Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T19:53:23.304Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response of Calli and Seedlings of Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) Cultivars to Metribuzin

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Howard F. Harrison Jr. ,
Prashant Bhatt  and
George Fassuliotis
Howard F. Harrison Jr.
Affiliation:
Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. of Agric., U.S. Vegetable Lab., 2875 Savannah Highway, Charleston, SC 29407
Prashant Bhatt
Affiliation:
Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. of Agric., U.S. Vegetable Lab., 2875 Savannah Highway, Charleston, SC 29407
George Fassuliotis
Affiliation:
Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. of Agric., U.S. Vegetable Lab., 2875 Savannah Highway, Charleston, SC 29407
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Hypocotyl callus cultures were established from six tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum L.) cultivars that exhibited differential tolerance to preemergence and postemergence metribuzin [4-amino-6-tert-butyl-3-(methylthio)-as-triazin-5(4H)-one] at 0.5 kg ai/ha in the greenhouse. Metribuzin in a low sucrose growth medium inhibited callus growth, but calli were not highly sensitive to the herbicide Differences between cultivars in the response of calli to 50 ppm metribuzin were observed. The degree of tolerance of tomato cultivars to postemergence metribuzin at 0.5 kg/ha was similar to the degree of tolerance of their hypocotyl calli to 50 ppm metribuzin in the growth medium.

Keywords

Herbicideplant tissue culture
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 31 , Issue 4 , July 1983 , pp. 533 - 536
Copyright
Copyright © 1983 Weed Science Society of America 

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

Literature Cited

1. Adenjii, A. A. and Coyne, D. P. 1981. Inheritance of resistance to trifluralin toxicity in Cucurbita moschata Poir. HortScience 16:774–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Chaleff, R. S. and Parsons, M. F. 1978. Direct selection in vitro for herbicide-resistant mutants of Nicotiana tabacum . Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 10:5104–5107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Comstock, V. E. and Andersen, R. N. 1968. An inheritance study of tolerance to atrazine in a cross of flax (Linum usitatissium L.). Crop Sci. 8:508–509.Google Scholar
4. Ellis, B. E. 1978. Non-differential sensitivity to the herbicide metribuzin in tomato cell suspension cultures. Can. J. Plant Sci. 58:775–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Miller, J. C. Jr., Baker, L. R., and Penner, D. 1973. Inheritance of tolerance to chloramben methyl ester in cucumber. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 98:386–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Murashige, T. and Skoog, F. 1962. A revised medium for rapid growth and bioassays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol. Plantarum. 15:473–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Oswald, T. H., Smith, A. E., and Phillips, D. V. 1976. Herbicide tolerance developed in cell suspension cultures of perennial white clover. Can. J. Bot. 55:1351–1358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Oswald, T. H., Smith, A. E., and Phillips, D. V. 1978. Phytotoxicity and detoxification of metribuzin in dark-grown suspension culture of soybean. Pest. Bioch. and Physiol. 8:73–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Radin, D. N., and Carlson, P. S. 1978. Herbicide-tolerant tobacco mutants selected in situ and recovered via regeneration from cell culture. Gen. Res. Camb. 32:83–89.Google Scholar
10. Snedecor, G. W. and Cochran, W. G. Statistical Methods. Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa, 1980. 507.Google Scholar
11. Souza Machado, V., Nonnecke, I. L., and Phatak, S. C. 1978. Bioassay to screen tomato seedlings for tolerance to metribuzin. Can. J. Plant Sci. 58:823–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Wallender, C. J., Talbert, R. E., and Ramthun, L. E. 1979. Tolerance of tomato cultivars to metribuzin. Ark. Farm Res 28(3):6.Google Scholar
13. Zilkah, S. and Gressel, J. 1977. Cell cultures vs. whole plants for measuring phytotoxicity. I. The establishment and growth of callus and suspension cultures; definition of factors affecting toxicity on calli. Plant and Cell Physiol. 18:641–655.Google Scholar
14. Zilkah, S. and Gressel, J. 1977. Cell cultures vs. whole plants for measuring phytotoxicity. II. Correlations between phytotoxicity in seedlings and calli. Plant and Cell Physiol. 18:657–670.Google Scholar
15. Zilkah, S. and Gressel, J. 1977. Cell cultures vs. whole plants for measuring phytotoxicity. III. Correlations between phytotoxicities in cell suspension cultures, calli and seedlings. Plant and Cell Physiol. 18:815–820.Google Scholar
16. Zilkah, S. and Gressel, J. 1978. Correlations in phytotoxicity between white and green calli of Rumex obtusifolius, Nicotiana tabacum, and Lycopersicon esculentum . Pest. Biochem. and Physiol. 9:334–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar