4.6 Article

Efficient Parthenogenesis Induction and In Vitro Haploid Plant Regeneration in Cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.) Using Putrescine, Spermidine, and Cycocel

期刊

JOURNAL OF PLANT GROWTH REGULATION
卷 37, 期 4, 页码 1127-1134

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00344-018-9803-1

关键词

Cucumis sativus L; Embryo rescue; Haploid; Parthenogenesis; Polyamines

资金

  1. Agricultural Biotechnology Research Institute of Iran (ABRII) [12-05-05-9451-94001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, the effect of spraying mother plants with various levels of putrescine, spermidine, and cycocel (each at 0, 50, 500, and 5000mg/l) were assessed on the frequency of haploid embryos produced from unfertilized ovaries and subsequent regeneration of derived embryos. Significantly higher haploid embryos were obtained when mother plants were sprayed with putrescine at 500mg/l (5.2 embryos/fruit), spermidine at 50mg/l (4.8 embryos/fruit), and cycocel at 50mg/l (5.2 embryos/fruit) as compared to the control (without spraying, 3.2 embryos/fruit). However, embryogenesis induction was decreased drastically as the concentration of all the three compounds tested was increased and the lowest haploid embryos were observed when 5000mg/l of spermidine (0.4 embryos/fruit) or cycocel (2.0 embryos/fruit) were applied. Only spermidine at 50mg/l led to 100% regeneration into fully developed plantlets. The seed setting and size of fruits were also affected by polyamines and cycocel applications. Ploidy analysis using a flow cytometer indicated that all regenerated plantlets contain the gametic chromosome number (n=x=7) of parental plants and the results of chromosome counting also confirmed the haploid nature of regenerated plantlets. It can be concluded that the induction of haploid embryogenesis from unfertilized ovaries after pollination with irradiated pollen and subsequent conversion of derived embryos into the plantlets could be improved in Cucumis sativus L. by applying appropriate levels of putrescine, spermidine, and cycocel.

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

4.6
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