17
necessary to address ecotoxicological studies of accumulated pollutants (Abhilash
and Yunus 2011). Because the use of green carbon can slow the risk of atmospheric
pollution from fossil fuel utilization (Tour et al. 2010), the annual crops of shortrotation woody biomass could be the best options to address the energy crisis issue
(McKenney et al. 2011). Additional advantages of biomass may also be seen in
increased soil fertility, microbial community enrichment, prevention of land erosion, and biodiversity maintenance (Abhilash et al. 2011; Tripathi et al. 2016a, b).
Biomasses produced by different microbe-assisted phyto-remediating plants
have the capacity to revitalize and remediate the marginal or degraded lands by
carbon sequestration, decreased greenhouse effects, and addition of organic carbon as rhizo-secretions and litterfall (Abhilash et al. 2013b; Zhalnina et al. 2018).
Some plants have a fast N-uptake and N-use capacity that might concurrently
improve the soil fertility (Gelfand et al. 2013). The majority of lands are contaminated with pesticides, fly ash, organic pollutants, and heavy metals. Restoration of
these contaminated lands is possible through multipurpose phyto-remediation
mediated by Jatropha curcas, Vigna radiata, and Spinacia oleracea (Tripathi
et al. 2014b; Dubey et al. 2014; Edrisi et al. 2015). Plants such as Eucalyptus,
Pinus, Populus, Salix, Pongamia, Miscanthus, Camelina, and Panicum have multipurpose benefits that could deepen the impact of biomass on land restoration,
fertility, and food security (Graham-Rowe 2011; Tripathi et al. 2017). In addition
to microbe-assisted phytoremediation, microorganisms help in biomass and bioenergy production (and also act as major players in terrestrial ecosystems). The
associated processes of this system include carbon and nitrogen cycling, plant
growth promotion, and greenhouse gases (CO 2 , CH 4 , and N 2 O feedback system)
(Harfouche et al. 2011). Alternative approaches such as transgenic technology for
modifying plant root traits and harnessing benefits of plant–microbe interactions
for remediation of the contaminated lands are suggested (Abhilash et al. 2012;
Abhilash and Dubey 2015). These approaches can sequester more carbon along
with enhanced biomass production that could be used further as a feedstock for
bioenergy (Tables 2.2 and 2.3).
2.9 Major Challenges for Wide-Scale Utilization
of Microbial Services
Plant–microbe interactions offer multiple benefits, but the process is underutilised
and lacks wide-scale application. Although there are reports of the beneficial impact
of plant–microbe processes on plant health, food production, and ecosystem services under controlled conditions, similar results are often not replicated during the
field application. Most studies consider a single microbe or a combination of two or
three microbes; however, in a natural system these microbes have to compete for
niche adaptation in multipartite interaction with a large number of microbial populations (Hussa and Goodrich-Blair 2013). Various biotic and abiotic factors also
affect interaction performance. Further, we have limited information regarding how
these interactions vary with changing ecological parameters, time, and space
2.9 Major Challenges for Wide-Scale Utilization of Microbial Services
necessary to address ecotoxicological studies of accumulated pollutants (Abhilash
and Yunus 2011). Because the use of green carbon can slow the risk of atmospheric
pollution from fossil fuel utilization (Tour et al. 2010), the annual crops of shortrotation woody biomass could be the best options to address the energy crisis issue
(McKenney et al. 2011). Additional advantages of biomass may also be seen in
increased soil fertility, microbial community enrichment, prevention of land erosion, and biodiversity maintenance (Abhilash et al. 2011; Tripathi et al. 2016a, b).
Biomasses produced by different microbe-assisted phyto-remediating plants
have the capacity to revitalize and remediate the marginal or degraded lands by
carbon sequestration, decreased greenhouse effects, and addition of organic carbon as rhizo-secretions and litterfall (Abhilash et al. 2013b; Zhalnina et al. 2018).
Some plants have a fast N-uptake and N-use capacity that might concurrently
improve the soil fertility (Gelfand et al. 2013). The majority of lands are contaminated with pesticides, fly ash, organic pollutants, and heavy metals. Restoration of
these contaminated lands is possible through multipurpose phyto-remediation
mediated by Jatropha curcas, Vigna radiata, and Spinacia oleracea (Tripathi
et al. 2014b; Dubey et al. 2014; Edrisi et al. 2015). Plants such as Eucalyptus,
Pinus, Populus, Salix, Pongamia, Miscanthus, Camelina, and Panicum have multipurpose benefits that could deepen the impact of biomass on land restoration,
fertility, and food security (Graham-Rowe 2011; Tripathi et al. 2017). In addition
to microbe-assisted phytoremediation, microorganisms help in biomass and bioenergy production (and also act as major players in terrestrial ecosystems). The
associated processes of this system include carbon and nitrogen cycling, plant
growth promotion, and greenhouse gases (CO 2 , CH 4 , and N 2 O feedback system)
(Harfouche et al. 2011). Alternative approaches such as transgenic technology for
modifying plant root traits and harnessing benefits of plant–microbe interactions
for remediation of the contaminated lands are suggested (Abhilash et al. 2012;
Abhilash and Dubey 2015). These approaches can sequester more carbon along
with enhanced biomass production that could be used further as a feedstock for
bioenergy (Tables 2.2 and 2.3).
2.9 Major Challenges for Wide-Scale Utilization
of Microbial Services
Plant–microbe interactions offer multiple benefits, but the process is underutilised
and lacks wide-scale application. Although there are reports of the beneficial impact
of plant–microbe processes on plant health, food production, and ecosystem services under controlled conditions, similar results are often not replicated during the
field application. Most studies consider a single microbe or a combination of two or
three microbes; however, in a natural system these microbes have to compete for
niche adaptation in multipartite interaction with a large number of microbial populations (Hussa and Goodrich-Blair 2013). Various biotic and abiotic factors also
affect interaction performance. Further, we have limited information regarding how
these interactions vary with changing ecological parameters, time, and space
2.9 Major Challenges for Wide-Scale Utilization of Microbial Services