Harnessing the rhizosphere microbiome for sustainable weed suppression in agroecosystems

Introduction

The heavy reliance on synthetic herbicides in modern agroecosystems has precipitated an ecological bottleneck, characterized by soil degradation, water contamination, and the rapid emergence of herbicide-resistant weed biotypes [1] . Understanding the precise intensity and distribution of these weed populations across specific regional districts is crucial for grasping the sheer scale of the agricultural threat. As mapping these aggressive plant species becomes a priority for agronomists, it is increasingly clear that pure chemical management is unsustainable. In response, agricultural science is pivoting toward biological and ecologically integrated management strategies. At the forefront of this shift is the rhizosphere, the narrow region of soil directly influenced by root secretions and associated soil microorganisms. The rhizosphere represents a highly competitive ecological battleground where crops and weeds vie for resources. Harnessing the native microbiomes within this zone offers a promising, sustainable pathway to suppress weed proliferation while simultaneously enhancing soil health and crop resilience [6] . This review explores the botanical and microbiological dynamics of the rhizosphere, detailing the mechanisms by which microbial communities can be leveraged as bio-herbicidal agents and out-competitors against invasive agricultural weeds.

The Botany-Microbiology Nexus: Root Exudates and Microbiome Assembly

The composition of the rhizosphere microbiome is not random; it is highly curated by the host plant through the release of root exudates. Botanically, these exudates-comprising sugars, organic acids, amino acids, and secondary metabolites-act as primary signaling molecules and carbon sources that recruit specific microbial taxa from the bulk soil. Crucially, weed species and cultivated crops exhibit distinct exudation profiles, leading to differential microbiome assembly. Invasive weeds often engineer their rhizosphere to recruit microbial communities that facilitate rapid nutrient acquisition and stress tolerance, giving them a competitive edge over crops [10] . Conversely, specific crop cultivars can be bred or

International Journal of Agriculture and Food Science https://www.agriculturaljournals.com managed to release exudates that attract microbes capable of antagonizing weed growth. Understanding this biochemical dialogue is essential for manipulating the soil microbiome to favor crop establishment over weed dominance.

Mechanisms of Microbial Weed Suppression

The suppression of weeds by rhizosphere microorganisms occurs through several overlapping biological mechanisms, ranging from direct pathogenesis to indirect ecological competition.

Microbe-Mediated Allelopathy

Allelopathy involves the release of biochemicals by one plant that influence the growth of another. However, these allelochemicals rarely act in a sterile environment. Soil microbes play a pivotal role in mediating allelopathy by either synthesizing their own phytotoxic compounds or biotransforming inactive crop root exudates into highly toxic allelochemicals that inhibit weed seed germination and root elongation [14 ].

Deleterious Rhizobacteria (DRB) and Pathogenic Fungi DRB are a specialized subset of the microbiome that colonize plant roots and inhibit plant growth without causing visual symptoms of classical disease. Host-specific DRB targets the root systems of specific weed species, disrupting cellular functions through the overproduction of phytotoxins like hydrogen cyanide (HCN) or specific lipopeptides [9] . Similarly, soil-borne fungi can act as bioherbicides by penetrating weed seed coats, leading to seed decay before emergence.

Resource Competition and Niche Exclusion

A highly diverse and robust crop microbiome can physically and metabolically outcompete weed seedlings for limiting soil resources, particularly phosphorus and nitrogen. By dominating the ecological niches within the root zone, efficient microbial consortia effectively starve weed competitors [20] .

Phytohormone Manipulation

Microbes significantly influence plant architecture by synthesizing or degrading phytohormones. For example, certain bacteria produce high levels of indole-3-acetic acid (IAA) which, while beneficial at low concentrations, becomes highly inhibitory to root development in weed seedlings at elevated levels [24] . Other microbes synthesize 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate (ACC) deaminase, altering ethylene levels and disrupting the normal growth trajectory of competitive weeds.

Translating Lab to Field

Formulation and Bio-efficacy the transition of weedsuppressing microbes from controlled laboratory conditions to variable agricultural fields remains a significant hurdle. Single strain isolates often fail in the field due to environmental stress and competition with indigenous soil microbiomes. The future lies in developing robust, multistrain microbial consortia that exhibit functional redundancy. Furthermore, the formulation science behind these products is critical. Encapsulation techniques, the use of appropriate carrier materials, and the extension of shelflife are required to maintain microbial viability [28] . It is also vital that these bioherbicidal formulations are compatible with standard organic farming practices, ensuring they do not negatively interact with locally produced bio-fertilizers or organic composts applied for plant nutrition.

Environmental Influences and Agronomic Practices

The efficacy of the rhizosphere microbiome in suppressing weeds is highly contingent upon abiotic soil factors. Soil pH, moisture content, temperature, and organic matter levels directly influence microbial survival and phytotoxin production [33] . Agronomic practices such as crop rotation, cover cropping, and reduced tillage also profoundly shape the microbiome. Integrating microbial weed suppression into existing Integrated Weed Management (IWM) framework requires an understanding of how seasonal variations and localized climate conditions dictate microbial behavior in the soil profile.

Challenges and Future Perspectives

Despite the high potential of microbiome-based weed suppression, commercialization is currently limited by regulatory hurdles, inconsistent field efficacy, and the high cost of production. Moving forward, the application of advanced multi-omics technologies (meta-genomics, metatranscriptomics, and metabolomics) will be crucial for deciphering the complex plant-microbe dialogues that dictate weed suppression [37] . Additionally, the targeted use of CRISPR-Cas technologies to engineer hyper-efficient, highly specific DRB strains holds immense promise for the next generation of precision bioherbicides.

Conclusion

The rhizosphere microbiome represents a powerful, yet underutilized, tool for sustainable weed management in modern agroecosystems. By understanding the intricate botanical and microbiological interactions driven by root exudates, allelopathy, and resource competition, agricultural scientists can develop targeted biological interventions that suppress invasive weeds. Overcoming the translational challenges from the laboratory to field formulations will require continued interdisciplinary research. Ultimately, integrating microbiome management into standard agricultural practices offers a critical pathway toward reducing chemical herbicide dependency and fostering resilient, sustainable food production systems.

References

1. Mulugeta M. Into the Weeds: Herbicide Resistant Weeds & Management -The National Wildlife Federation Blog. 2023. https://blog.nwf.org/2023/02
2. Parven A, Meftaul IM, Venkateswarlu K, Megharaj M. Herbicides in modern sustainable agriculture: environmental fate, ecological implications, and human health concerns. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology. 2025;22(2):1181-1202.
3. Cerdeira AL, Duke SO. Effects of glyphosate-resistant crop cultivation on soil and water quality. GM Crops. 2010;1(1):16-24.
4. Mueth AR. Evaluation of Variable Rate Soil Residual Herbicide Application on Weed Control and Crop Safety [dissertation].. West Lafayette (IN): Purdue University Graduate School; 2025.
5. Ofosu R, Agyemang ED, Márton A, Pásztor G, Taller J, Kazinczi G. Herbicide resistance: managing weeds in a changing world. Agronomy. 2023;13(6):1595. International Journal of Agriculture and Food Science https://www.agriculturaljournals.com
6. Asghar W, Craven KD, Swenson JR, Kataoka R, Mahmood A, Farias JG. Enhancing the resilience of agroecosystems through improved rhizosphere processes: a strategic review. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2024;26(1):109.
7. Dukare A, Mhatre P, Maheshwari HS, Bagul S, Manjunatha BS, Khade Y, et al. Delineation of mechanistic approaches of rhizosphere microorganisms facilitated plant health and resilience under challenging conditions. 3 Biotech. 2022;12(3):57.
8. Yusuf A, Li M, Zhang SY, Odedishemi-Ajibade F, Luo RF, Wu YX, et al. Harnessing plant-microbe interactions: strategies for enhancing resilience and nutrient acquisition for sustainable agriculture. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2025;16:1503730.
9. Saeed Q, Xiukang W, Haider FU, Kučerik J, Mumtaz MZ, Holatko J, et al. Rhizosphere bacteria in plant growth promotion, biocontrol, and bioremediation of contaminated sites: a comprehensive review of effects and mechanisms. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2021;22(19):10529.
10. Coats VC, Rumpho ME. The rhizosphere microbiota of plant invaders: an overview of recent advances in the microbiomics of invasive plants. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2014;5:368.
11. LaForgia ML, Kang H, Ettinger CL. Competitive outcomes between native and invasive plants are linked to shifts in the bacterial rhizosphere microbiome. bioRxiv. 2021;2021-01.
12. Li G, Liu X, Han M, Qin X, Li P. Rhizosphere bacterial characteristics reveal the invasive advantage of Sphagneticola trilobata compared to the greening grass Axonopus compressus. BMC Microbiology. 2026.
13. Li X, Zhang Y, Kong FL, Naz M, Zhou JY, Qi SS, et al. Invasive plant Alternanthera philoxeroides benefits more competition advantage from rhizosphere bacteria regardless of the host source. Plants. 2023;12(11):2085.
14. Schütz V, Bigler L, Girel S, Laschke L, Sicker D, Schulz M. Conversions of benzoxazinoids and downstream metabolites by soil microorganisms. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution. 2019;7:238.
15. Hazrati H, Fomsgaard IS, Kudsk P. Root-exuded benzoxazinoids: uptake and translocation in neighboring plants. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2020;68(39):10609-10617.
16. Zambelli A, Nocito FF, Araniti F. Unveiling the multifaceted roles of root exudates: chemical interactions, allelopathy, and agricultural applications. Agronomy. 2025;15(4):845.
17. Razafindralambo H, Mathot N, Fauconnier ML, Jijakli H. A synbiotic approach to the formulation of innovative bioherbicides for weed control: a global perspective. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2026;17.
18. Shirdashtzadeh M. Deleterious rhizobacteria as weed biological control agent: development and constraints. Asian Journal of Microbiology, Biotechnology and Environmental Sciences. 2014;16:561-574.
19. Etesami H. The dual nature of plant growth-promoting bacteria: benefits, risks, and pathways to sustainable deployment. Current Research in Microbial Sciences. 2025;9:100421.
20. Copeland C, Schulze-Lefert P, Ma KW. Potential and challenges for application of microbiomes in agriculture. The Plant Cell. 2025;37(8):koaf185.
21. Priyadarshini C, Lal R, Yuan P, Liu W, Adhikari A, Bhandari S, et al. Plant disease suppressiveness enhancement via soil health management. Biology. 2025;14(8):924.
22. Chen Q, Song Y, An Y, Lu Y, Zhong G. Soil microorganisms: their role in enhancing crop nutrition and health. Diversity. 2024;16(12):734.
23. Edelmann HG. Plant root development: is the classical theory for auxin-regulated root growth false? Protoplasma. 2022;259(3):823-832.
24. Wang Z, Xu J, Zhang N, Wang P, Zhao H, Zhou Y, et al. Imazethapyr-induced inhibition of Arabidopsis root growth associated with disrupting auxin signal to alter cell wall remodeling. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2025;73(8):4913-4922.
25. Bunsangiam S, Thongpae N, Limtong S, Srisuk N. Production of Indole-3-Acetic Acid: A White Biotechnology for Weed Biocontrol. 2021.
26. Yasuor H, Abu-Abied M, Belausov E, Madmony A, Sadot E, Riov J, et al. Glyphosate-induced anther indehiscence in cotton is partially temperature dependent and involves cytoskeleton and secondary wall modifications and auxin accumulation. Plant Physiology. 2006;141(4):1306-1315.
27. Campos EV, Ratko J, Bidyarani N, Takeshita V, Fraceto LF. Nature-based herbicides and micro- /nanotechnology fostering sustainable agriculture. ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering. 2023;11(27):9900-9917.
28. Vassilev N, Vassileva M, Martos V, Garcia del Moral LF, Kowalska J, Tylkowski B, et al. Formulation of microbial inoculants by encapsulation in natural polysaccharides: focus on beneficial properties of carrier additives and derivatives. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2020;11:270.
29. Pereira JF, Oliveira ALM, Sartori D, Yamashita F, Mali S. Perspectives on the use of biopolymeric matrices as carriers for plant-growth promoting bacteria in agricultural systems. Microorganisms. 2023;11(2):467.
30. Pajkic K. Development of encapsulation methods for biostimulants [dissertation].. Vienna (Austria): Technische Universität Wien; 2021.
31. Muslykhah U, Phupaboon S, Suriyapha C, Sommai S, Pongsub S, Dagaew G, et al. Effects of phytonutrientbased encapsulation of Wolffia globosa on gas production, in vitro fermentation characteristics, and methane mitigation using in vitro study techniques. Italian Journal of Animal Science. 2024;23(1):18691883.
32. Glaspie CF, Jones EA, Penner D, Pawlak JA, Everman WJ. Effect of clay, soil organic matter, and soil pH on initial and residual weed control with flumioxazin. Agronomy. 2021;11(7):1326.
33. Samson-Brais É, Lucotte M, Moingt M, Tremblay G, Paquet S. Impact of weed management practices on soil biological activity in corn and soybean field crops in Québec (Canada). Canadian Journal of Soil Science. 2020;101(1):12-21.
34. Xia Y, Feng J, Zhang H, Xiong D, Kong L, Seviour R, et al. Effects of soil pH on the growth, soil nutrient composition, and rhizosphere microbiome of Ageratina adenophora. PeerJ. 2024;12:e17231.
35. Zdor RE, Alexander CM, Kremer RJ. Weed suppression by deleterious rhizobacteria is affected by formulation and soil properties. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis. 2005;36(9-10):12891299.
36. Altop EK, Kaya S. Rhizosphere microbiome manipulation for weed suppression. Black Sea Journal of Agriculture. 2025;Advanced Online Publication:3536.