4.7 Article

The development and evaluation of single cell suspension from wheat and barley as a model system; a first step towards functional genomics application

期刊

BMC PLANT BIOLOGY
卷 10, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2229-10-239

关键词

-

资金

  1. Sino-Danish Scientific and Technological Cooperation [AM14: 64/NPP35]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The overall research objective was to develop single cell plant cultures as a model system to facilitate functional genomics of monocots, in particular wheat and barley. The essential first step towards achieving the stated objective was the development of a robust, viable single cell suspension culture from both species. Results: We established growth conditions to allow routine culturing of somatic cells in 24 well microtiter plate format. Evaluation of the wheat and barley cell suspension as model cell system is a multi step process. As an initial step in the evaluation procedure we chose to study the impact of selected abiotic stress elicitors at the physiological, biochemical and molecular level. We report the results of osmotic stress imposed by NaCl and PEG. As proline is an important osmoprotectant of the cereal cells, colorimetric assay for proline detection was developed for small volumes (200 mu l). We performed RT-PCR experiments to study the change in the expression of the genes encoding Delta(1)-pyrroline-5-carboxylate synthetase (P5CS) and Delta(1)-pyrroline-5-carboxylate reductase (PC5R) in response to abiotic stress. Conclusions: We found differences between the wheat and barley suspension cultures, barley being more tolerant to the applied osmotic stresses. We suggested a model to explain the obtained differences in stress tolerance between the two species. The suspension cell cultures have proven useful for determining changes in proline concentration and expression level of genes (P5CS, P5CR) under various treatments and we suggest that the cells can be used as a model host system to study gene expression and regulation in monocots.

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