGPR inoculation), the results showed an increasing trend in phellandrene content with increasing salinity levels (Fig. 3b). The highest amount of phellandrene is 57.48 in treatment 5 (T5, 12.5 g NaCl per liter) with using PGPR inoculation. Trends of other compounds are shown in Fig. 3 and Tables 4 and 5. Nevertheless, the application of PGPR has specifically shown a significant positive effect on essential oil production in R. officinalis.

Table 4 Results of analysis of variance for the impact of salinity without PGPR on the rate of main compounds of essential oils in Rosmarinus officinalis
Full size table
Table 5 Results of analysis of variance for the impact of salinity with PGPR on percentage of main compounds of essential oils in Rosmarinus officinalis
Full size table
Fig. 3
figure 3

Main compounds of essential oils Rosmarinus officinalis without PGPR (A) and with PGPR (B)

Full size image

Dehydration, salinity, low- and high-temperature stresses and other abiotic stresses lead to metabolic toxicity, generation of ROS, membrane disorganization, prevention of photosynthesis, reduced nutrient acquisition and altered hormones levels [9]. Accumulation of osmoprotectants, production of superoxide radical scavenging mechanisms, exclusion or compartmentation of ions by the efficient transporter and symporter systems and production of specific enzymes involved in the regulation of plant hormones are among the mechanisms that plants have evolved for adaptation to abiotic stresses [12, 29, 37, 40, 41]. Similar to these, findings of PGPR have been reported by some other workers [19, 26].

Essential oil yield can be increased by plant in association with mycorrhiza and humic substances, which benefit root ramification, improving water absorption and phosphorus uptake. Furthermore, they can also influence the chemical composition of EOs [10, 22]. Adesemoye and Kloepper [1] compiled the benefits derivable from plant–PGPR interactions to include the following: improvements in seed germination rate, root development, yield, leaf area, shoot and root weights, chlorophyll content, protein content, hydraulic activity and nutrient uptake (including phosphorus and nitrogen). The bacteria, with their physiological adaptation and genetic potential for increased tolerance to drought, increasing salt concentration and high temperatures, could improve plant production in degraded sites [30, 45] (Tables 6 and 7).

Table 6 Amount of the different compounds of essential oils in salinity treatment without PGPR in Rosmarinus officinalis
Full size table
Table 7 Amount of the different compounds of essential oils in salinity treatment with PGPR in Rosmarinus officinalis
Full size table

Conclusion

The plant growth-promoting microorganisms were found to have a great potential for use as bioinoculants to increase production of medicinal and aromatic plants [11]. The literature clearly demonstrates that PGPR induces plant growth and development through their numerous direct and indirect mechanisms of action [33]. In this work, synthesis of herbal organs for essential oils of R. officinalis was described. Optical properties were established as strongly dependent on the application of PGPR. In this context, our results revealed that the application of PGPRs can help to improve the essential oil yield in R. officinalis even in the salinity conditions. The essential oils represent an important part of the folk medicine for their medicinal properties such as the antioxidant activity [39]. Notably, abiotic and biotic factors may influence the different mechanisms and limit the interactions between plant and beneficial bacteria, resulting in less-than-acceptable performance in plant growth promotion and management of diseases [16, 17]. Finally, it can be stated that PGPR can help to improve the essential oil yield in normal and salinity conditions, but further investigations are needed to evaluate its performance in different conditions and under multi-stress situations.

Abbreviations

PGPR:

plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria

Nb:

nutrient broth

GC/MS:

gas chromatography–mass spectrometry

g/L:

gram per liter

References

  1. Adesemoye AO, Kloepper JW. Plant-microbes interactions in enhanced fertilizer use efficiency. J Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2009;85:1–12.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Arnold N, Valentini G, Bellomaria B, Hocine L. Comparative study of the essential oils from Rosmarinus eriocalyx Jordan & Fourr. From Algeria and Rosmarinus officinalis L. from other countries. J Essent Oil Res. 1997;9(2):167–75.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Atikbekkara F, Bousmaha L, Talebbendiab SA, Boti JB, Casanova J. Chemical composition of essential oil of Rosmarinus officinalis L. grown in the Tlemcen region. J Biol Health. 2007;7:6–11.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Babalola OO. Beneficial bacteria of agricultural importance. Biotechnol Lett. 2010;32:1559–70.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Barriuso J, Pereyra MT, Lucas García JA, Megías M, Gutierrez Mañero FJ, Ramos B. Screening for putative PGPR to improve establishment of the symbiosis Lactarius deliciosus–Pinus sp. J Microbial Ecol. 2005;50(1):82–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Beattie GA. Plant-associated bacteria: survey, molecularphylogeny, genomics and recent advances. In: Gnanamanickam SS, editor. Plant-associated bacteria. Dordrecht: Springer; 2006. p. 1–56.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bianciotto V, Andreotti S, Balestrini R, Bonfante P, Perotto S. Extracellular polysaccharides are involved in the attachment of Azospirillum brasilense and Rhizobium leguminosarum to arbuscularmycorrhizal structures. Eur J Histochem. 2001;45(1):39–49.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Cakmakci R, Donmez D, Aydýn A, Sahin F. Growth promotion of plants by plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria under greenhouse and two different field soil conditions. J Soil Biol Biochem. 2005;38:1482–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Carmen B, Roberto D. Soil bacteria support and protect plants against abiotic stresses. Institute of Genetics and Biophysics Adriano BuzzatiTraverso. Chapter 7. Italy 2011.

  10. Copetta A, Lingua G, Berta G. Effects of three AM fungi on growth, distribution of glandular hairs, and essential oil production in Ocimum basilicum L. var. Genovese. J Mycorrhiza. 2006;16:485–94.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Da Silva JAT, Egamberdieve D. Plant-growth promoting rhizobacteria and medicinal plants. RPMP. Vol. 38- Essential Oils III and Phytopharmacology. 2014; 25–42.

  12. Des Marais DL, Juenger TE. Pleiotropy, plasticity, and the evolution of plant abiotic stress tolerance. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2010;1206:56–79.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Döbereiner J. History and new perspectives of diazotrophs in association with non-leguminous plants. J Symbiosis. 1992;13:1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Earanna N, Bagyaraj DJ. Influence of AM fungi and growth promoting rhizomicroorganisms on growth and herbage yield of Phyllanthusamarus Schum. and Thom. J Geobios. 2004;31:117–20.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Egamberdieva D, Jabborova D, Mamadalieva N. Salt-tolerant Pseudomonas extremorientalis able to stimulate growth of Silybum marianum under salt stress condition. J Med Aromat Plant Sci Biotechnol. 2013;7:65–75.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Egamberdiyeva D, Hoflich G. Root colonization and growth promotion of winter wheat and pea by Cellulomonas spp. at different temperatures. J Plant Growth Regul. 2002;38:219–24.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Egamberdiyeva D, Hoflich G. Influence of growth promoting bacteria on the growth of wheat at different soils and temperatures. J Soil Biol Biochem. 2003;35:973–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Egamberdiyeva D. The effect of plant growth promoting bacteria on growth and nutrient uptake of maize in two different soils. Appl J Soil Ecol. 2008;36:184–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Gabriele B, Christin Z, Jana L, Monika G, Rodrigo C, Kornelia S. Impact of plant species and site on rhizosphere-associated fungi antagonistic to Verticillium dahliaekleb. J Appl Environ Microbiol. 2005;71(8):4203–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ghorbani M, Ranjbar Fardoyi A, Panahi F, Attarha J, Marzbani N, Moases M. Salinity and Nitraria schoberi: growth parameters, chlorophyll content and ion accumulation. Int J Agric Crop Sci. 2014;7–11:853–62.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Glick BR, Cheng Z, Czarny J, Duan J. Promotion of plant growth by ACC deaminase-producing soil bacteria. Eur J Plant Pathol. 2007;119:329–39.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Hazzoumi Z, Moustakime Y, Elharchili EH, Joutei KA, et al. Effect of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) and water stress on growth, phenolic compounds, glandular hairs, and yield of essential oil in basil (Ocimumgratissimum L.). J Chem Biol Technol Agric. 2015;2:10–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hemavathi VN, Sivakumr BS, Suresh CK, Earanna N. Effect of Glomus fasciculatum and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on growth and yield of Ocimum basilicum. Karnataka J Agric Sci. 2006;19:17–20.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Hosseinzadah F, Satei A, Ramezanpour M. Effects of mycorrhiza and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on growth, nutrient uptake and physiological characteristics in Calendula officinalis L. Middle East. J Sci Res. 2011;8(5):947–53.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Lakshmipathy R, Chandrika K, Gowda B, Balakrishna AN, Bagyaraj DJ. Response of Saraca asoca (Roxb.) de Wilde to inoculation with Glomusm osseae, Bacillus coagulans and Trichoderma harzianum. J Soil Biol Ecol. 2001;21:76–80.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Lugtenberg B, Chin-A-Woeng T, Antonie BG. Effects of salinity stress and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on Medicago sativa. Van Leeuwenhoek. 2002;81:373–83.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Lugtenberg B, Kamilova F. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria. J Annu Rev Microbiol. 2009;63:541–56.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Lugtenberg BJJ, Dekkers L, Bloemberg GV. Molecular determinants of rhizosphere colonization by Pseudomonas. J Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2001;39:461–90.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Mahaian S, Tuteja N. Cold, salinity and drought stresses: an overview. J Arch Biochem Biophys. 2005;444:139–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Maheshwari DK, Dubey RC, Aeron A, Kumar B, Kumar S, Tewari S, Arora NK. Integrated approach for disease management and growth enhancement of Sesamum indicum L. utilizing Azotobacter chroococcum TRA2 and chemical fertilizer. World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2012;28(10):3015–24.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Mani N. Phytochemical and antimicrobial studies on Alpinia galangal and Coleus amboinicus as influenced by native AM fungi. PhD thesis, BharathidasanUniviersity, India. 2004.

  32. Morelli F, Ferarrese L, Munhoz CL, Alberton O. Antimicrobial activity of essential oil and growth of Ocimum basilicum L. inoculated with mycorrhiza and humic substances applied to soil. J Genet Mol Res. 2017;16(3):1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Ngoma L, OlurantiBabalola O, Ahmad F. Ecophysiology of plant growth promoting bacteria. J Sci Res Essays. 2012;7(47):4003–13.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Oluwatuyi M, Kaatz GW, Gibbons S. Antibacterial and resistance modifying activity of Rosmarinus officinalis. Phytochemistry. 2004;65(24):3249–54.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Palevitch PD, Yaniv Z. Medicinal plants of Holy land. Tel-Aviv, Tammuz Publisher Ltd. 1991;1:2–4.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Panahi F, Asareh MH, Jafari M, Givar A, Tavili A, Arzani H, Ghorbani M. The responses of Salsola orientalis to salt stress. Int J Adv Biol Biomed Res. 2015;3(2):163–71.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Parida AK, Das AB. Salt tolerance and salinity effects on plants: a review. J Ecotox Environ Saf. 2005;60:324–49.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Patten CL, Glick BR. Role of Pseudomonas putida in doleacetic acid in development of the host plant root system. Appl J Environ Microbiol. 2002;68:3795–801.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Rozza AL, Pellizzon CH. Essential oils from medicinal and aromatic plants: a review of the gastroprotective and ulcer-healing activities. Fundam Clin Pharmacol. 2013;27:51–63.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Santner A, Calderon-Villalobos LIA, Estelle M. Plant hormones are versatile chemical regulators of plant growth. J Nat Chem Biol. 2009;5:301–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Shao HB, Chu LY, Jaleel CA, Manivannan P, Panneerselvam R, Shao MA. Understanding water deficit stress-induced changes in the basic metabolism of higher plants-biotechnologically and sustainably improving agriculture and the ecoenvironment in arid regions of the globe. J Crit Rev Biotech. 2009;29:131–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Sheng XF. Growth promotion and increased potassium uptake of cotton and rape by a potassium releasing strain of Bacillus edaphicus. J Soil Biol Biochem. 2005;37:1918–22.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Sumana DA. Influence of VA mycorrhizal fungi and nitrogen fixing and mycorrhization helper bacteria on growth of neem (Azadirachta indica A. Juss). PhD. thesis, University of Agriculture Sciences, India 1998.

  44. Thompson DC. Evaluation of bacterial antagonists for reduction of summer patch symptoms in Kentucky blue grass. J Plant Dis. 1996;80:850–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Yang J, Kloepper JW, Ryu C-M. Rhizosphere bacteria help plants tolerate abiotic stress. J Trends Plant Sci. 2009;14(1):1–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Zahir ZA, Munir A, Asghar HN, Shaharoona B, Arshad M. Effectiveness of rhizobacteria containing ACC deaminase for growth promotion of peas (Pisum sativum) under drought conditions. J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2008;18:958–63.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Zargari A. Medical plants. 5th ed. Tehran: Tehran University Press; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors’ contributions

Contribution of authors is defined as the priority of authorship. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the University of Kashan for funding this project.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competive interests.

Availability of data and materials

Data and information about this project were provided by supervisor (corresponding author).

Consent for publication

All authors agree to publish this article in this journal.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This research was approved in University of Kashan with No: 1975/305 and has not been published elsewhere before.

Funding

The funding for this research has been provided by University of Kashan.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Rangeland Management, College of Natural Resources and Earth Sciences, University of Kashan, Isfahan, Iran

    Reza Dehghani Bidgoli & Nazanin Azarnezhad

  2. Natural Essential Oils Institute, University of Kashan, Isfahan, Iran

    Maryam Akhbari

  3. Department of Desertification, College of Natural Resources and Earth Sciences, University of Kashan, Isfahan, Iran

    Majid Ghorbani

Authors
  1. Reza Dehghani Bidgoli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nazanin Azarnezhad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maryam Akhbari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Majid Ghorbani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Reza Dehghani Bidgoli.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dehghani Bidgoli, R., Azarnezhad, N., Akhbari, M. et al. Salinity stress and PGPR effects on essential oil changes in Rosmarinus officinalis L.. Agric & Food Secur 8, 2 (2019). https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.1186/s40066-018-0246-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.1186/s40066-018-0246-5

Keywords

Agriculture & Food Security

ISSN: 2048-7010