4.7 Article

Molecular characterization of grapevine plants transformed with GFLV resistance genes: II

Journal

PLANT CELL REPORTS
Volume 25, Issue 6, Pages 546-553

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00299-005-0087-0

Keywords

nepovirus; coat protein-mediated virus resistance; pathogen-derived resistance; somatic embryogenesis; Vitis vinifera; virus resistance; grapevine fanleaf disease

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A collection of 127 putatively transgenic individuals of Vitis vinifera cv. Russalka was characterized by PCR and Southern hybridization. Six different constructs containing the neomycin phosphotransferase (nptII) marker gene and sequences of the Grapevine Fanleaf Virus Coat Protein (GFLV CP) gene including non-translatable and truncated forms were transferred via Agrobacterium-mediated transformation. Detection of transgenic sequences by PCR was positive in all lines. Southern blot analysis revealed that the number of inserted T-DNA copies ranged from 1 to 6. More than 46% of the tested transgenic lines contain one copy of the inserted T-DNA, qualifying them as interesting candidates for further breeding programs. Southern data of one line indicate the presence of an incomplete copy of the T-DNA, thus confirming previous PCR results. Since many putative transgenic lines shared identical hybridization patterns, they were clustered into 39 lines and considered as having originated from independent transformation events. The detection of the tetracycline (TET) resistance genes in 15% of the lines shows that an integration of plasmid backbone sequences beyond the T-DNA borders occurred. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) performed on leaf tissue did not show any accumulation of the GFLV CP in the 39 transgenic lines analyzed. Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and Northern blot were carried out; RT-PCR analyses showed that the GFLV CP mRNA was expressed at variable levels.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available