Modern agricultural technology aims to achieve controlled environmental farming. To this end, it seeks to eliminate that old troublemaker: the soil. Conversely, the modern farmer is looking for ways to harness soil life – the edaphon – to his advantage. In the topsoil, fungi use their fungal threads, the mycelium, to create a dense network, also known in forests as the ‘Wood-Wide-Web’. (45)
by Udo Pollmer, April 14, 2025
Within this network, plants pass on their pest warnings, so to speak, via a mass email. Fungal mycelia also transport toxins to...
...eliminate pests elsewhere or to inhibit the growth of competing herbs. Plant viruses do not miss this opportunity; they, in turn, spread through the root internet in the same way that computer viruses spread via the internet.
Chapter 5. The Soil – a Bazaar with Internet and Delivery Service
At the same time, fungi act as the plants’ delivery service. Douglas firs, for example, supply carbon to birches via the Wood-Wide-Web. Ghost flowers (Monotropa uniflora) do not photosynthesise at all; they obtain their carbon requirements exclusively via fungi. The fungi, in turn, obtain the nutrient from forest trees and pass on a portion of it. (46) It is no different in the vegetable garden. (45)
Soil life thus opens up new possibilities for fertilisation. As three-quarters of the atmosphere consists of nitrogen, microbes such as the bacterium Azospirillum are highly sought after, as they fix atmospheric nitrogen in a similar way to the nodule bacteria found in legumes. (47) Azospirillum does not form nodules, but lives on the roots. It is already being used in cereal fields, vegetable beds and fruit orchards. (48) There, the microbe can replace nitrate fertilisers.
In the rainforest, the bacterium is used to produce terra preta. In the desert, other microbes are naturally responsible for fertility. Isn’t it strange that deserts turn green and blossom virtually overnight after a tropical thunderstorm? Even though the soil is free of humus or fertiliser? The growth is more impressive than what our farmers can achieve on their meticulously tended fields. One reason is that the flora in arid regions forms a symbiotic relationship with cyanobacteria (‘blue-green algae’), which provide it with the necessary nutrients. (49)
There are now high hopes that special cyanobacteria such as Nostoc, Nodularia or Anabaena will finally be able to replace mineral fertilisers such as nitrogen and phosphate. (50) Unfortunately, many attempts to inoculate fields with these microorganisms have failed so far; they were quickly overwhelmed by the native soil flora. (50) For this reason, they are cultivated in bioreactors and extracts are obtained from them which, in addition to fertiliser, primarily contain phytohormones and antibiotic substances, e.g. benzoic acid. (51) As usual, this method is not without risk, as many cyanobacteria can produce potent toxins such as microcystins, which are also absorbed by plants. (52, 53)
A large group of microbes that are already being used commercially alongside the bacterium Azospirillum are arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Unlike true mycorrhizal fungi, they do not live in the root nodules but on them in a loose symbiotic relationship. This is a particularly viable option for organic farming, given the shortage of animal manure and the fact that mineral fertilisers are frowned upon.
Arbuscular fungi such as Rhizophagus irregularis improve the roots’ access to nutrients. The fungus grows into the root, creating a direct connection known as an arbuscle. The mycelium then grows outwards from the root, tapping into a volume of soil many times greater than the root could reach. It mobilises phosphorus, sulphur, potassium and trace elements such as zinc and copper. To treat seeds, a mere 1.5 grams of Rhizophagus spores is sufficient for an entire hectare. (54)
Whilst inoculating crops with arbuscular fungi has already become established as a way of replacing fertiliser, the targeted use of the recently discovered rhizophagy is only just emerging: plants attract microbes with root secretions and cultivate them. Most crops feed around a third of their carbohydrate production to their tiny guests. Their root tips then take up the commensals, destroy their cell walls with hydrogen peroxide and ‘suck’ them out. From digested microbes, plants can not only meet a significant proportion of their requirements for nitrogen, iron and other minerals; they also utilise the microbes’ amino acids and even proteins. (55–57)
Some of these microbes are able to survive. They produce ethylene to stimulate the growth of root hairs. In this way, they manage to penetrate a little deeper back into the soil. It is noteworthy that there they can regenerate, multiply and once again be fed upon and absorbed by the roots. (58–60) Presumably, virtually all plants are capable of utilising this form of ‘nutrition’. (55) The discovery of rhizophagy is rightly regarded as a revolution in our understanding of plant nutrition.
Chapter 6. Ploughshares to scrap: No-Till!
Arbuscular fungi living in the soil and rhizophagy form the basis of no-till farming. By avoiding intensive tillage such as ploughing, the network remains intact and fertility is preserved. (61, 62). In no-till farming, the seed is incorporated into the crop residues, the stubble, at the time of harvest using a cultivator or a direct-drill machine. The soil is loosened at the surface, the seed is placed in the soil and sealed with a roller. It is not turned over deeply with a plough, as was done in the past. This protects against erosion, improves water retention and prevents waterlogged, impassable soil after heavy rainfall. Finally, the tunnels created by soil organisms, particularly earthworms, are largely preserved as drainage channels.
With a direct-drilling machine, farmers can do without some of their conventional machinery. The amount of fertiliser and plant protection products, as well as equipment and fuel, required is significantly lower. It is understandable that companies supplying the agricultural sector with machinery and agrochemicals are reluctant to embrace this method. As a result, we hear little about it here, whereas no-till farming has been popular in the Americas, Asia and Australia for decades. (63)
Agriculture – whether traditional or no-till – now makes use of arbuscular fungi. For seed inoculation, they are often combined with plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR). They colonise the root zone, ensure better nutrient uptake, break down crop residues and help suppress pathogenic fungi such as Fusarium, which benefits soil health. (64, 65) A prerequisite for success is regular crop rotation.
Growth-promoting rhizobacteria not only provide extra fertiliser, they also synthesise hormones such as auxins, cytokinins and gibberellins. These promote root and shoot development. Incidentally, the application of tryptophan serves the same purpose. Plants use these to produce the auxin IAA. (66) This amino acid is often combined with rhizobacteria, which increases the yield of vegetables or the fruit set of fruit trees. (67) Another amino acid now in use, methionine, is the precursor of ethylene. This accelerates ripening. (48)
Every cultivation method has its Achilles’ heel: because the soil is not turned over, field mice can establish themselves in large numbers and eat everything bare. In such a case, tillage that destroys the rodents’ burrows is wiser than the use of poison. Weeds can also prove to be a problem, which, at least during the transition, requires the use of herbicides such as glyphosate. Their use is self-limiting, as soil life must not be harmed. Any glyphosate residues in our waterways do not originate from agriculture, as researchers in Tübingen recently demonstrated. (68, 69) Rather, they are the result of liquid detergents used in German households. (70) That’s just bad luck …
No-till farming is more environmentally friendly than organic farming. (71) If no-till farming is viewed as a method rather than an ideology, conventional farms will adopt it sooner or later. With direct drilling, the no-till movement is on the verge of replacing organic farming globally without the latter’s yield losses.
Chapter 7. Mother Earth’s Poison Kitchen
Microbes can do more in the field than simply fertilise plants and stimulate their growth hormonally. They suppress pathogens and suppress weeds. The ability of some microbes in the root zone to eliminate pathogens makes them suitable as biological seed dressings. Hydrogen cyanide (cyanide) is a popular secondary plant compound among soil bacteria. Rhizobacteria use this highly toxic gas for defence and as a hunting poison. Many a competing plant, commonly known as a ‘weed’, begins to wither (48, 72, 73).
Rhizobacteria, such as various Pseudomonas species or Streptomyces, produce antibiotics and fungicides. They protect their habitat with substances such as colistin, 2,4-diacetylphloroglucinol, (kanosamine, oligomycin A, oomycin A, visconamide, xanthobaccin, polymyxin, zwittermicin, petrobactin, pyoluteorin, pyrrolnitrin, phenazine, bacitracin and γ-butyrolactone, to name but a few (48, 74–76). Many of these have long been in use in medicine and agriculture, mostly as antibiotics, pesticides or drugs. (77) Some, such as the growth promoter bacitracin, have been banned in livestock housing in the EU for consumer protection. But in lettuce they are apparently unproblematic because they are ‘vegetarian’.
It may come as a surprise that wherever plant-based foods thrive, antibiotics are ubiquitous. It is not only soil bacteria that are active; moulds also play their part, for example in the form of chloramphenicol or polyketides, which include tetracyclines and statins – i.e. cholesterol-lowering drugs. (76) The notion that, due to resistance, there will soon be no medicines left to treat bacterial infections is the result of dubious propaganda. The active substances are numerous, just like the microorganisms that produce them. Yet doctors are gradually being banned from using tried-and-tested antibiotics, and new ones are no longer being approved. This development is explosive; the deliberately engineered scarcity instils fear and fosters a sense of impending doom.
In agriculture, however, the market is booming with antibiotic and hormonal extracts from microbes, algae and plants. They are subsumed under the term ‘biostimulants’, a collective term for highly diverse active substances. (78) Often only trace amounts are required, which must be incorporated into large quantities of carrier substances so that they can be dosed correctly. Farmers regret the lack of a guarantee of success, as they were accustomed to with conventional agrochemicals. For instead of consistently increasing yields as hoped, they are particularly effective when plants are under stress such as drought, pest infestation and infections. In such cases, they often offset yield losses. They are, so to speak, a kind of harvest insurance for the farm.
Myxococcus xanthus, a soil bacterium, is a rising star in the field of biological plant protection. It lives on plant debris and forms predatory swarms to overpower and devour other microbes. (79) Not only does it feed on foreign species, but it also practises cannibalism: members of its own species are killed with poison, as a sophisticated injection apparatus instantly pierces the victim’s cell wall. (80)
A typical victim of the hunting squadron is Phytophthora infestans, itself a dreaded pathogen responsible for potato blight. (81) It is not particularly fussy and will also attack other vegetables. The same fate befalls tomato bacterial wilt, another devastating soil-borne disease. (Pathogen: Ralstonia solanacearum). (82) Myxococcus likes to poison its victims with heavy metals such as copper or kill them with antibiotics such as myxopyronins. (79) The latter are raising great hopes among plant protection specialists and pharmacists. (83)
Hunger is the best cook
When food is scarce, 100,000 or more myxococci gather together and form a tiny, yellowish fruiting body. Around ten per cent of them develop into spores. As soon as conditions improve, they germinate together within the fruiting body and form hunting swarms. Around a third of the cells survive. They only leave the fruiting body once they are full: most of the starving individuals die and serve as food for their fellow species. (80)
Chapter 8. Life in hiding: insidious endophytes
In contrast to Myxococcus, the next group of toxin producers is already firmly established in plant protection: the endophytes. These are fungi and bacteria that live within plants and combat insects, plant diseases, nematodes and weeds. (77) No-till farming relies on endophytes just as much as traditional agriculture.
Quinoa, known as the Inca grain, offers an impressive example of what endophytes are capable of. It germinates in a flash, even under the most adverse conditions. If germinated seeds dry out, they regenerate completely as soon as it rains again. If grains break, each piece germinates on its own. Some varieties are adapted to Chile’s coastal climate and can be irrigated with salty seawater. Others thrive on barren soils at an altitude of 4,000 metres. Even in the arid Atacama Desert, quinoa manages to survive. (84, 85)
No other crop achieves such feats. It owes this to its endophytes, which naturally live within the seeds and become active during germination: every quinoa seed contains specific Bacillus bacteria, which are themselves masters of survival. As robust, dormant spores, they lie in wait for better times. Upon germination, they first kill off competitors using hydrogen peroxide. (86)
A few years ago, New Zealand breeders succeeded in deterring birds that pose a threat to air traffic using endophytes. The grass at airports produces toxins that thoroughly spoil the birds’ appetite. (87) Since then, these grasses have also been used on agricultural meadows to scare away wild geese that wish to graze there. Furthermore, many insects are killed by the toxins produced by the endophytes. When there is nothing left to eat, the birds take flight. Such grasses are naturally in high demand among fruit growers and winegrowers. As ground cover, they keep pests at bay. This reduces the need for pesticides.
Breeders infect their seed with selected strains. In the case of grasses, these are mostly fungi of the genus Epichloë. These are closely related to the pathogen that causes the toxic ergot. (88) New varieties of German ryegrass and tall fescue have already caused livestock losses among cattle, sheep and horses worldwide. (89-92) In the USA, the damage was estimated at one billion dollars annually. (93) As might be expected, breeders also use endophytes for bread cereals. After all, these are also grasses. This can sometimes go wrong: when an Epichloë that lives in meadow grasses (Elymus) was transferred to durum wheat, the wheat plants died. (94)
Wheat and sunflowers thrive better when inoculated with endophytic bacteria such as Klebsiella pneumoniae, Bacillus cereus or Azospirillum brasilense. (95–97) They boost productivity by fixing nitrogen, making phosphate and potassium soluble, producing phytohormones such as indole-3-acetic acid (IAA) and suppressing harmful fungi such as Fusarium. Some Fusarium species, in turn, act as endophytes to combat other wheat diseases such as leaf blight, caused by the fungus Pyrenophora tritici-repentis. (98) Some are capable of killing nematodes or replacing insecticides. (76, 77, 99)
Why bother developing and extensively testing pesticides when the same, indeed stronger, effects can be achieved through endophytes? If this leads to losses in the animal world, society refrains from criticism because it is ‘natural’ and not ‘chemical’. Organic farming is therefore absolutely delighted; at last it can protect its crops ‘organically’. For consumers, however, pesticides offer greater safety than endophytes, as the latter do not reproduce.
Chapter 9. Phytonoses instead of zoonoses
Many people are now sitting up and taking notice when it comes to Klebsiella; after all, this microbe is notorious as a multi-resistant hospital pathogen, responsible for pneumonia, meningitis, urinary tract infections and sepsis. Its presence in wheat, maize and other crops seems strange. The experts never tire of assuring us that they only use harmless strains that are incapable of infecting humans.
It is true that plants generally harbour different strains of a microbial species than those found in hospitals. But microorganisms are highly adaptable. They mutate and acquire genetic material from other species, such as virulence genes or resistance plasmids. This is also the case with Bacillus cereus, an important endophyte. Naturally, its strains in our crops often possess genes that pose a risk due to the production of enterotoxins. (100)
In the case of Klebsiella, the expert community’s assessment is already changing. Conventional microbiological identification has proved inadequate. A distinction is now made between Klebsiella pneumoniae and Klebsiella variicola. The latter is primarily regarded as an endophyte. Unfortunately, it is also pathogenic to humans and, moreover, often possesses dangerous resistance traits. (101–103) Although infections caused by it are not yet as common, they are more lethal than those caused by pneumoniae. (104)
Klebsiella variicola infects both animals and plants. In cattle, it causes mastitis (101); in plants, it contributes to the decline of the ironwood or kangaroo tree, together with Ralstonia solanacearum, the pathogen responsible for tomato wilt. (105) Ironwood ( Casuarina equisetifolia ) is an important crop in the Pacific region. “Today, Klebsiella variicola can be regarded as a bacterial species,” states a review article, “that can infect humans as a pathogen and colonise plants as an endophyte and, in a few cases, as a pathogen.” (104)
This is why the term ‘phytonoses’ was coined, modelled on ‘zoonoses’ – that is, infections transmitted by animals such as rabies or the fish tapeworm. This naturally raises the question: does eating white bread carry a residual risk? Who knows, but the heat of the oven should have killed off the endophytes, if they were indeed infectious. Their toxins are relatively heat-resistant. (107) Raw plant-based foods fare the worst. This explains the regular occurrence of Klebsiella variicola in the gut flora. (106)
Undeterred, endophytes are always regarded as environmentally friendly because they are supposedly non-pathogenic. ‘It’s all harmless,’ the scientific community pats itself on the back smugly. Unfortunately, nothing is really certain here. Even the bacterium Rhizobium pusense, which is unanimously regarded as absolutely harmless, can trigger phytonoses. As an endophyte, it fixes nitrogen in the root nodules of chickpeas and mung beans. It is not only a significant bacterial growth promoter in crop production, but unfortunately also an opportunistic pathogen. The same applies to R. radiobacter. (108) The supposedly completely harmless rhizobia have been identified in life-threatening bacteraemia and peritonitis. (109–112)
Phytotherapeutics: herbal medicine, purely plant-based
Wild plants also use toxic endophytes to ward off excessive intrusion by animals. By concentrating the toxin near the rootstock, they prevent overgrazing and thus force the herds to move on. Many medicinal plants owe their alkaloids to these cohabitants. Thus, the notion that herbal medicine is ‘purely plant-based’ is, strictly speaking, somewhat misguided. Like many antibiotics, it is the work of microorganisms. For phytotherapy, endophytes are naturally desirable.
The beneficial microbes in the field explain why farmers who use hardly any fertiliser – or at least far less than the amount required according to Liebig’s law – are still able to harvest successfully. The microbes – whether arbuscular fungi or endophytes – also keep diseases and pests at bay. Hopefully, no grower will get the idea of equipping their plants with endophytes that also poison important pollinators, or that scare away the birds which the plant specifically attracts to help disperse its seeds. Not to mention consumers.
No-till is a promising approach for agriculture, even if it may take a few years after the switch for the benefits to become apparent. It should also be borne in mind that crops get off to a slow start at the beginning of their growth, but often outperform neighbouring conventional fields at harvest time.
English Editor: Josef Hueber
References
1. Heuvelink E et al: Some recent developments in controlled-environment agriculture: on plant physiology, sustainability, and autonomous control. Journal Of Horticultural Science and Biotechnology 2025; 100: 604–614
2. Guo M et al: Application of plant factory with artificial lighting in horticultural production: current progress and future trends. Horticultural Plant Journal 2025; doi.org/10.1016/j.hpj.2025.04.005.
3. Mattson N, Daughtrey M: Common diseases of hydroponic leafy greens and herbs. e-GRO Edible Alert 2022; 7: (1)
4. Raudales R, McGehee C: Biofungicides for control of root diseases on greenhouse-grown vegetables. e-GRO Edible Alert 2017; 2 (7): 1-4
5. Wallihan EF et al: Effect of pH on yield and leaf composition of hydroponic tomatoes. HortScience 1977; 12: 316—317
6. Zhang X et al: Effects of environment lighting on the growth, photosynthesis, and quality of hydroponic lettuce in a plant factory. International Journal of Agriculture & Biological Engineering 2018; 11 (2): 33–40
7. Lewis Ivey ML et al: What is Controlled Environment Agriculture (CEA)? Fact sheet, Ohio State University 23. May 2025
8. Walia A: Aeroponics: Growing in the mist. Just Agriculture 2021; June: 8-11
9. Kanojia A et al: Aeroponics: art of growing without soil. Just Agriculture 2021; June: 1-5
10. Chole AS et al: Vertical farming: controlled environment agriculture. Just Agriculture 2021; 1: 249-256
11. Eckinger E: Unterirdische Farm: Pflanzenbau in 33 Metern Tiefe. Agrarheute.com 2017; 5. Dec.
12. Yin R: Pasona urban farming. insideflows.org/project/pasona-urban-farming/ ohne Jahr
13. Freigang C: Vertical-Farming-Projekt der Migros gescheitert. Beobachter.ch 2021, 17. Juni
14. Dorian T, Pisa K: This farm is growing food deep beneath South Korean mountains. CNN 2019; 9. Dec.
15. Sharan SY et al: A novel approach to supplement plant growth with devotional music: an experimental research on mung bean (Vigna radiata L.). Journal of Geointerface 2023; 2: 69-76
16. Allievi S et al: A turning point in plant acoustics investigation. Plant Signaling & Behavior 2021; 16: e1919836
17. Demey ML et al: Sound perception in plants: from ecological significance to molecular understanding. Trends in Plant Science 2023; 28: 825-840
18. Yeoh JPS et al: Music for plants? An investigation into the impact of exposure to acoustic stimulus in bok choy (Brassica rapa) plants. Evolutionary Studies in Imaginative Culture 2024; 8: 129–143
19. Khait I et al: Plants emit informative airborne sounds under stress. bioRxiv 2019; e507590
20 Bhandawat A, Jayaswall K: Biological relevance of sound in plants. Environmental and Experimental Botany 2022; 200: e104919
21. Hegnsholt E et al: Tackling the 1.6-billion-ton food loss and waste crisis. Boston Consulting Group 2018; 20. August
22. Li B et al: Oral secretions: A key molecular interface of plant–insect herbivore Interactions. Journal of Integrative Agriculture 2025; 24: 1342–1358
23. Owen-Smith N: Woody plants, browsers and tannin in southern African savannas. Suid-Afrikaanse Tydskrif vir Wetenshap 1993; 89: 505-510
24. Hooimeijer JF et al: The diet of kudus in a mopane dominated area, South Africa. Koedoe 2005; 48: 93-102
25. Brenner ED et al: Plant neurobiology: an integrated view of plant signalling. Trends in Plant Science 2006; 11: 413-419
26. Trewavas A, Baluska F: The ubiquity of consciousness. EMBO Reports 2011; 12: 1221-1225
27. Trewavas A: The foundations of plant intelligence. Interface Focus 2017; 7: e20160098
28. Gagliano M et al: The Language of Plants. University of Minnesota, Mineapolis 2017
29. Bonato B et al: Cracking the code: a comparative approach to plant communication. Communicative & Integrative Biology 2021; 14: 176–185
30. Dambolena JS et al: Terpenes: natural products for controlling insects of importance to human health—a structure-activity relationship study. Psyche 2016, e4595823
31. Laothawornkitkul J et al: The role of isoprene in insect herbivory. Plant Signaling & Behavior 2008; 3: 1141–1142
32. Sahu A et al: Isoprene deters insect herbivory by priming plant hormone responses. Science Advances 2025; 11: eadu4637
33. Gaikwad T et al: Rapid local and systemic jasmonate signalling drives the initiation and establishment of plant systemic immunity. Nature Plants 2026; 12: 152-163
34. Wu X, Ye J: Manipulation of jasmonate signaling by plant viruses and their insect vectors. Viruses 2020; 12: e148
35. Min D et al: Application of methyl jasmonate to control disease of postharvest fruit and vegetables: A Meta-analysis. Postharvest Biology and Technology 2014; 208: e112667
36. Zhang Z et al: Jasmonate increases terpene synthase expression, leading to strawberry resistance to Botrytis cinerea infection. Plant Cell Reports 2022; 41: 1243-1260
37. Chiriboga XM et al: Diffusion of the maize root signal (E)-β-caryophyllene in soils of different textures and the effects on the migration of the entomopathogenic nematode Heterorhabditis megidis. Rhizosphere 2017; 3, Pt 1: 53-59
38. Zhao P et al: A small peptide APP3-14 disrupts pathogen–insect mutualism by modulating plant MYC2-mediated olfactory defense. Plant Communications 2025; 6: e101544
39. Groen SC et al: Virus infection of plants alters pollinator preference: a payback for susceptible hosts? PLoS Pathogens 2016; 12: e1005790
40. Bacon C, Hinton DM: Endophytes talking: Evidence for quorum sensing inhibitors by metabolites of endophytes. 10th International Symposium on Fungi Endophytes of Grasses. Salamanca 2018; 13-21 June
41. Kamath A et al: Quorum Sensing and Quorum Quenching: Two sides of the same coin. Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology 2023; 123: e101927
42. Gianoli E et al: Leaf mimicry in a climbing plant protects against herbivory. Current Biology 2014; 24: 984-987
43. White J, Yamashita F: Boquila trifoliolata mimics leaves of an artificial plastic host plant. Plant Signaling & Behavior 2021; 17: e1977530
44. Nick P: Kommunizieren statt Vergiften – neue Strategien für den Pflanzenschutz. BioSpektrum 2023: 29: 213-217
45. Giovannetti M et al: At the root of the wood wide web. Plant Signaling & Behavior 2006; 1: 1-5
46. Merckx VSFT et al: Mycoheterotrophy in the wood-wide web. Nature Plants 2024; doi.org/10.1038/s41477-024-01677-0
47. Pelagio-Flores R et al: A century of Azospirillum: plant growth promotion and agricultural promise. Plant Signaling & Behavior 2025; 20: e2551609
48. Zope VP et al: Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria: an overview in agricultural perspectives. In Sayyed RZ (ed.): Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria for Sustainable Stress Management, Microorganisms for Sustainability. Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd 2019: 345-361
49. Powell JT et al: Desert crust microorganisms, their environment, and human health. Journal of Arid Environments 2015; 112: 127-133
50. Massey MS, Davis JG: Beyond soil inoculation: cyanobacteria as a fertilizer replacement. Nitrogen 2023; 4: 253-262
51. Elagamey E et al: Perspective Chapter: Cyanobacteria – A Futuristic Effective Tool in Sustainable Agriculture. In: Tiwari A: Cyanobacteria – Recent Advances and New Perspectives. IntechOpen 2023
52. Botana LM (Ed): Phycotoxins: Chemistry and Biochemistry. Blackwell, Ames 2007
53. Botana LM (Ed): Seafood and Freshwater Toxins. Marcel Dekker, New York 2000
54. Reichelt W: Ackernde Pilzsporen. Laborjournal.de 3. Sept. 2020
55. White JF et al: Evidence for widespread microbivory of endophytic bacteria in roots of vascular plants through oxidative degradation in root cell periplasmic spaces. In: Singh Ak et al (Eds) PGPR Amelioration in Sustainable Agriculture. Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge 2019; 167-193
56. Stephenson D: How crop rotation & microbial math22nagement practices affect soil health. Strip-Till Farmer 20. Feb. 2023; striptillfarmer.com/articles/4695
57. Adamczyk B: How do terrestrial plants access high molecular mass organic nitrogen, and why does it matter for soil organic matter stabilization? Plant & Soil 2021; 465: 583–592
58. White JF et al: Rhizophagy cycle: an oxidative process in plants for nutrient extraction from symbiotic microbes. Microorganisms 2018; 6: e95
59. Mata DJ da et al: The role of rhizophagy in nutrient uptake and agricultural sustainability. Diversitas Journal 2025; 10: 516– 528
60. Rajalingam N et al: Editorial: Rhizophagy and other cross-talks in rhizobiocomplex. Frontiers in Microbiology 2026; 16: e1763865
61. Kabir Z: Tillage or no-tillage: Impact on mycorrhizae. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 2005: 85: 23–29
62. Tian L et al: Diversified cover crops and no-till enhanced soil total nitrogen and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi diversity: a case study from the karst area of southwest China. Agriculture 2024; 14: e1103
63. Huggins DR, Reganold JP: No-Till: the quiet revolution. Scientific American 2008; July: 70-77
64. Yang H et al: No-tillage facilitates organic carbon sequestration by enhancing arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi-related soil proteins accumulation and aggregation. Catena 2024; 245: e108323
65. Vandana UK et al: The endophytic microbiome as a hotspot of synergistic interactions, with prospects of plant growth promotion. Biology 2021; 10: e101
66. Zhao Y: Auxin biosynthesis: A simple two-step pathway converts tryptophan to indole-3-acetic acid in plants. Molecular Plant 2012; 5: 334-336
67. Noor A et al: L-tryptophan-dependent auxin-producing plant-growth-promoting bacteria improve seed yield and quality of carrot by altering the umbel order. Horticulturae 2023; 9: e934
68. Schwientek M et al: Glyphosate contamination in European rivers not from herbicide application? Water Research 2024; 263: e122140
69. Röhnelt AM et al: Glyphosate is a transformation product of a widely used aminopolyphosphonate complexing agent. Nature Communications 2025; 16: e2438
70. Engelbart L et al: In-situ formation of glyphosate and AMPA in activated sludge from phosphonates used as antiscalants and bleach stabilizers in households and industry. Water Research 2025; 280: e123464
71. Trewavas A: A critical assessment of organic farming-and-food assertions with particular respect to the UK and the potential environmental benefits of no-till agriculture. Crop Protection 2004; 23: 757-781
72. Heydari S et al: Hydrogen cyanide production ability by Pseudomonas fluorescence bacteria and their inhibition potential on weed germination. Tropentag, Hohenheim, October 7-9, 2008
73. Zeller SL et al: Host-plant selectivity of rhizobacteria in a crop/weed model system. PLoS ONE 2007; 2: e846
74. Haas D, Défago G: biological control of soil-borne pathogens by fluorescent Pseudomonads. Nature Reviews Microbiology 2005; 3: 307-319
75. Thakur R et al: Role of soil health in plant disease management: a review. Agricultural Reviews 2022; 43: 70-76
76. Fite T et al: Endophytic fungi: versatile partners for pest biocontrol, growth promotion, and climate change resilience in plants. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 2023; 7: e1322861
77. Sherzad Z et al: Plant growth promoting endophytic bacteria: a sustainable solution for climate change and environmental stresses in agriculture. Discover 2025; 7: e894
78. Di Sario L et al: Plant biostimulants to enhance abiotic stress resilience in crops. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2025; 26: e1129
79. Contreras-Moreno FJ et al: Myxococcus xanthus predation: an updated overview. Frontiers in Microbiology 2024; 15: e1339696
80. Treuner-Lange A, Søgaard-Andersen L: Überlebenskünstler mit sozialen und kommunikativen Fähigkeiten. BioSpektrum 2020; 26: 28-31
81. Wu Z et al: Biocontrol mechanism of Myxococcus xanthus B25-I-1 against Phytophthora infestans. Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology 2021; 175: e104832
82. Dong H et al: Myxococcus xanthus R31 suppresses tomato bacterial wilt by inhibiting the pathogen Ralstonia solanacearum with secreted proteins. Frontiers in Microbiology 2022; 12: e801091
83. Krug D et al: Myxobakterielle Naturstofffabriken. BioSpektrum 2020; 26: 32-36
84. González-Teuber M et al: Molecular characterization of endophytic fungi associated with the roots of Chenopodium quinoa inhabiting the Atacama Desert, Chile. Genomics Data 2017; 11: 109–112
85. Miño R et al: Fungal endophytes boost salt tolerance and seed quality in quinoa ecotypes along a latitudinal gradient. Frontiers in Plant Science 2025; 16: e1602553
86. Pitzschke A: Developmental peculiarities and seed-borne endophytes in quinoa: omnipresent, robust bacilli contribute to plant fitness. Frontiers in Microbiology 2016; 7: e2
87. Li C et al: Epichloe endophyte discovery and their roles in China. 10th International Symposium on Fungi Endophytes of Grasses. Salamanca 2018; 13-21 June
88. Vanselow R: Ergotismus – Antoniusfeuer: Ein historisches Problem hoch aktuell. Tierärztliche Umschau 2015; 70: 176-182
89. Vanselow R: Lange Suche nach den Ursachen tödlicher Weidetiervergiftungen. VFD 11. Juni 2013
90. Canty MJ et al: Ergot alkaloid intoxication in perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne): an emerging animal health concern in Ireland? Irish Veterinary Journal 2014; 67: e21
91. Craig AM et al: The role of the Oregon State University Endophyte Service Laboratory in diagnosing clinical cases of endophyte toxicoses. Journal of Agricultural & Food Chemistry 2014; 62: 7376−7381
92. Guerre P: Ergot alkaloids produced by endophytic fungi of the genus Epichloë. Toxins 2015; 7: 773-790
93. Roberts C, Andrae J: Replacing toxic tall fescue with a nontoxic forage. Science Societies 10. May 2023
94. Moody B et al: Effectors required for Epichloe-wheat interactions. 10th International Symposium on Fungi Endophytes of Grasses. Salamanca 2018; 13-21 June
95. Ding H et al: Draft genome sequence of Bacillus cereus 905, a plant growth-promoting rhizobacterium of wheat. Genome Announcements 2016; 4: e00489-16
96. Adeleke BS et al: Genomic analysis of endophytic Bacillus cereus t4s and its plant growth-promoting traits. Plants 2021; 10: e1776
97. Ahlawat OP et al: Wheat endophytes and their potential role in managing abiotic stress under changing climate. Journal of Applied Microbiology 2022; 132: 2501-2520
98. Larran S et al: Endophytes from wheat as biocontrol agents against tan spot disease. Biological Control 2016; 92: 17–23
99. Tariq A et al: Endophytes: key role players for sustainable agriculture: mechanisms, omics insights and future prospects. Plant Growth Regulation 2025; 105: 1969–1990
100. Melnick RL et al: Detection and expression of enterotoxin genes in endophytic strains of Bacillus cereus. Letters in Applied Microbiology 2012; 54: 468-474
101. Giannattasio-Ferraz S et al: Multidrug-Resistant Klebsiella variicola Isolated in the Urine of Healthy Bovine Heifers, a Potential Risk as an Emerging Human Pathogen. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 2022; 88: e0004422
102. Potter RF et al: Population structure, antibiotic resistance, and uropathogenicity of Klebsiella variicola. mBio 2018; 9: e02481
103. Marian C et al: A paradigm for the contextual safety assessment of agricultural microbes: a closer look at Klebsiella variicola. Frontiers in Industrial Microbiology 2024; 2: eh1412302
104. Rodríguez-Medina N et al: Klebsiella variicola: an emerging pathogen in humans. Emerging Microbes & Infections 2019; 8: 973–988
105. Setia G et al: Next-generation sequencing dataset of bacterial communities of Microcerotermes crassus workers associated with Ironwood trees (Casuarina equisetifolia) in Guam. Data in Brief 2023; 48: e109286
106. Raffelsberger N et al: Gastrointestinal carriage of Klebsiella pneumoniae in a general adult population: a cross-sectional study of risk factors and bacterial genomic diversity. Gut Microbes 2021; 13: e1939599
107. Bryła M et al: Stability of ergot alkaloids during the process of baking rye bread. LWT 2019; 110: 269-274
108. Aujoulat F et al: Rhizobium pusense is the main human pathogen in the genus Agrobacterium/Rhizobium. Clinical Microbiology & Infection 2015; 21, P472: e1–e5
109. Casanova C et al: Agrobacterium spp. nosocomial outbreak assessment using rapid MALDI-TOF MS based typing, confirmed by whole genome sequencing. Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control 2019; 8: e171
110. Roy S et al: Rhizobium radiobacter-induced peritonitis: a case report and literature analysis. Journal of Medical Cases 2022; 13: 471-474
111. Tekeli O et al: A retrospective study: management of Rhizobium radiobacter-associated bloodstream infections in pediatric hematology and oncology patients. Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira 2025; 71: e20241944
112. Kalambry AC et al: Rhizobium radiobacter pleurisy in a girl: a case report. Journal of Medical Case Reports 2026; 20: e120
113. Chen S: China is making its vegetables grow bigger, faster and stronger ... using electricity. South China Morning Post, 17. Sept. 2018
114. Lu D, Hambling D: Inside China’s attempt to boost crop yields with electric fields. New Scientist 2019; (3244) 24.8.2019
115. Fleming S: China has made a shocking food production discovery – electro culture. European Sting 2018, 23. Oct.
116. Jayakrishna SS, Ganesh S: Unveiling the effects of electric field treatments on crop cultivation: a game-changing sustainable energy strategy for plant pathogen eradication and boosting yield growth in agriculture, validated with an artificial intelligence approach. Energy Nexus 2025; 18: e100438
117. Wang Yg, Wang Jh: Effect of electric fertilizer on soil properties. Chinese Geographical Science 2004; 14: 71-74
118. Liu B, Liu D: Electric purifying aseptic sterilizing device for animal house. 2004; CN2609910Y
119. Adzhieva AA et al: Features of the electric field of the atmosphere in various weather conditions. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2020; 1604: e012016
120. Lee S et al: Effects of air anions on growth and economic feasibility of lettuce: a plant factory experiment approach. Sustainability 2022; 14: e15468
121. Bennett WR: Health and Low-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields. Yale University, New Haven 1994
122. Goldsworthy A: Electrostimulation of cells by weak electric currents. In: Lynch PT, Davey MR (Eds) Electrical Manipulation of Cells. Chapman & Hall, New York 1996: 249-272
123. Rout S: Electroculture & the future of agriculture. descworld.org/ 2025-3-6
124. Christianto V, Smarandache F: A review on electroculture, magneticulture and laserculture to boost plant growth. Bulletin of Pure and Applied Sciences 2021; 40 B: 65-69
125. Lemström S: Electricity in Agriculture and Horticulture. The Electrician Printing & Publishing Co LTD, London 1904
126. Zurbicki Z: Atmospheric electricity and plant nutrition. Acta Horticulturae 1973; 29: 413-428
127. Lodge O: Electricity in agriculture. Nature 1908; 78: 331-332
128. Blackman VH: Field experiments in electro-culture. Journal of Agricultural Science 1924; 14: 240-267
129. Christofleau J: Electroculture. Alex. Trouchet, Perth 1925
130. Anon: Electro-Culture. Nature 1900; 61: 602
131. Lakhovsky G: The Secret of Life. W Heinemann, London 1939
132. Nelson RA: Elektro- und Magnetokultur. Nexus-Magazin 2023; (108): 64-70
133. Bohn M: Forsøg med karse i 9. klasse vækker international opsigt. dr.dk 16. Mai 2013
134. Marsh D: Electroculture. The Garden History Blog 2021; 04/09
135. Holt C: Electroculture. 2023; ISBN 979-8396956506
136. Alattar E et al: Improvement in growth of plants under the effect of magnetized water. AIMS Biophysics 2026; 9: 346–387.
137. Xia X et al: Magnetic field treatment on horticultural and agricultural crops: its benefits and challenges. Folia Horticulturae 2024; 36: 67–80
138. Jha AK: Magnetoponics: Redefining agriculture and farming through levitating seeds. AgriGate Magazine 2025; 5: 278-281
139. Kumar KS, Sushrutha GS: Maglev power generator. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR) 2017; 6: 2383-2385
140. Kokorian J et al: Ultra-flat bismuth films for diamagnetic levitation by template-stripping. Thin Solid Films 2014; 550: 298-304
141. Chen X et al: Nonlinear dynamics of diamagnetically levitating resonators. Nonlinear Dynamics 2024; 112: 18807–18816
142. Pavan Kishore ML et al: a comprehensive review on acoustic levitation techniques and applications. Tianjin Daxue Xuebao (Ziran Kexue yu Gongcheng Jishu Ban) 2025; 58: 160-173
143. Andrade MAB et al: Acoustic levitation of a large solid sphere. Applied Physics Letters 2016: 109: e044101
144. Rout S: The sound revolution: exploring the future of acoustic levitation and its infinite possibilities in healthcare and other industries. descworld.org/ 2025-1-1
145. Ravikumar M et al: Ultrasonication: an advanced technology for food preservation. International Journal of Pure & Applied Bioscience 2017; 5: 363-371
146. Alshehhi M et al: Ultrasound-assisted food processing: a mini review of mechanisms, applications, and challenges. 3S Web of Conferences 2023; 428: e02011
147. Xie WJ et al: Acoustic method for levitation of small living animals. Applied Physics Letters 2006; 89: e214102
148. El-Kadi AW: The role of abolishing gravity in ancient Egyptian pyramids architecture. Archaeological Discovery 2023; 11 16-37
149. Cundall A: Vibration-assisted megalithic engineering: reassessing acoustic and mechanical techniques in antiquity. 2025; academia.edu/145376697/
150. Crandall BS et al: Electro-agriculture: Revolutionizing farming for a sustainable future. Joule 2024; 8: 2974–2991
151. Hann EC et al: A hybrid inorganic–biological artificial photosynthesis system for energy-efficient food production. Nature Food 2022; 3: 461-471
152. Fan L et al: Electrochemical CO2 reduction to high-concentration pure formic acid solutions in an all-solid-state reactor. Nature Communications 2020; 11: e3633
153. Schmidt T et al: Gene anschalten statt umbauen: CRISPR aktiviert Zellprogramme ohne DNA-Eingriff. BIOspektrum 2026; 32 (1): 31-34
154. Ermanoski I et al: From renewable energy to edible fungi: Bypassing photosynthesis toward planetary sustainability. Next Sustainability 2026; 7: e100259
155. Hawking T: ‘Electro-agriculture’ may help plants grow in the dark. Popular Science 2024; 23. Oct
156. WWF Deutschland: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in Deutschland. 2023
157. Anderson RL: Increasing corn yield with no-till cropping systems: a case study in South Dakota. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 2016; 31: 568 – 573
158. Richter D, Matuschka FR: Differential risk for Lyme disease along hiking trail, Germany. Emerging Infectious Diseases 2011; 17: 1704-1706
159. Richter D, Matuschka FR: Elimination of Lyme disease spirochetes from ticks feeding on domestic ruminants. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 2010; 76: 7650–7652
160. Richter D, Matuschka FR: Modulatory effect of cattle on risk for Lyme disease. Emerging Infectious Diseases 2006; 12: 1919-1923
161. Warnas M: The influence of cattle on the phenology of the tick Ixodes ricinus and the prevalence of the Borrelia burgdorferi s.l. complex. Master Thesis Wageningen 2005
162. Sheldrake R: A New Science of Life. Icon, London 2009
163. Raguso RA, Kessler A Speaking in Chemical Tongues. Decoding the Language of Plant Volatiles. in: Gagliano M et al: The Language of Plants. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis 2017; 27-61
