4.7 Article

Ethylene influences green plant regeneration from barley callus

期刊

PLANT CELL REPORTS
卷 26, 期 3, 页码 285-290

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00299-006-0252-0

关键词

ACC; Hordeum vulgare; silver nitrate

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The plant hormone ethylene is involved in numerous plant processes including in vitro growth and regeneration. Manipulating ethylene in vitro may be useful for increasing plant regeneration from cultured cells. As part of ongoing efforts to improve plant regeneration from barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), we investigated ethylene emanation using our improved system and investigated methods of manipulating ethylene to increase regeneration. In vitro assays of regeneration from six cultivars, involving 10 weeks of callus initiation and proliferation followed by 8 weeks of plant regeneration, showed a correlation between regeneration and ethylene production: ethylene production was highest from 'Golden Promise', the best regenerator, and lowest from 'Morex' and 'DH-20', the poorest regenerators. Increasing ethylene production by addition of 1-aminocyclopropane 1-carboxylic acid (ACC) during weeks 8-10 increased regeneration from Morex. In contrast, adding ACC to Golden Promise cultures during any of the tissue culture steps reduced regeneration, suggesting that Golden Promise may produce more ethylene than needed for maximum regeneration rates. Blocking ethylene action with silver nitrate during weeks 5-10 almost doubled the regeneration from Morex and increased the Golden Promise regeneration 1.5-fold. Silver nitrate treatment of Golden Promise cultures during weeks 8-14 more than doubled the green plant regeneration. These results indicate that differential ethylene production is related to regeneration in the improved barley tissue culture system. Specific manipulations of ethylene were identified that can be used to increase the green plant regeneration from barley cultivars. The timing of ethylene action appears to be critical for maximum regeneration.

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

4.7
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