Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Plant growth-promoting bacteria can influence host metabolism, but live-inoculation systems confound chemical signaling with colonization, nutrient exchange, and continuous metabolite release. Here, Paenibacillus cellulositrophicus LB46 was co-cultured with sterile Casuarina equisetifolia seedlings for 5 d. After 0.22 μm filtration, the interaction-conditioned filtrate was applied to new sterile seedlings; no culturable LB46 was detected in the filtrate under the plating conditions used. Untargeted LC–QTOF-MS profiled roots after 3 and 5 d and shoots after 5 d. The filtrate induced broad metabolic remodeling, with stronger responses in roots than in shoots. A total of 473, 437, and 125 metabolites met the differential-abundance criterion (BH-FDR < 0.05) in 3 d roots, 5 d roots, and 5 d shoots, respectively; 273 root metabolites showed a significant treatment × time interaction (BH-FDR < 0.05). Temporal classification revealed pronounced turnover among early-transient, late-induced, and sustained responses. At 5 d, only 11 metabolites met the differential-abundance criterion in both roots and shoots, indicating predominantly tissue-differentiated remodeling. These results define temporally and spatially differentiated metabolic responses to the interaction-conditioned environment. Because bulk physicochemical properties of the filtrates were not characterized, the observed responses cannot be attributed exclusively to specific chemical signals.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: