Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T04:45:26.419Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genotypic variation in the response to embryogenic callus induction and regeneration in Saccharum spontaneum

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2021

Chunjia Li Open the ORCID record for Chunjia Li [Opens in a new window] ,
Xujuan Li ,
Xiuqin Lin ,
Wei Qin ,
Xin Lu ,
Jun Mao  and
Xinlong Liu
Chunjia Li
Affiliation:
Yunnan Key Laboratory of Sugarcane Genetic Improvement, Sugarcane Research Institute, Yunnan Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Kaiyuan661699, China
Xujuan Li
Affiliation:
Yunnan Key Laboratory of Sugarcane Genetic Improvement, Sugarcane Research Institute, Yunnan Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Kaiyuan661699, China
Xiuqin Lin
Affiliation:
Yunnan Key Laboratory of Sugarcane Genetic Improvement, Sugarcane Research Institute, Yunnan Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Kaiyuan661699, China
Wei Qin
Affiliation:
Yunnan Key Laboratory of Sugarcane Genetic Improvement, Sugarcane Research Institute, Yunnan Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Kaiyuan661699, China
Xin Lu
Affiliation:
Yunnan Key Laboratory of Sugarcane Genetic Improvement, Sugarcane Research Institute, Yunnan Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Kaiyuan661699, China
Jun Mao
Affiliation:
Yunnan Key Laboratory of Sugarcane Genetic Improvement, Sugarcane Research Institute, Yunnan Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Kaiyuan661699, China
Xinlong Liu*
Affiliation:
Yunnan Key Laboratory of Sugarcane Genetic Improvement, Sugarcane Research Institute, Yunnan Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Kaiyuan661699, China
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Embryogenic callus induction and regeneration are useful in many aspects of plant biotechnology, especially in the functional characterization of economically important genes. However, in sugarcane, callus induction and regeneration vary across genotypes. Saccharum spontaneum is an important wild germplasm that confers disease resistance and stress tolerance to modern sugarcane cultivars, and its genome has been completely sequenced. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of genetic variations on embryogenic callus induction and regeneration in S. spontaneum and to screen genotypes having high tissue culture susceptibility. The study was performed using nine genotypes of S. spontaneum and the following five parameters were assessed to determine the response of genotypes to embryogenic callus induction and regeneration: callus induction, embryogenic callus ratio, embryogenic callus induction, embryonic callus regeneration and regeneration capacity. All the genotypes varied significantly (P < 0.01) in all the parameters, except for embryonic callus regeneration, which was high (>80%) for all the genotypes. High broad-sense heritability (86.1–96.8%) indicated that genetic differences are the major source of genotypic variations. Callus induction was found to be strongly positively correlated with embryogenic callus induction (r = 0.890, P < 0.01) and regeneration capacity (r = 0.881, P < 0.01). Among the nine tested genotypes, VN2 was found to be the most responsive to tissue culture and could therefore be used to characterize functional genes in S. spontaneum. We also suggested an approach with potential applications in facilitating the rapid identification of sugarcane genotypes susceptible to tissue culture.

Keywords

crop wild relativeembryogenic callusgenotypic variationSaccharum spontaneumsugarcanetissue culture
Type
Research Article
Information
Plant Genetic Resources , Volume 19 , Issue 2 , April 2021 , pp. 153 - 158
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of NIAB

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barba, RC, Zamora, AB, Mallion, AK and Linga, CK (1977) Sugarcane tissue culture research. Proceedings of International Society of Sugar Cane Technologists 16: 1843–1864.Google Scholar
Basnayake, SW, Moyle, R and Birch, RG (2011) Embryogenic callus proliferation and regeneration conditions for genetic transformation of diverse sugarcane cultivars. Plant Cell Reports 30: 439–448.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Basso, MF, da Cunha, BADB, Ribeiro, AP, Martins, PK, de Souza, WR, de Oliveira, NG, Nakayama, TJ, das Chagas Noqueli Casari, RA, Santiago, TR, Vinecky, F, Cancado, LJ, de Sousa, CAF, de Oliveira, PA, de Souza, SACD, de Almeida Cancado, GM, Kobayashi, AK and Molinari, HBC (2017) Improved genetic transformation of sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) embryogenic callus mediated by Agrobacterium tumefaciens. Current Protocols in Plant Biology 2: 221–239.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Birch, RG (2014) Sugarcane biotechnology: axenic culture, gene transfer, and transgene expression. In: Moore, PH and Botha, FC (eds) Sugarcane: Physiology, Biochemistry, and Functional Biology. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 645–681.Google Scholar
Bower, R and Birch, RG (1992) Transgenic sugarcane plants via microprojectile bombardment. The Plant Journal 2: 409–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, D, Yang, FY, Yan, JJ, Wu, YQ, Bai, SQ, Liang, XZ, Zhang, YW and Gan, YM (2012) SRAP analysis of genetic diversity of nine native populations of wild sugarcane, Saccharum spontaneum, from Sichuan, China. Genetics and Molecular Research 11: 1245–1253.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
FAO (2020) FAOSTAT Online Database. Available at http://faostat.fao.org/ (accessed on 30 December 2020).Google Scholar
Fitch, MM and Moore, PH (1990) Comparison of 2, 4-D and picloram for selection of long-term totipotent green callus cultures of sugarcane. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture 20: 157–163.Google Scholar
Gandonou, CH, Errabii, T, Abrini, J, Idaomar, M, Chibi, F and Senhaji, S (2005) Effect of genotype on callus induction and plant regeneration from leaf explants of sugarcane (Saccharum sp.). African Journal of Biotechnology 4: 1250–1255.Google Scholar
Glaszmann, JC, Rott, P and Engelmann, F (1996) Role of in-vitro maintenance of sugarcane for germplasm conservation and exchange. In: Croft, BJ, Piggin, CM, Wallis, ES and Hogarth, DM (eds) Sugarcane Germplasm Conservation and Exchange. Canberra: ACIAR, pp. 67–70.Google Scholar
Govindaraj, P, Amalraj, VA, Mohanraj, K and Nair, NV (2014) Collection, characterization and phenotypic diversity of Saccharum spontaneum L. from arid and semi arid zones of Northwestern India. Sugar Tech 16: 36–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoque, ME and Mansfield, JW (2004) Effect of genotype and explant age on callus induction and subsequent plant regeneration from root-derived callus of Indica rice genotypes. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture 78: 217–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, XL, Li, XJ, Xu, CH, Lin, XQ and Deng, ZH (2016) Genetic diversity of populations of Saccharum spontaneum with different ploidy levels using SSR molecular markers. Sugar Tech 18: 365–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahlanza, T, Rutherford, RS, Snyman, SJ and Watt, MP (2013) In vitro generation of somaclonal variant plants of sugarcane for tolerance to Fusarium sacchari. Plant Cell Reports 32: 249–262.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mahlanza, T, Rutherford, RS, Snyman, SJ and Watt, MP (2019) Methylglyoxal-induced enhancement of somatic embryogenesis and associated metabolic changes in sugarcane (Saccharum spp. hybrids). Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture 136: 279–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martinez-Montero, ME, Martinez, J and Engelmann, F (2008) Cryopreservation of sugarcane somatic embryos. CryoLetters 29: 229–242.Google ScholarPubMed
Moore, PH, Paterson, AH and Tew, T (2014) Sugarcane: the crop, the plant, and domestication. In: Moore, PH and Botha, FC (eds) Sugarcane: Physiology, Biochemistry, and Functional Biology. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 1–17.Google Scholar
Mordocco, AM, Brumbley, JA and Lakshmanan, P (2009) Development of a temporary immersion system for mass production of sugarcane (Saccharum spp. interspecific hybrids). In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology-Plant 45: 450–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mustafa, G, Joyia, FA, Anwar, S, Parvaiz, A and Khan, MS (2018) Biotechnological interventions for the improvement of sugarcane crop and sugar production. In: de Oliveira, A (ed.) Sugarcane-Technology and Research. London: IntechOpen, pp. 113–138.Google Scholar
Özgen, M, Birsin, MA and Benlioglu, B (2015) Biotechnological characterization of a diverse set of wheat progenitors (Aegilops sp. and Triticum sp.) using callus culture parameters. Plant Genetic Resources: Characterization and Utilization 15: 45–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panje, RR and Babu, CN (1960) Studies in Saccharum spontaneum distribution and geographical association of chromosome numbers. Cytologia 25: 152–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raza, G, Ali, K, Mukhtar, Z, Mansoor, S, Arshad, M and Asad, S (2010) The response of sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L) genotypes to callus induction, regeneration and different concentrations of the selective agent (geneticin-418). African Journal of Biotechnology 9: 8739–8747.Google Scholar
Roach, BT (1972) Nobilization of sugarcane. Proceedings of International Society of Sugar Cane Technologists 14: 206–216.Google Scholar
Roach, BT (1978) Utilization of Saccharum spontaneum in sugarcane breeding. Proceedings of the International Society of Sugar Cane Technologists 16: 43–58.Google Scholar
Roach, BT (1989) Origin and improvement of the genetic base of sugarcane. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Sugar Cane Technologists 11: 34–47.Google Scholar
Taylor, PW, Ko, HL, Adkins, SW, Rathus, C and Birch, RG (1992) Establishment of embryogenic callus and high protoplast yielding suspension cultures of sugarcane (Saccharum spp. hybrids). Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture 28: 69–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolera, B, Diro, M and Belew, D (2014) Response of sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) varieties to BAP and IAA on in vitro shoot multiplication. Advances in Crop Science and Technology 2: 126. doi:10.4172/2329-8863.1000126.Google Scholar
Yang, X, Song, J, Todd, J, Peng, Z, Paudel, D, Luo, Z, Ma, X, You, Q, Hanson, E, Zhao, Y, Zhang, J, Ming, R and Wang, J (2019) Target enrichment sequencing of 307 germplasm accessions identified ancestry of ancient and modern hybrids and signatures of adaptation and selection in sugarcane (Saccharum spp.), a ‘sweet’ crop with ‘bitter’ genomes. Plant Biotechnology Journal 17: 488–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, J, Nagai, C, Yu, Q, Pan, YB, Ayala-Silva, T, Schnell, RJ, Comstock, JC, Arumuganathan, AK and Ming, R (2012) Genome size variation in three Saccharum species. Euphytica 185: 511–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, J, Zhang, X, Tang, H, Zhang, Q, Hua, X, Ma, X, Zhu, F, Jones, T, Zhu, X, Bowers, J, Wai, CM, Zheng, C, Shi, Y, Chen, S, Xu, X, Yue, J, Nelson, DR, Huang, L, Li, Z, Xu, H, Zhou, D, Wang, Y, Hu, W, Lin, J, Deng, Y, Pandey, N, Mancini, M, Zerpa, D, Nguyen, JK, Wang, L, Yu, L, Xin, Y, Ge, L, Arro, J, Han, JO, Chakrabarty, S, Pushko, M, Zhang, W, Ma, Y, Ma, P, Lv, M, Chen, F, Zheng, G, Xu, J, Yang, Z, Deng, F, Chen, X, Liao, Z, Zhang, X, Lin, Z, Lin, H, Yan, H, Kuang, Z, Zhong, W, Liang, P, Wang, G, Yuan, Y, Shi, J, Hou, J, Lin, J, Jin, J, Cao, P , Shen, Q, Jiang, Q, Zhou, P, Ma, Y, Zhang, X, Xu, R, Liu, J, Zhou, Y, Jia, H, Ma, Q, Qi, R, Zhang, Z, Fang, J, Fang, H, Song, J, Wang, M, Dong, G, Wang, G, Chen, Z, Ma, T, Liu, H, Dhungana, SR, Huss, SE, Yang, X, Sharma, A, Trujillo, JH, Martinez, MC , Hudson, M, Riascos, JJ, Schuler, M, Chen, L, Braun, DM, Li, L, Yu, Q, Wang, J, Wang, K, Schatz, MC, Heckerman, D, Van Sluys, M, Souza, GM, Moore, PH, Sankoff, D, VanBuren, R, Paterson, AH, Nagai, C and Ming, R (2018) Allele-defined genome of the autopolyploid sugarcane Saccharum spontaneum L. Nature Genetics 50: 1565–1573.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Li et al. supplementary material

Table S1

Download Li et al. supplementary material(File)
File 15 KB