4.5 Article

Study of the somaclonal variation produced by different methods of polyploidization in Asparagus officinalis L.

期刊

PLANT CELL TISSUE AND ORGAN CULTURE
卷 122, 期 1, 页码 31-44

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11240-015-0747-x

关键词

Colchicine; Rhizome buds; Endoreduplication; EST-SSRs; Organogenesis; Separation of mixoploids

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polyploid plants have been induced in different Asparagus officinalis L. breeding programs in order to obtain plants with improved agronomical traits, such as large spear diameter or segregation ratios with a higher number of males. The polyploidization methods can produce somaclonal variation in the polyploid plants obtained and, therefore, unwanted changes in the agronomical traits of the initial elite plants. We used two different polyploidization methods to induce polyploid plants from diploid genotypes of commercial varieties and tetraploid genotypes of the Spanish landrace Morado de Hu,tor. The first method was the culture of rhizome buds in the medium ARBM-3 (Asparagus Rhizome Bud Medium), supplemented with different concentrations of colchicine (0.1-0.75 g l(-1)) for 10 and 20 days. The best polyploidization rate obtained was 25 % (0.5 g l(-1) colchicine for 10 days). The second method was the regeneration of polyploid plants from callus culture, resulting in a polyploidization rate of 40 and 12.5 % for the diploid genotype CM077 and the tetraploid genotype HT156, respectively. Additionally, we have developed a new protocol to separate the mixoploids generated into their different genetic components, obtaining plants with a unique ploidy level. EST-SSRs markers were employed to analyze the genetic stability of polyploidy plants. Somaclonal variation was not detected for polyploidy plants obtained through the culture of rhizome bud explants. Therefore, these polyploid plants should maintain the agronomical traits of the initial elite plants. However, somaclonal variation was detected in the polyploid plants regenerated from callus culture.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据