4.7 Article

Influence of medium solidification and pH value on in vitro propagation of Maranta leuconeura cv. Kerchoviana

期刊

SCIENTIA HORTICULTURAE
卷 86, 期 3, 页码 211-221

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0304-4238(00)00148-5

关键词

agar; gelrite; pH value; growth and development; vitrification; chlorophyll

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aseptic cultures of Maranta leuconeura were established from shoot tip explants. They were initiated on Murashige and Skoog (MS)-basal medium supplemented with benzyladenine (BA, 5 mg/l) and agar (6 mg/l) (starting medium). Explants were transferred at 6 week intervals until the onset of proliferation (ca. 6 months). Thereafter, four subcultures were made in liquid multiplication medium containing BA (5 mg/l) and the produced shoots were cultured in media having different levels of gelling agents and pH. Superior growth and development were obtained in liquid media and significant differences among the mean values of most treatments were also obtained. Agar and Gelrite (gel) used at 5 and 1.5 g/l, respectively, supported the fastest growth and development of both root and shoot. Adding agar plus gel at the rate of 3+1 g/l led to the best growth and development of shoots, but rooting response was more pronounced at 5+0.5 g/l. A medium pH of 5.7 resulted in the maximum multiplication rate, shoot strength and leaves differentiation. Maranta leuconeura can be successfully micropropagated at pH 5.7 whether in liquid or solid media, but in the solid we recommend the use of gel (1.5 g/l), agar plus gel (3+1 g/l) or agar (5 g/l) in the same order. Also, liquid medium is preferred for micropropagation until the third subculture. Thereafter, solid medium should be used to overcome production of vitrified shoots and to insure obtaining healthy vigorous plantlets with a higher chlorophyll content. Hardening-off and acclimatization of the plantlets that were produced resulted in numerous plants used for indoor decoration. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

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