Box plot illustrating epi- and endophyte major bacterial phyla.

Contexts in source publication

Context 1

... and A. tortilis) demonstrated separate clusters within the endophytic bacterial communities (p-value = 0.006, Fig. 2A and B), they did not separate into different clusters in the epiphytic samples (p-value = 0.585, Fig. 2A). To illustrate these differences, major bacterial phyla were plotted for both species in epi- and endophytic samples (Fig. 3). Epiphytic samples showed significantly higher abundance of Actinobacteria, Cyanobacteria and significantly lower abundance of Firmicutes and Proteobacteria compared with endophytic samples from the same leaves. While epiphytic bacterial communities showed no significant changes in phylum composition between the host species (A. ...

Context 2

... and significantly lower abundance of Firmicutes and Proteobacteria compared with endophytic samples from the same leaves. While epiphytic bacterial communities showed no significant changes in phylum composition between the host species (A. raddiana or A. tortilis), the endophytic bacterial communities differed between acacia species (Fig. 3). In endophytic bacterial communities, abundance of Firmicutes was significantly higher on A. raddiana compared with leaves sampled from A. tortilis trees (61.2 ± 32.0% and 32.0 ± 27.9%, respectively), while A. tortilis had a significantly higher abundance of Proteobacteria than ...

Context 3

... and enzymes [37]. These plant responses were shown to affect plants-microbiome colonization [32,38,39]. Moreover, our results showed that the endophytic and epiphytic bacterial communities were significantly different from each other ( Fig. 2A). In fact, endophytic but not epiphytic bacteria communities, differed between the two acacia species (Fig. 3A, 3B, 4) - specific to the host (acacia tree). This potentially indicates that endophytic bacteria were horizontally transmitted and that they might be more affected by genotypic factors rather than abiotic factors ...