Advertisement

In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology - Plant

, Volume 54, Issue 6, pp 658–671 | Cite as

A filter paper-based liquid culture system for citrus shoot organogenesis—a mixture-amount plant growth regulator experiment

  • Randall P. Niedz
  • Mizuri Marutani-Hert
Plant Tissue Culture
  • 99 Downloads

Abstract

This study determined the effects of a static liquid culture system on shoot regeneration from citrus epicotyl explants. A mixture-amount experiment was used to determine the effects of zeatin riboside (ZR), 6-benzylaminopurine (BA), and indole-3-acetic acid (IAA) on two citrus types—citrange (Citrus sinensis ‘Washington’ L. Osbeck. × Poncirus trifoliata L. Raf var. Carrizo) and sweet orange (Citrus sinensis L. Osbeck var. ‘Ridge Pineapple’). A liquid culture system comprising a Petri dish, cellulose filter paper, and liquid culture medium was used. Shoot regeneration experiments were conducted over 6 wk that included 2 wk in the dark followed by 4 wk in the light. Three responses were measured: (1) number of explants forming buds and/or shoots, (2) number of explants with shoots > 2 mm, and (3) overall explant and shoot quality. The effects of paper disc number, liquid medium volume, and explant size on shoot regeneration were determined. High-quality shoots were produced from explants cultured in 5.25 to 12 mL medium volume and explant sizes ranging from 2 to 15 mm. The effects of the plant growth regulators were similar for the two citrus types and were as follows: (1) use of ZR or BA resulted in high-quality shoot production; (2) ZR and BA were not synergistic; (3) culture in 20 μM ZR resulted in the highest shoot production; (4) BA and IAA were strongly synergistic, with the greatest production with BA when IAA was included in the mixture; and (5) ZR and IAA were antagonistic, particularly with Ridge Pineapple.

Keywords

Sweet orange Shoot regeneration Mixture-amount Plant growth regulators Experimental design 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Eldridge Wynn for his careful preparation of the media formulations, assistance with the growth of the plant cultures, and collection of the data.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Abdoli M, Moieni A, Dehghani H (2007) Effects of cultivar and agar concentration on in vitro shoot organogenesis and hyperhydricity in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Pak J Bot 39:31–35Google Scholar
  2. Acanda Y, Canton M, Wu H, Zale J (2017) Kanamycin selection in temporary immersion bioreactors allows visual selection of transgenic citrus shoots. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 129:351–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adelberg JW (2016) Micropropagation in liquid culture using partial immersion systems. Acta Hortic (1113):35–46Google Scholar
  4. Almeida WAB, Mourão Filho FAA, Pino LE, Boscariol RL, Rodriguez APM, Mendes BMJ (2003) Genetic transformation and plant recovery from mature tissues of Citrus sinensis L. Osbeck. Plant Sci 164:203–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Alvarez-Gerding X, Cortés-Bullemore R, Medina C, Romero-Romero JL, Inostroza-Blancheteau C, Aquea F, Arce-Johnson P (2015) Improved salinity tolerance in Carrizo citrange rootstock through overexpression of glyoxalase system genes. Biomed Res Int 2015:1–7.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/827951 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beruto M, Beruto D, Deberch P (1999) Influence of agar on in vitro cultures: I. Physicochemical properties of agar and agar gelled media. In Vitro Cell Biol-Plant 35:86–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beruto M, La Rosa C, Portogallo C (2001) Effects of agar impurities on in vitro propagation of Ranunculus asiaticus L. Acta Hortic (560):399–402Google Scholar
  8. Beruto M, Portogallo C, Curir P (2006) Agar phenolic impurities affect the biological performance of in vitro cultures. Acta Hortic 725(I):173–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Casanova E, Moysset L, Trillas MI (2008) Effects of agar concentration and vessel closure on the organogenesis and hyperhydricity of adventitious carnation shoots. Biol Plant 52:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cavallaro V, Castiglione V, Barbera AC, Tringali S (2010) Influence of gelling agents on in vitro shoot proliferation of globe artichoke [Cynara cardunculus subsp. scolymus (L.) Hegi] genotypes. Adv Hortic Sci 24:257–262Google Scholar
  11. Cervera M, Juárez J, Navarro A, Pina JA, Durán-Vila N, Navarro L, Peña L (1998) Genetic transformation and regeneration of mature tissues of woody fruit plants bypassing the juvenile stage. Transgenic Res 7:51–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Costa M, Otoni W, Moore G (2002) An evaluation of factors affecting the efficiency of Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of Citrus paradisi (Macf.) and production of transgenic plants containing carotenoid biosynthetic genes. Plant Cell Rep 21:365–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dam A, Paul S, Bhattacharya C, Bandyopadhyay TK (2013) Effects of culture conditions on multiple shoot induction from inflorescence and RAPD analysis of cloned plants in Limonium sinensis (Girard) Kuntze, var. Golden Diamond. J Plant Biochem Biotechnol 22:348–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dutt M, Erpen L, Ananthakrishnan G, Barthe GA, Brlansky RH, Maiti IB, Grosser JW (2016) Comparative expression analysis of five caulimovirus promoters in citrus. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 126:229–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Etienne H, Berthouly M (2002) Temporary immersion systems in plant micropropagation. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 69:215–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fernandez-García N, Piqueras A, Olmos E (2008) Sub-cellular location of H2O2, peroxidases and pectin epitopes in control and hyperhydric shoots of carnation. Environ Exp Bot 62:168–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gutiérrez-E MA, Luth D, Moore GA (1997) Factors affecting Agrobacterium-mediated transformation in Citrus and production of sour orange (Citrus aurantium L.) plants expressing the coat protein gene of citrus tristeza virus. Plant Cell Rep 16:745–753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hao G, Stover E, Gupta G (2016) Overexpression of a modified plant thionin enhances disease resistance to citrus canker and huanglongbing (HLB). Front Plant Sci 7.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.01078
  19. He Y, Chen S, Peng A, Zou X, Xu L, Lei T, Liu X, Yao L (2011) Production and evaluation of transgenic sweet orange (Citrus sinensis Osbeck) containing bivalent antibacterial peptide genes (Shiva A and Cecropin B) via a novel Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of mature axillary buds. Sci Hortic 128:99–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hu W, Li W, Xie S, Fagundez S, McAvoy R, Deng Z, Li Y (2016) Kn1 gene overexpression drastically improves genetic transformation efficiencies of citrus cultivars. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 125:81–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ivanova M, Van Staden J (2011) Influence of gelling agent and cytokinins on the control of hyperhydricity in Aloe polyphylla. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 104:13–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Karapanos IC, Akoumianakis K, Olympios CM, Passam HC (2006) The influence of gelling agent purity and ion additions on in vitro tomato pollen germinability and pollen tube growth on semi-solid substrates. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 87:181–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Khawale RN, Singh SK, Garg G, Baranwal VK, Ajirlo SA (2006) Agrobacterium-mediated genetic transformation of Nagpur mandarin (Citrus reticulata Blanco). Curr Sci 91:1700–1705Google Scholar
  24. Kim EK, Hahn EJ, Murthy HN, Paek KY (2003) High frequency of shoot multiplication and bulblet formation of garlic in liquid cultures. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 73:231–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lucchesini M, Pacifici S, Tognoni F, Mensuali-Sodi A, Serra G (2006) Optimisation of in vitro cultural conditions of some officinal species. Acta Hortic (723):303–308Google Scholar
  26. Luth D, Moore G (1999) Transgenic grapefruit plants obtained by Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated transformation. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 57:219–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Maene L, Debergh P (1985) Liquid medium additions to established tissue cultures to improve elongation and rooting in vivo. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 5:23–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Marutani-Hert M, Bowman KD, McCollum GT, Mirkov TE, Evens TJ, Niedz RP (2012) A dark incubation period is important for Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of mature internode explants of sweet orange, grapefruit, citron, and a citrange rootstock. PLoS One 7:e47426.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0047426 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. Moore GA, Jacono CC, Neidigh JL, Lawrence SD, Cline K (1992) Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of citrus stem segments and regeneration of transgenic plants. Plant Cell Rep 11:238–242PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Murashige T, Tucker DPH (1969) Growth factor requirements of citrus tissue culture. Proc 1st Int Citrus Symp 3:1155–1161Google Scholar
  31. Naylor Adelberg JA, Adelberg JW, Rapaka VK (2016) A rooting matrix and tissue culture vessel system yielded larger, faster growing Echeveria plants. Acta Hortic (1113):53–58Google Scholar
  32. Niedz RP, Evens TJ (2011) Mixture screening and mixture-amount designs to determine plant growth regulator effects on shoot regeneration from grapefruit (Citrus paradisi macf.) epicotyls. In Vitro Cell Biol-Plant 47:682–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Niedz RP, Evens TJ (2016) Design of experiments (DOE)—history, concepts, and relevance to in vitro culture. In Vitro Cell Biol-Plant 52:547–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Niedz RP, Hyndman SE, Evens TJ (2007) Using a gestalt to measure the quality of in vitro responses. Sci Hortic 112:349–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Niedz RP, Albano JP, Marutani-Hert M (2015) Effect of various factors on shoot regeneration from citrus epicotyl explants. J Environ Hortic 17:121–128Google Scholar
  36. Orbović V, Ćalović M, Dutt M, Grosser JW, Barthe G (2015) Production and characterization of transgenic citrus plants carrying p35 anti-apoptotic gene. Sci Hortic 197:203–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Orbović V, Grosser JW (2006) Citrus. Methods Mol Biol 344:177–189PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Pena L, Cervera M, Juarez J, Ortega C, Pina JA, Duran-Vila N, Navarro L (1995) High efficiency Agrobacterium-mediated transformation and regeneration of citrus. Plant Sci 104:183–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Peng AH, Liu XF, He YR, Xu LZ, Lei TG, Yao LX, Cao L, Chen SC (2015) Characterization of transgenic Poncirus trifoliata overexpressing the ferric chelate reductase gene CjFRO2 from Citrus junos. Biol Plant 59:654–660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pisowotzki C, Saare-Surminski K, Lieberei R (2008) Micropropagation of Phalaenopsis-hybrids in temporary immersion system (TIS)—effects of exudated phenolic substances on plant development. Propag Ornam Plants 8:221–223Google Scholar
  41. Preece JE (2010) Micropropagation in stationary liquid media. Propag Ornam Plants 10:183–187Google Scholar
  42. Rathore JS, Rai MK, Phulwaria M, Shekhawat NS (2013) A liquid culture system for improved micropropagation of mature Acacia nilotica (L.) Del. ssp. indica and ex vitro rooting. P Natl A Sci India B 84:193–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rogovina LZ, Vasil’ev VG, Braudo EE (2008) Definition of the concept of polymer gel. Polym Sci Ser C+ 50:85–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ruffoni B, Pamato M, Giovannini A, Brea M (2008) Gladiolus micropropagation in temporary immersion system. Propag Ornam Plants 8:102–104Google Scholar
  45. Scholten HJ, Pierik RLM (1998a) Agar as a gelling agent: chemical and physical analysis. Plant Cell Rep 17:230–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Scholten HJ, Pierik RLM (1998b) Agar as a gelling agent: differential biological effects in vitro. Sci Hortic 77:109–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Smith WF (2005) Experimental design for formulation. Experimental design for formulation. ASA-SIAM Series on statistics and applied probability. SIAM/American Statistical Association, Philadelphia/AlexandriaGoogle Scholar
  48. Smulders MJM, Janssen GFE, Croes AF, Barendse GWM, Wullems GJ (1988) Auxin regulation of flower bud formation in tobacco explants. J Exp Bot 39:451–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Takayama S, Misawa M (1980) Differentiation in Lilium bulbscales grown in vitro. Effects of activated charcoal, physiological age of bulbs and sucrose concentration on differentiation and scale leaf formation in vitro. Physiol Plant 48:121–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Teng WL, Liu YJ (1993) Restricting hyperhydricity of lettuce using screen raft and water absorbent resin. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 34:311–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Welander M, Persson J, Asp H, Zhu LH (2014) Evaluation of a new vessel system based on temporary immersion system for micropropagation. Sci Hortic 179:227–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Welander M, Zhu LH, Li XY (2007) Factors influencing conventional and semi-automated micropropagation. Propag Ornam Plants 7:103–111Google Scholar
  53. Yang L, Hu W, Xie Y, Li Y, Deng Z (2016) Factors affecting Agrobacterium-mediated transformation efficiency of kumquat seedling internodal stem segments. Sci Hortic 209:105–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Yu C, Huang S, Chen C, Deng Z, Ling P, Gmitter FG Jr (2002) Factors affecting Agrobacterium-mediated transformation and regeneration of sweet orange and citrange. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 71:147–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Yu Y, Zhao YQ, Zhao B, Ren S, Guo YD (2011) Influencing factors and structural characterization of hyperhydricity of in vitro regeneration in Brassica oleracea var. italica. Can J Plant Sci 91:159–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for In Vitro Biology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research ServiceU.S. Horticultural Research LaboratoryFort PierceUSA

Personalised recommendations