Cadmium-tolerant root microbes reduce cadmium accumulation in Ligusticum chuanxiong Hort.


Abstract

Ligusticum chuanxiong Hort. is an important medicinal plant. Its dried rhizomes are used in traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) and have demonstrated significant efficacy in treating cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases. However, L. chuanxiong is a cadmium hyperaccumulator, which leads to cadmium concentrations in its medicinal rhizomes that often exceed the safe limit for medicinal materials. This property not only impedes the synthesis and accumulation of the plant's own active compounds but also triggers export bans or rejections, resulting in substantial economic losses. Building on our previous work in which three cadmium-tolerant microbial strains were isolated from the L. chuanxiong root system, this study aims to evaluate their efficacy in mitigating cadmium stress. Specifically, we investigated their ability to alleviate growth inhibition in the plant, reduce cadmium uptake, and explore their underlying tolerance mechanisms. This study employed a hydroponic system to conduct co-culture experiments with these microbial strains. Under cadmium stress (20 mg · L ⁻¹, Group M), L. chuanxiong exhibited significant growth inhibition, root browning to dark brown or black, and increased malondialdehyde (MDA) content in leaves and roots. Cadmium stress induced oxidative damage and activated the antioxidant system (elevated CAT, POD, SOD in leaves; POD in roots). In contrast, co-culture with cadmium-tolerant strains (B90, F24, F38) alleviated growth inhibition. MDA content and CAT activity in leaves showed no significant increase, while POD and SOD activities were higher than in the CK group but significantly lower than in the M group, indicating reduced oxidative stress. All three strains significantly reduced cadmium content in shoots and roots, with variations among strains and plant parts. F38 decreased root cadmium by 54.72% and promoted cadmium translocation to shoots, whereas F24 reduced shoot cadmium by 40.27%. B90 demonstrated stronger efficacy in enhancing plant cadmium tolerance. Overall strain performance ranked as F38 > F24 > B90 in alleviating cadmium toxicity and promoting plant growth. In conclusion, these root-derived cadmium-tolerant strains effectively mitigate cadmium stress and reduce accumulation in medicinal rhizomes, providing valuable microbial resources and microecological strategies for ensuring the safety of medicinal plants.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].