Screening， Identification and Biological Activity of Three Sulfur-oxidizing Bacteria

doi:10.13560/j.cnki.biotech.bull.1985.2025-0731

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective To address the issues of low sulfur availability in agricultural soils and sulfur deficiency in crops, this study is aimed to screen sulfur-oxidizing bacteria (SOB) with both high sulfur oxidation efficiency and multiple bioactivities from the rhizosphere soil of oilseed rape in Yunnan, China, and to evaluate their potential for agricultural application. Method SOB were isolated using targeted enrichment and isolation techniques. Sulfur oxidation activity was evaluated based on pH reduction and sulfate production. Isolates were screened for multifunctional PGP traits, including nitrogen fixation, zinc solubilization, and phosphate solubilization. Promising strains were further assessed for biological activities such as siderophore production, heteroauxin (IAA) secretion, and antagonism against plant pathogens. Their efficacy in promoting seed germination and Solanum lycopersicum plant growth was validated. Result A total of 313 SOB strains were isolated. Among them, 16 Strains presented strong sulfur-oxidizing capacity (sulfate production: 38.53-66.54 mg/L). Based on morphological, physiological, biochemical characteristics, and 16S rDNA sequence analysis, three high-activity strains, YNK-FB0053, YNK-FB0056, and YNK-FB0057, were identified as Burkholderia gladioli, Pantoea endophytica, and Priestia aryabhattai, respectively. All three strains possessed the activities of nitrogen fixation, zinc solubilization, phosphate solubilization, and siderophore secretion. They also harbored genes associated with antibiotic synthesis (srfAB, yndJ, ituC, sboA, bioA, NRPS, and PKSI). Seed germination tests demonstrated that these strains increased germination rates of Brassica napus L, Solanum lycopersicum, and Secale cereale by 16.67%–44.33% and total seedling length by 17.95%–33.70%. In pot experiments with Solanum lycopersicum, all three strains significantly (P<0.05) promoted plant growth, with chlorophyll content, plant height, and stem diameter increased by approximately 15%–30%, root length extended by more than 55%, and belowground biomass showing the most pronounced improvement. In terms of nutrient accumulation, total nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, and sulfur contents were all enhanced, while iron content had the greatest increase, reaching 112.50%. Conclusion The rhizosphere soil of Yunnan oilseed rape harbors SOB strains with both high-efficiency sulfur oxidation and multiple plant growth-promoting functions. Strain YNK-FB0053 (B. gladioli), YNK-FB0056 (P. endophytica), and YNK-FB0057 (P. aryabhattai) significantly enhance seed germination, Solanum lycopersicum plant growth, and mineral element accumulation, demonstrating substantial potential for agricultural application as novel multifunctional bioinoculants.

Key words: soil sulfur cycle, sulfur-oxidizing bacteria, Burkholderia gladioli, Pantoea endophytica, Priestia aryabhattai, microbial resources

CHEN Yan, LIU Xin, SHI Zhu-feng, PU Te, LIU En-de, ZHANG Yi-jie, CAO Yan-ru, YANG Pei-wen. Screening， Identification and Biological Activity of Three Sulfur-oxidizing Bacteria[J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2026, 42(1): 315-328.

Figures/Tables 16

References 39

[1]	Supikova K, Kosinova A, Vavrusa M, et al. Sulfated phenolic acids in plants [J]. Planta, 2022, 255(6): 124.
[2]	Zenda T, Liu ST, Dong AY, et al. Revisiting sulphur—the once neglected nutrient: it’s roles in plant growth, metabolism, stress tolerance and crop production [J]. Agriculture, 2021, 11(7): 626.
[3]	Borpatragohain P, Rose TJ, Liu L, et al. Remobilization and fate of sulphur in mustard [J]. Ann Bot, 2019, 124(3): 471-480.
[4]	Chaudhary S, Dhanker R, Kumar R, et al. Importance of legumes and role of sulphur oxidizing bacteria for their production: a review [J]. Legume Res Int J, 2020: 275-284.
[5]	Shah SH, Islam S, Mohammad F. Sulphur as a dynamic mineral element for plants: a review [J]. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr, 2022, 22(2): 2118-2143.
[6]	Joshi N, Gothalwal R, Singh M, et al. Novel sulphur-oxidizing bacteria consummate sulphur deficiency in oil seed crop [J]. Arch Microbiol, 2021, 203(1): 1-6.
[7]	Jadhav SC, Salvi VG, Kasture MC, et al. Influence of different levels of sulphur and biofertilizers on soil properties and yield of mulched groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) in lateritic soils of Konkan region[J]. Pharma Innovation,2022, 11(1):1040-1045.
[8]	Li Q, Gao Y, Yang A. Sulfur homeostasis in plants[J]. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 2020, 21(23): 8926.
[9]	Saha B, Saha S, Roy PD, et al. Microbial transformation of sulphur: an approach to combat the sulphur deficiencies in agricultural soils [M]//Role of Rhizospheric Microbes in Soil. Singapore: Springer Singapore, 2018: 77-97.
[10]	Santana MM, Dias T, Gonzalez JM, et al. Transformation of organic and inorganic sulfur-adding perspectives to new players in soil and rhizosphere [J]. Soil Biol Biochem, 2021, 160: 108306.
[11]	Zhao C, Wang J, Zang F, et al. Both water content and sulfur-oxidizing bacterial community affect elemental sulfur oxidation in soils with different textures[J]. Available at SSRN 4029206,2022. .
[12]	Das SK, Mishra AK, Tindall BJ, et al. Oxidation of Thiosulfate by a New Bacterium, Bosea thiooxidans. (strain BI-42) gen. nov., sp. nov.: Analysis of Phylogeny Based on Chemotaxonomy and 16S Ribosomal DNA Sequencing [J]. Int J Syst Bacteriol, 1996, 46(4): 981-987.
[13]	Nadella RK, Vaiyapuri M, Kusunur AB, et al. Isolation and characterization of sulphur oxidizing bacteria (Halothiobacillus sp.) from aquaculture farm soil [J]. J Environ Biol, 2019, 40(3): 363-369.
[14]	Shinde AH, Sharma A, Doshi S, et al. Isolation and screening of sulfur-oxidizing bacteria from coast of Bhavnagar, India, and formulation of consortium for bioremediation [J]. Environ Sci Pollut Res, 2022, 29(36): 54136-54149.
[15]	Xie ZZ, Li SR, Lin WT, et al. Parasulfuritortus cantonensis gen. nov., sp. nov., a microaerophilic sulfur-oxidizing bacterium isolated from freshwater sediment [J]. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol, 2021, 71(2): 004657.
[16]	Borse K, Agnihotri V, Bhandarkar H, et al. Effective sulfur oxidizing bacterial isolation from process waste water of food industry [J]. Plant Arch, 2021, 21(Suppliment-1): 1595-1604.
[17]	Chaudhary S, Dhanker R, Singh K, et al. Characterization of sulfur-oxidizing bacteria isolated from mustard (Brassica juncea L.) rhizosphere having the capability of improving sulfur and nitrogen uptake [J]. J Appl Microbiol, 2022, 133(5): 2814-2825.
[18]	Ashraf S. Isolation, screening and identification of lead and cadmium resistant sulfur oxidizing bacteria [J]. Pak J Agric Sci, 2018, 55(2): 349-359.
[19]	Sajjad W, Bhatti TM, Hasan F, et al. Characterization of sulfur-oxidizing bacteria isolated from acid mine drainage and black shale samples [J]. Pak J Bot, 2016, 48(3):1253-1262.
[20]	Chaudhary S, Dhanker R, Tanvi SG. Characterization and optimization of culture conditions for sulphur oxidizing bacteria after isolation from rhizospheric mustard soil, decomposing sites and pit house[J]. Int J Biol Biomol Agric Food Biotechnol Eng, 2017, 11:379-383.
[21]	刘艳, 杨旭, 李加松, 等. 云南省油菜生产现状及发展建议 [J]. 中国农技推广, 2023, 39(10): 14-17.
	Liu Y, Yang X, Li JS, et al. Present situation and development suggestions of rapeseed production in Yunnan Province [J]. China Agric Technol Ext, 2023, 39(10): 14-17.
[22]	国家统计局. 中国统计年鉴-2020 [M]. 北京:中国统计出版社,2020.
	National Bureau of Statistics. China Statistical Yearbook-2020[M]. Beijing: China Statistics Press, 2020.
[23]	冯路遥, 赵江源, 施竹凤, 等. 森林根际土壤细菌的分离、鉴定及生物活性筛选 [J]. 生物技术通报, 2024, 40(1): 294-307.
	Feng LY, Zhao JY, Shi ZF, et al. Isolation and identification of bacteria in forest rhizosphere soil and their biological activity screening [J]. Biotechnol Bull, 2024, 40(1): 294-307.
[24]	Senthilkumar M, Amaresan N, Sankaranarayanan A. Quantitative estimation of sulfate produced by sulfur-oxidizing bacteria [M]//Plant-Microbe Interactions. New York, NY: Springer US, 2020: 73-75.
[25]	Joshi R, McSpadden Gardener BB. Identification and characterization of novel genetic markers associated with biological control activities in Bacillus subtilis [J]. Phytopathology^® , 2006, 96(2): 145-154.
[26]	Mora I, Cabrefiga J, Montesinos E. Antimicrobial peptide genes in Bacillus strains from plant environments [J]. Int Microbiol, 2011, 14(4): 213-223.
[27]	郑文艺, 韩海燕, 崔海超, 等. 欧洲疮痂链霉菌F5的鉴定及其抗菌活性 [J]. 微生物学通报, 2022, 49(6): 2111-2123.
	Zheng WY, Han HY, Cui HC, et al. Characterization and antipathogenic activity of Streptomyces europaeiscabiei F5 from the rhizosphere of pigeon pea [J]. Microbiol China, 2022, 49(6): 2111-2123.
[28]	祁鹤兴, 赵映珺, 李鹏, 等. 产PK和NRP类抗生素苦豆子内生放线菌分子筛选及抗生素类型鉴定 [J]. 微生物学通报, 2016, 43(3): 583-592.
	Qi HX, Zhao YJ, Li P, et al. Screening and identification of polyketide and non-ribosomal peptide antibiotics from endophytic actinomycetes of Sophora alopecuroides L [J]. Microbiol China, 2016, 43(3): 583-592.
[29]	布坎南. 伯杰细菌鉴定手册第八版 [M]. 8版. 北京: 科学出版社, 1984.
	Buchanan RE. Bergey’s manual of determinative bacteriology [M]. 8th ed. Beijing: Science Press, 1984.
[30]	东秀珠, 蔡妙英. 常见细菌系统鉴定手册 [M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2001.
	Dong XZ, Cai MY. Handbook of identification of common bacterial systems [M]. Beijing: Science Press, 2001.
[31]	Walsh PS, Metzger DA, Higuchi R. Chelex 100 as a medium for simple extraction of DNA for PCR-based typing from forensic material [J]. BioTechniques, 2013, 54(3): 134-139.
[32]	廖永琴, 王楠, 申云鑫, 等. 三株酚酸降解菌的筛选与鉴定及其生物活性 [J]. 微生物学通报, 2024, 51(6): 2193-2214.
	Liao YQ, Wang N, Shen YX, et al. Three phenolic acid-degrading bacterial strains: screening, identification, and biological activities [J]. Microbiol China, 2024, 51(6): 2193-2214.
[33]	Vishnu, Sharma P, Kaur J, et al. Characterization of sulfur oxidizing bacteria and their effect on growth promotion of Brassica napus L [J]. J Basic Microbiol, 2024, 64(12): e2400239.
[34]	Maksimov IV, Singh BP, Cherepanova EA, et al. Prospects and applications of lipopeptide-producing bacteria for plant protection (review) [J]. Appl Biochem Microbiol, 2020, 56(1): 15-28.
[35]	Suárez-Moreno ZR, Caballero-Mellado J, Coutinho BG, et al. Common features of environmental and potentially beneficial plant-associated Burkholderia [J]. Microb Ecol, 2012, 63(2): 249-266.
[36]	Bhakat K, Chakraborty A, Islam E. Characterization of zinc solubilization potential of arsenic tolerant Burkholderia spp. isolated from rice rhizospheric soil [J]. World J Microbiol Biotechnol, 2021, 37(3): 39.
[37]	Zhang XC, Wang NN, Hou MM, et al. Contribution of K solubilising bacteria (Burkholderia sp.) promotes tea plant growth (Camellia sinesis) and leaf polyphenols content by improving soil available K level [J]. Funct Plant Biol, 2022, 49(3): 283-294.
[38]	Yang WT, Yi YJ, Xia B. Unveiling the duality of Pantoea dispersa: a mini review [J]. Sci Total Environ, 2023, 873: 162320.
[39]	张德锋, 高艳侠, 王亚军, 等. 贝莱斯芽孢杆菌的分类、拮抗功能及其应用研究进展 [J]. 微生物学通报, 2020, 47(11): 3634-3649.
	Zhang DF, Gao YX, Wang YJ, et al. Advances in taxonomy, antagonistic function and application of Bacillus velezensis [J]. Microbiol China, 2020, 47(11): 3634-3649.

序号 No.	州（市） Prefectures （Cities）	海拔 Height （m）	经度（E） Longitude	纬度（N） Latitude
1	丽江	1 832	105°17′09″	27°51′27″
2	大理	1 969	100°08′28.77″	25°37′1.82″
3	曲靖	1 590	104°23′38.07″	25°21′39.99″
4	保山	1 650	98°32′31″	24°56′48.93″
5	楚雄	1 816	101°37′01.35″	25°18′33.10″
6	昭通	2 141	105°17′09″	27°51′27″
7	迪庆	3 122	98°39′11.83″	27°58′6.77″
8	怒江	2 963	99°51′35.64″	27°10′58.80″

序号 No.	州（市） Prefectures （Cities）	海拔 Height （m）	经度（E） Longitude	纬度（N） Latitude
1	丽江	1 832	105°17′09″	27°51′27″
2	大理	1 969	100°08′28.77″	25°37′1.82″
3	曲靖	1 590	104°23′38.07″	25°21′39.99″
4	保山	1 650	98°32′31″	24°56′48.93″
5	楚雄	1 816	101°37′01.35″	25°18′33.10″
6	昭通	2 141	105°17′09″	27°51′27″
7	迪庆	3 122	98°39′11.83″	27°58′6.77″
8	怒江	2 963	99°51′35.64″	27°10′58.80″

引物名称Primer name	引物序列Primer sequence （5′-3′）	产物长度Product length （bp）	参考文献Reference
SrfAB	GTTCTCGCAGTCCAGCAGAAG GCCGAGCGTATCCGTACCGAG	308	［25］
yndJ	CAGAGCGACAGCAATCACAT TGAATTTCGGTCCGCTTATC	212	［25］
fenD	CCTGCAGAAGGAGAAGTGAAG TGCTCATCGTCTTCCGTTTC	293	［25］
ituC	TTCACTTTTGATCTGGCGAT CGTCCGGTACATTTTCAC	575	［25］
bamC	CTGGAAGAGATGCCGCTTAC AAGAGTGCGTTTTCTTCGGA	957	［26］
dhbC	ATGTTGGATCAAAACGTTAT TCATATGTGATCCACGCCCA	1 197	［25］
sboA	TCGGTTTGTAAACTTCAACTGC GTCCACTAGACAAGCGGCTC	334	［26］
ysnE	GGCTGTGAACCTTTGCTATG GCTGTTCGGGTCCTCTTTAT	462	［25］
bioA	TTCCACGGCCATTCCTATAC TTTGTCCCCTTATCCTGCAC	210	［26］
PKSI	TSAAGTCSAACATCGGB CGCAGGTTSCSGTACCAG	1 200—1 400	［27］
PKSII	ACCGGCT GCACSTCSGGSCT ACGTAGTCSAGGTCGCASAC	700	［28］
NRPS	GCSTACSYSATSTACACSTCSGG SASGTCVCCSGTSCGGTAS	800	［27］

引物名称Primer name	引物序列Primer sequence （5′-3′）	产物长度Product length （bp）	参考文献Reference
SrfAB	GTTCTCGCAGTCCAGCAGAAG GCCGAGCGTATCCGTACCGAG	308	［25］
yndJ	CAGAGCGACAGCAATCACAT TGAATTTCGGTCCGCTTATC	212	［25］
fenD	CCTGCAGAAGGAGAAGTGAAG TGCTCATCGTCTTCCGTTTC	293	［25］
ituC	TTCACTTTTGATCTGGCGAT CGTCCGGTACATTTTCAC	575	［25］
bamC	CTGGAAGAGATGCCGCTTAC AAGAGTGCGTTTTCTTCGGA	957	［26］
dhbC	ATGTTGGATCAAAACGTTAT TCATATGTGATCCACGCCCA	1 197	［25］
sboA	TCGGTTTGTAAACTTCAACTGC GTCCACTAGACAAGCGGCTC	334	［26］
ysnE	GGCTGTGAACCTTTGCTATG GCTGTTCGGGTCCTCTTTAT	462	［25］
bioA	TTCCACGGCCATTCCTATAC TTTGTCCCCTTATCCTGCAC	210	［26］
PKSI	TSAAGTCSAACATCGGB CGCAGGTTSCSGTACCAG	1 200—1 400	［27］
PKSII	ACCGGCT GCACSTCSGGSCT ACGTAGTCSAGGTCGCASAC	700	［28］
NRPS	GCSTACSYSATSTACACSTCSGG SASGTCVCCSGTSCGGTAS	800	［27］

D/d	固氮指数 Nitrogen fixation	溶锌指数 Zinc dissolution	解磷指数 Phosphorus solution	溶磷指数 Phosphorus dissolution
YNK-FB0053	4.106±0.694a	5.129± 0.459a	3.453±0.320a	1.506±0.425b
YNK-FB0056	4.476±0.240a	5.087± 0.302a	3.687±0.251a	3.460±0.441a
YNK-FB0057	2.060±0.183b	2.660±0.613b	1.157±0.562b	2.910±0.571ab