Synergistic Applications of Chemistry and Biotechnology in Enhancing Agronomic Efficiency and Crop Resilience

Muhammad Bilal; Azmat Ali; Abdul Aziz; Habib Ullah; Muhammad Umar; Shabnam Dilawar; Bushra Khawaja; Zubair

doi:10.70749/ijbr.v3i9.2257

Authors

Muhammad Bilal Department of Agricultural Chemistry & Biochemistry, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar, Pakistan.
Azmat Ali Department of Agricultural Chemistry & Biochemistry, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar, Pakistan.
Abdul Aziz Department of Agricultural Chemistry & Biochemistry, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar, Pakistan.
Habib Ullah Department of Agricultural Chemistry & Biochemistry, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar, Pakistan.
Muhammad Umar Department of Agricultural Chemistry & Biochemistry, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar, Pakistan.
Shabnam Dilawar Institute of Plant Breeding and Genetics, UAP, Peshawar, Pakistan.
Bushra Khawaja Department of Agricultural Chemistry & Biochemistry, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar, Pakistan.
Zubair Department of Agricultural Chemistry & Biochemistry, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar, Pakistan.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.70749/ijbr.v3i9.2257

Keywords:

synergistic agriculture, biotechnology, agrochemicals, crop resilience, sustainable farming, RT-qPCR, soil microbiome, PGPR, mycorrhizal fungi, integrated pest management

Abstract

Background: Modern agriculture faces unprecedented challenges, including climate change, soil degradation, and the need to increase crop productivity while minimising environmental impact. Traditional agronomic practices, which rely solely on synthetic fertilisers and pesticides, have raised concerns regarding environmental pollution and soil health deterioration. Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the synergistic effects of integrating chemical and biotechnological approaches to enhance crop growth, yield, stress tolerance, and soil health; develop eco-friendly agrochemical formulations compatible with biotechnological applications; and evaluate the environmental safety and economic viability of combined treatments. Methodology: Field experiments were conducted using maize (Zea mays L.) and wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under a randomised complete block design with three replicates. The treatments included control, chemical-only (controlled-release fertilisers with humic substances), biotechnology-only (PGPR strains and mycorrhizal fungi), and integrated chemical-biotechnology applications. The parameters measured included growth metrics, nutrient uptake, physiological responses, gene expression (RT-qPCR for DREB2A and HSP70), soil microbiome analysis via 16S rRNA sequencing, and economic assessments. Results: Integrated treatments significantly enhanced crop yield by 18% in maize and 15% in wheat compared to chemical-only treatments (p < 0.01). Nutrient-use efficiency improved by 24% in maize and 22% in wheat. Gene expression analysis revealed 2.3-fold and 2.7-fold increases in DREB2A and HSP70 expression, respectively. Soil organic matter increased by 15%, with enhanced populations of beneficial microbes, including Azospirillum and Glomus species. Economic analysis showed a 20% reduction in input costs with a 12% increase in net revenue. Conclusion: The synergistic integration of chemistry and biotechnology provides an effective, sustainable agronomic framework that enhances crop productivity and resilience while ensuring environmental safety and economic viability.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Lundgren MR. Agricultural biotechnology: Potential, challenges, and debate. Plants, People, Planet. 2024.

https://doi.org/10.1002/ppp3.70019

2. Khajeeyan R, Taghavi SM, Hassanpouraghdam MB. Evaluation of the benefits of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria and mycorrhizal fungi on drought tolerance in Aloe barbadensis Mill. Scientific Reports. 2024;14:14878.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-64878-9

3. Pakistan Bureau of S. Economic Survey of Pakistan 2024-25. 2025.

4. State Bank of P. Agricultural Credit Survey 2024-25. 2025.

5. Pakistan Agricultural Research C. Soil Survey of Pakistan: Regional Characteristics. 2025.

6. Ministry of National Food S, Research. National Food Security Policy 2025-30. 2025.

7. Tester M, Langridge P. Breeding Technologies to Increase Crop Production in a Changing World. Science. 2010;327(5967):818-22.

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1183700

8. Tilman D. Agricultural Sustainability and Intensive Production Practices. Nature. 2002;418:671-7.

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01014

9. Zeng W, Liu H, Chen Y. Effects of combined inoculation of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria on tobacco growth and rhizosphere microbial community. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2025;15:1475485.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2024.1475485

10. Riaz M, Ahmad S, Khan MA. Evolution of agricultural biotechnology is the paradigm shift from conventional to molecular breeding for sustainable crop production. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2025;16:1585826.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2025.1585826

11. Kumar S. Integrated Use of Biofertilizers and Chemical Fertilizers for Sustainable Crop Production. Journal of Plant Nutrition. 2020;43(7):1023-35.

12. Al-Shammary AAG, Kouzani AZ, Kaynak A. A comprehensive review of agronomic practices and their effects on soil health, crop productivity and environmental sustainability. Journal of Environmental Management. 2024;372:122728.

13. Bodirsky BL, Popp A, Lotze-Campen H, Dietrich JP, Rolinski S, Weindl I, Müller C. Reactive nitrogen requirements to feed the world in 2050 and potential to mitigate nitrogen pollution. Nature Communications. 2014;5(1):3858.

https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms4858

14. Glick BR. Plant Growth-Promoting Bacteria: Mechanisms and Applications. Scientifica. 2012:963401.

https://doi.org/10.6064/2012/963401

15. Sagar A, Rathore P, Ramteke PW. Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria, Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi and their synergistic effects on plant growth under salinity stress. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2021;12:692618.

https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9071491

16. Competition Commission of P. Fertilizer Industry Assessment Report. 2025.

17. National Fertilizer Development C. Monthly Fertilizer Review July 2025. 2025.

18. Zandonadi DB. Humic Substances: Relevance and Implications for Soil Fertility and Plant Growth. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2016;7:1456.

19. Isman MB. Botanical Insecticides, Deterrents, and Repellents in Modern Agriculture and an Increasingly Regulated World. Annual Review of Entomology. 2006;51:45-66.

https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ento.51.110104.151146

20. Mittler R. ROS are good. Trends in Plant Science. 2017;22(1):11-9.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2016.08.002

21. Shen J. Advances in Fertilizer Technology for Sustainable Agriculture. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2018;9:1048.

22. Indus River System A. Water Availability Assessment 2024-25. 2025.

23. Gould F, Brown ZS, Kuzma J. Wicked evolution: Can we address the sociobiological dilemma of pesticide resistance? Science. 2018;360(6390):728-32.

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aar3780

24. Vurukonda SSKP, Vardharajula S, Shrivastava M, SkZ A. Enhancement of drought stress tolerance in crops by plant growth promoting rhizobacteria. Microbiological Research. 2016;184:13-24.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micres.2015.12.003

25. Nakashima K, Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K, Shinozaki K. The transcriptional regulatory network in the drought response and its crosstalk in abiotic stress responses including drought, cold, and heat. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2014;5:170.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00170

26. Tilman D, Balzer C, Hill J, Befort BL. Global food demand and the sustainable intensification of agriculture. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2011;108(50):20260-4.

https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1116437108