Induced mutations: technological advancement for development of new ornamental varieties

Abstract

Induced mutagenesis is now one of the most important technologies for the development of new varieties through genetic manipulations. In commercial floriculture there is always demand for new varieties. Mutation has been most successfully utilized in ornamental crops and this author has developed 80 new mutant varieties. Voluminous literature has been generated on ornamental crops using classical and in vitro techniques focusing on different aspects like radio-sensitivity, selection of material, exposure to mutagens, suitable dose of mutagens, combined treatment, recurrent irradiation, acute and chronic irradiations, ion beam technology, colchicine induced-mutation, mutation detection, nature of chimerism, classical and modern methods for management of chimeras, in vitro mutagenesis, directive mutation, isolation of mutants etc. Step wise advancement/refinement of practical approaches for application of classical and in vitro induced mutation techniques have highlighted improvement of ornamental crops with special emphasis on interesting mutants with changed flower type, appendage like structure on florets, striped flowers, tubular florets, late/early blooming varieties along with management of chimera. The knowledge generated on ornamental crops will work as a model system to prepare guide lines for future planning of successful and accurate application of mutation technique in crop improvement programme.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. 1.

    Ahloowalia B, In vitro mutagenesis for the improvement of vegetatively propagated plants. In: Induced mutations and molecular techniques for crop improvement. Proceedings of a symposium, Vienna, 19–23 June, Jointly organized by IAEA and FAO, 1995. p. 531–541.

  2. 2.

    Ahloowalia BS, Maluszynski M, Nichterlein K. Global impact of mutation-derived varieties. Euphytica. 2004;135:187–204.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Anonymous. List of new mutant. Mutat Breed Newsl. 1994;39:14–33.

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Bowen HJM, Cawse PA, Dick M. The induction of sports in chrysanthemum by gamma irradiation. Radiat Bot. 1962;1:297–303.

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Broertjes C, Mutation breeding in vegetatively propagated crops. In: Fifth congress of the European association for research on plant breeding, Milano 30.9 to 2-10, 1968, p. 139–165.

  6. 6.

    Broertjes C. Dose-fractionation studies and radiation-induced phenomena in African violet. In: Benson DW, Sparrow AH, editors. Survival of food crops and livestock in the mission. Oak Ridge: US Atomic Energy Commission; 1971. p. 325–42.

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Broertjes C, Van Harten AM. Application of mutation breeding methods in the improvement of vegetatively propagated crops. Amsterdam: Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company; 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Cassels AC, Walsh PC. Diplontic selection as a positive factor in determining the fitness of mutants of Dianthus ‘Mystere’ derived from X-irradiation of nodes in in vitro culture. Euphytica. 1993;70:167–74.

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Chakrabarty D, Datta SK. Management of chimera and in vitro mutagenesis for development of new flower colour/shape and chlorophyll variegated mutants in chrysanthemum. In: Shu QY, editor. Induced plant mutations in the genomics era. Vienna: Joint FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear techniques in Food and Agriculture, International Atomic Energy Agency; 2009. p. 303–5.

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Chakrabarty D, Mandal AKA, Datta SK. Management of chimera through direct shoot regeneration from florets of chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemum morifolium Ramat). J Hortic Sci Biotechnol. 1999;74(3):293–6.

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Chakrabarty D, Mandal AKA, Datta SK. Retrieval of new coloured chrysanthemum through organogeneis from sectorial chimeras. Curr Sci. 2000;78(9):1060–1.

    Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Datta SK. Colchi-mutation (C-mutation). Everyman’s Sci. 1985;XIX(3):70–2.

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Datta SK. Chrysanthemum cultivars evolved by induced mutations at National Botanical Research Institute, Lucknow. The Chrysanthemum. 1988;44(1):72–5.

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Datta SK. Induced mutation for plant domestication: Lantana depressa. Proc Indian Sci Acad. 1995;B61(1):73–8.

    Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Datta SK. Ornamental plants-role of mutation. Delhi: Daya Publishing House; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Datta SK. Mutation studies on garden roses: a review. Proc. Indian Natl. Sci. Acad. 1997;B63:107–26.

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Datta SK. Mutation studies on garden chrysanthemum—a review. Sci Hortic. 2001;7:159–99.

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Datta SK. Success story of induced mutagenesis for development of new ornamental varieties. In: Kozgar MI, Khan S, editors. Bioremediation, biodiversity and bioavailability 6 (Special Issue I). Global Science Books; 2012, p. 15–26.

  19. 19.

    Datta SK. Induced mutagenesis: basic knowledge for technological success. In: Tomlekova NB, Kozgar ML, Wani MR, editors. Mutagenesis: exploring genetic diversity of crops. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers; 2014. p. 95–137.

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Datta SK. Indian floriculture, role of CSIR. New Delhi: Regency Publications A Division of Asral International (P) Ltd; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Datta SK, Induction and analysis of somatic mutations in vegetatively propagated ornamental. D.Sc. thesis, Kanpur University, India, 1992.

  22. 22.

    Datta SK. Role of classical mutagenesis for development of new ornamental varieties. In: Shu QY, editor. Induced plant mutations in the genomics era. Vienna: Joint FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear techniques in Food and Agriculture, International Atomic Energy Agency; 2009. p. 300–2.

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Datta SK, Gupta MN. Effects of gamma irradiation on rooted cuttings of small flower chrysanthemum. New Bot. 1980;VII:73–85.

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Datta SK, Chakraborty D, Mandal AKA. Gamma ray induced genetic variation and their manipulation through tissue culture. Plant Breed. 2001;120:91–2.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Datta SK, Mandal AKA. In vitro mutageneis—a quick method for establishment of solid mutant in chrysanthemum. Curr Sci. 2005;88(1):155–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Dowrick GJ, El-Bayoumi A. The induction of mutations in chrysanthemum using x and gamma radiation. Eyphytica. 1966;15:204–10.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Dwivedi AK, Banerji BK, Chakraborty D, Mandal AKA, Datta SK. Gamma ray induced new flower colour chimera and its management through tissue culture. Indian J Agric Sci. 2000;70(12):853–5.

    Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Gottschalk W, Wolf G. Induced mutations in plant breeding. Monographs on theoretical and applied genetics, vol. 7. Berlin: Springer; 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Grunewaldt J. In vitro mutagensis of Saintpaulia and Palargonium cultivars. Acta Hortic. 1983;131:339–43.

    Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Grunewaldt J. In vitro selection and propagation of temperature tolerant of Saintpaula. Acta Hortic. 1988;226:271–5.

    Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Gupta MN, Induction of somatic mutation in some ornamental plants. In: Proceedings all India symposium horticulture. 1966. p. 107–114.

  32. 32.

    Gupta MN. Mutation breeding of some vegetatively propagated ornamentals. Prog Plant Res. 1979;2:75–92.

    Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Hossain Z, Mandal AKA, Datta SK, Biswas AK. Isolation of a NaCl-tolerant mutant of Chrysanthemum morifolium by gamma radiation: in vitro mutagenesis and selection by salt stress. Funct Plant Biol. 2006;33:91–101.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Hossain Z, Mandal AKA, Datta SK, Biswas AK. Development of NaCl-Tolerant strain in Chrysanthemum morifolium Ramat. Through in vitro mutagenesis. Plant Biol. 2006;8(4):450–61.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Hossain Z, Mandal AKA, Shukla R, Datta SK. NaCl stress—its chromotoxic effects and antioxidant behaviour in roots of Chrysanthemum morifolium Ramat. Plant Sci. 2004;166:215–20.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Hossain Z, Mandal AKA, Datta SK, Biswas AK. Development of NaCl-tolerant strain in Chrysanthemum morifolium Ramat. Through shoot organogenesis of selected callus line. J Biotechnol. 2007;129:658–67.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Huitema JBM, Cussenhoven GC, Dons JJM, Broertjes C. Induction and selection of low temperature tolerant mutants of Chrysanthemum Ramat. Acta Hortic. 1986;197:89–96.

    Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Huitema JBM, Preil W, Gussenhoven GC, Schineidereit M. Methods or the selection of low-temperature tolerant mutants of Chrysanthemum morifolium Ramat. by using irradiated cell suspension cultures. I. Selection of regenerations in vivo under suboptimal temperature conditions. Plant Breed. 1989;102:140–7.

    Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Ikegami H, et al. Mutation induction through ion beam irradiations in protoplasts of chrysanthemum. Bull Fukuoka Agric Res Cent. 2005;24:5–9.

    Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Jank H, Experimental production of mutations in Chrysanthemum indicum by X-rays. (Translation of Jank 1957a). U.K. At. Energy Established Harwell, 1957, 36 pp.

  41. 41.

    Jerzy M. In vitro induction of mutation in chrysanthemum using x-and gamma radiation. Mutat Breed Newsl. 1990;35:10.

    Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Jerzy M, Lubomski M. Adventitious shoot formation on ex in vitro derived leaf explants of Gerbera jamesonii. Sci Hortic. 1991;47:115–24.

    Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Jerzy M, Zalewska M. Polish cultivars of Dendranthema grandiflora Tzvelev and Gerbera jamesonii Bolus bred in vitro by induced mutations. Mutat Breed Newsl. 1996;42:19.

    Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Jerzy M, Zalewska M. In vitro adventitious bud techniques for mutation breeding of Gerbera jamesonii Acta. Horticulture. 1992;314:269–74.

    Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Johnson RT. Gamma irradiation and in vitro induced separation of chimeral genotypes in carnation. HortScience. 1980;15(5):605–6.

    Google Scholar 

  46. 46.

    Jung-Heliger H, Horn W. Variation nach mutagener Behandlung von Stecklingen and in vitro-Kulturen bei Chrysanthemum. Z Pflanzenzlichg. 1980;85:185–99.

    Google Scholar 

  47. 47.

    Laneri U, Franconi R, Altavista P. Somatic mutagensis of Gerbera jamesonii hybr.: irradiation and in vitro culture. Acta Hortic. 1990;280:395–402.

    Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Liu LX, Guo HJ, Zhao LS, Wang J, Zhao SR. Achievements and perspectives of crop space breeding in China. In: Shu QY, editor. Induced plant mutations in the genomics era. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 2009. p. 213–5.

    Google Scholar 

  49. 49.

    Maliga P. Isolation and characterization of mutants in plant cell cultures. Annu Rev Plant Physiol. 1984;1984(35):519–52.

    Google Scholar 

  50. 50.

    Mandal AKA, Chakrabarty D, Datta SK. Application of in vitro techniques in mutation breeding of chrysanthemum. Plant Cell, Tissue Organ Cult. 2000;60:33–8.

    Google Scholar 

  51. 51.

    Mandal AKA, Chakrabarty D, Datta SK. In vitro isolation of solid novel flower colour mutants from induced chimeric ray florets of chrysanthemum. Euphytica. 2000;114:9–12.

    Google Scholar 

  52. 52.

    Mandal AKA, Datta SK. Combination of classical and modern methods for the development of new ornamental varieties. In: Datta SK, editor. Role of classical mutation breeding in crop improvement. Delhi: Daya Publishing House; 2005. p. 304–9.

    Google Scholar 

  53. 53.

    Mandal AKA, Datta SK. Direct somatic embryogenesis and plant regeneration from ray florets of chrysanthemum. Biol Plant. 2005;49(1):29–33.

    Google Scholar 

  54. 54.

    Maluszyuski M, Ahloowalia BS, Sigurbjornsson B. Application of in vivo and in vitro mutation techniques for crop improvement. Euphytica. 1995;85:303–15.

    Google Scholar 

  55. 55.

    Micke A, Donini B, Maluszynski M. Induced mutations for crop improvement. Mutat Breed Rev. 1990;7:1–41.

    Google Scholar 

  56. 56.

    Micke A, Donini B, Maluszynski M. Induced mutations for crop improvement—a review. Trop Agric (Trinidad). 1987;64:259–78.

    Google Scholar 

  57. 57.

    Misra P, Datta SK, Chakrabarty D. Mutation in flower colour and shape of Chrysanthemum morifolium induced by gamma radiation. Biol Plant. 2003;47(1):153–6.

    Google Scholar 

  58. 58.

    Nagatomi S. Enlargement of induced variations by combined method of chronic irradiations with callus culture in sugarcane. Gamma Field Symp. 1991;30:87–110.

    Google Scholar 

  59. 59.

    Nagatomi S. Effects of various irradiation methods on mutation induction of regenerants through leaf trimming and tissue culture of pineapple. Tech News. 1992;41:1–2.

    Google Scholar 

  60. 60.

    Nagatomi S. Effectiveness of gamma ray chronic irradiation on in vitro mugagenesisi in crops. New Delhi: SEMINARI: Agriculture & Bosciences; 2002. p. 49–58.

    Google Scholar 

  61. 61.

    Nagatomi S, Degi K, Yagaguchi M, Miyahira E, Skamoto M, Takaesu K. Six mutant varieties of different flower colour induced by floral organ culture of chronically irradiated chrysanthemum plants. Techn News Inst Radiat Breed. 1993;43:1–2.

    Google Scholar 

  62. 62.

    Nagatomi S, et al. Three mutant varieties in Eustoma grandiflorum induced through in vitro culture of chronic irradiated plants. Tech News. 1996;53:1–2.

    Google Scholar 

  63. 63.

    Nagatomi S, et al. Mutation induction on chrysanthemum plants regenerated from in vitro cultured explants irradiated with C ion beam. TIARA Annu Rep. 1996;5:50–2.

    Google Scholar 

  64. 64.

    Nagatomi S, Degi K. Mutation breeding of chrysanthemum by gamma field irradiation and in vitro culture. In: Shu QY, editor. Induced plant mutations in the genomics era. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 2009. p. 258–61.

    Google Scholar 

  65. 65.

    Okamura M, et al. Wide variety of flower-color and-shape mutants regenerated from leaf cultures irradiated with ion beams. Nucl Instr Methods Phys Res. 2003;206:574–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. 66.

    Okamura M, et al. Advances in mutagenesis in flowers and their industrialization. In: da Silva T, editor. Floriculture, ornamental and plant biotechnology, vol. 1. Global Science Books; 2006. p. 619–28.

  67. 67.

    Preil W, Engelhardt M, Walther F. Breeding of low temperature tolerant poinsettia (Euphobia pulcherrima) and Chrysanthemum by means of mutation induction in in vitro cultures. Acta Hortic. 1983;131:345–51.

    Google Scholar 

  68. 68.

    Richter A, Singleton WR. The effect of chronic gamma radiation on the production of somatic mutations in carnations. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 1995;1(5):295–300.

    Google Scholar 

  69. 69.

    Schum A, Preil W. Induced mutations in ornamental plants. In: Jain SM, Brar S, Ahloowalia, editors. Somaclonal variation and induced mutations in crop improvement. Netherlands: Springer; 1998. p. 333–6.

    Google Scholar 

  70. 70.

    Sigurbjornsson B, Micke A, Progress in mutation breeding. In: Induced mutations in plants (proceedings symposium pullman, 1969). IAEA, Vienna; 1969. p. 673–698.

  71. 71.

    Simard MH, Michaux-Ferriere N, Silvy A. Variants of carnation (Dianthus caryophllus L.) obtained by organogenesis from irradiated petals. Plant Cell, Tissue Organ Cult. 1992;29:37–42.

    Google Scholar 

  72. 72.

    Skirvin RM, Janick J. Tissue culture induced variation in scented Pelargonium spp. J Am Soc Hortic Sci. 1976;10(3):281–90.

    Google Scholar 

  73. 73.

    Tanaka A. Establishment of ion beam technology for breeding. In: Shu QY, editor. Induced plant mutations in the genomics era. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 2009. p. 216–9.

    Google Scholar 

  74. 74.

    Ueno K, et al. Effects of ion beam irradiation on chrysanthemum leaf discs and sweetpotato callus. JAERI-Rev. 2002;35:44–6.

    Google Scholar 

  75. 75.

    Ueno K, et al. Additional improvement of chrysanthemum using ion beam re-irradiation. JAERI-Rev. 2004;2004(25):53–5.

    Google Scholar 

  76. 76.

    Walther F, Suer A, Analysis of radiosensitivity—a basis requirement for in vitro somatic mutagenesis II. Gerbera jamesonii. In: Nuclear techniques and in vitro culture for plant improvement. IAEA, Vienna Aug, 1985, 1986a; 155–161.

  77. 77.

    Walther F, Suer A, In vitro mutagensis in Gerbera jamesonii, In: Horn CJ, Jesen W, Odenbach, Schieder O, Edotors. Genetic manipulation in plant breeding proceedings symposium Eucarpia Berlin 1985. Walter de gruyter Publ. Berlin, New York; 1986. p. 555–562.

Download references

Acknowledgements

I sincerely acknowledge my long association with CSIR-National Botanical Research Institute, Lucknow, India, where I did all mutation breeding research on different ornamental crops. I specially thank and convey my deepest feelings to my professional colleagues of floriculture laboratory from whom I have been grately benefited in my research activities.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. K. Datta.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Datta, S.K. Induced mutations: technological advancement for development of new ornamental varieties. Nucleus 63, 119–129 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13237-020-00310-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Ornamentals
  • Mutation
  • Mutant
  • Chimera
  • In vitro mutation