Advertisement

Plantlet Regeneration via Multiple Shoot Induction in Indian Cultivars of Lucerne (Medicago sativa L)

  • Suresh Kumar
  • Amaresh Chandra
  • Madan G. Gupta
Short Communication

Abstract

An efficient protocol has been developed for in vitro plant regeneration via multiple shoot induction in lucerne (Medicago sativa L). Shoot tips from in vitro grown 5–6 days old seedlings of 3 cultivars, LLC-3, Chetak and RL-88 were used as explants for multiple shoot induction on MS medium supplemented with cytokinins. Maximum of 14 shoots per apical meristem were observed in case of cv Chetak on MS medium supplemented with BAP (12.6 μM) and KN (9.3 μM). Shoot elongation on MS medium supplemented with GA (5.8 μM), while root induction was achieved on MS medium supplemented with IAA (11.4 μM) and activated charcoal (2.0 g l−1). Tissue raised plants showed 75% survival after transfer to soil under field conditions.

Key words

Medicago sativa lucerne alfalfa multiple shoot induction plant regeneration 

Abbreviations

BAP

6-benzylaminopurine

IAA

indole-3-acetic acid

KN

kinetin

MS

Murashige and Skoog

GA

gibberellic acid

NAA

α-naphthaleneacetic acid

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Sen S, Makkar HPS & Becker K, J Agric Food Chem, 46 (1998) 131.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sledge MK, In Proc 32nd Western Alfalfa & Forage Conf, University of California, California (2002) pp 201–206.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schroeder HE, Khan MRI, Knibb WR, Spencer KID & Higgins TJV, Aust J Plant Physiol, 18 (1991) 495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Du S, Erickson L & Bowley S, Plant Cell Rep, 13 (1994) 330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen THH, Marowitch J & Thompson BG, Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult, 8 (1987) 73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gupta S, Gupta S, Bhat V & Gupta MG, Ind J Biotechnol, 5 (2006) 269.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nolan KE, Rose RJ & Gorst JR, Plant Cell Rep, 8 (1989) 278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rose RJ, Nolan KE & Bicego L, J Plant Physiol, 155 (1999) 788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Thomas MR, Rose RJ & Nolan KE, Plant Cell Rep, 11 (1992) 113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Moursy HA, Haggam MEA, Ghamen SA & Rady MR, Egyp J Agron, 29 (1999) 179.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tabe LM, Wardley-Richardson T, Ceriotti A, Aryan A, McNabb W, Moore A & Higgins TJV, J Anim Sci, 73 (1995) 2752.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Trieu AT & Harrisson MJ, Plant Cell Rep, 16 (1996) 6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    lantcheva A, Vlahova M, Bakalova E, Kondorosi E, Elliott M & Atanassov A, Plant Cell Rep, 18 (1999) 904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Meijer EGM & Brown DCW, Plant Physiol, 69 (1987) 591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ninkovie S, Miijus S, Djukei J & Neskovie M, Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult, 42 (1995) 255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Neves LO, Tomaz L & Fevereiro MPS, Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult, 67 (2001) 81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kumar S & Gupta MG, Range Mgmt & Agroforestry, 28 (2007) 283.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Crop ImprovementIndian Grassland and Fodder Research InstituteJhansiIndia

Personalised recommendations