Advertisement

Plant Molecular Biology

, Volume 43, Issue 2–3, pp 179–188 | Cite as

Epigenetic aspects of somaclonal variation in plants

  • Shawn M. Kaeppler
  • Heidi F. Kaeppler
  • Yong Rhee
Article

Abstract

Somaclonal variation is manifested as cytological abnormalities, frequent qualitative and quantitative phenotypic mutation, sequence change, and gene activation and silencing. Activation of quiescent transposable elements and retrotransposons indicate that epigenetic changes occur through the culture process. Epigenetic activation of DNA elements further suggests that epigenetic changes may also be involved in cytogenetic instability through modification of heterochromatin, and as a basis of phenotypic variation through the modulation of gene function. The observation that DNA methylation patterns are highly variable among regenerated plants and their progeny provides evidence that DNA modifications are less stable in culture than in seed-grown plants. Future research will determine the relative importance of epigenetic versus sequence or chromosome variation in conditioning somaclonal variation in plants.

DNA methylation mutagenesis somaclonal variation tissue culture 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ahloowalia, B.S. 1986. Limitations to the use of somaclonal variation in crop improvement. In: J. Semal (Ed.) Somaclonal Variation and Crop Improvement, Martinus Nijhoff, Boston, pp. 14–27.Google Scholar
  2. Arnholdt-Schmitt, B. 1995. Physiological aspects of genome variability in tissue culture. II. Growth phase-dependent quantitative variability of repetitive BstN1 fragments of primary cultures of Daucus carota L. Theor. Appl. Genet. 91: 816–823.Google Scholar
  3. Arnholt-Schmitt, B., Herterich, S. and Neumann, K.H. 1995. Physiological aspects of genome variability in tissue culture. I. Growth phase-dependent differential DNA methylation of the carrot genome (Daucus carota L.) during primary culture. Theor. Appl. Genet. 91: 809–815.Google Scholar
  4. Banks, J.A., Masson, P. and Federoff, N. 1988. Molecular mechanisms in the developmental regulation of the maize Suppressormutator transposable element. Genes Dev. 2: 1364–1380.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bayliss, M.W. 1980. Chromosomal variation in plant tissues in culture. Int. Rev. Cytol. Suppl. 11A: 113–144.Google Scholar
  6. Benzion, G., Phillips, R.L. and Rines, H.W. 1986. Case histories of genetic variability in vitro: oats and maize. In: I.K. Vasil (Ed.) Cell Culture and Somatic Cell Genetics of Plants, Vol. 3, Academic Press, New York, pp. 435–448.Google Scholar
  7. Bregitzer, P., Halbert, S.E. and Lemaux, P.G. 1998. Somaclonal variation in the progeny of transgenic barley. Theor. Appl. Genet. 96: 421–425.Google Scholar
  8. Brettell, R.I.S. and Dennis E.S. 1991. Reactivation of a silent Ac following tissue culture is associated with heritable alterations in its methylation pattern. Mol. Gen. Genet. 229: 365–372.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Brettell, R.I.S., Dennis, E.S., Scowcroft, W.R. and Peacock, W.J. 1986. Molecular analysis of a somaclonal variant of alcohol dehydrogenase. Mol. Gen. Genet. 202: 335–344.Google Scholar
  10. Brown, P.T.H., Kyozuka, J., Sukekiyo, Y., Kimura, Y., Shimamoto, K. and Lorz, H. 1990. Molecular changes in protoplast-derived rice plants. Mol. Gen. Genet. 223: 324–328.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Brown, P.T.H., Gobel, E. and Lorz, H. 1991. RFLP analysis of Zea mays callus cultures and their regenerated plants. Theor. Appl. Genet. 81: 227–232.Google Scholar
  12. Carver, B.F. and Johnson, B.B. 1989. Partitioning of variation derived from tissue culture of winter wheat. Theor. Appl. Genet. 78: 405–410.Google Scholar
  13. Chandler, V.L. and Walbot, V. 1986. DNA modification of a maize transposable element correlates with loss of activity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 83: 1761–1771.Google Scholar
  14. Chomet, P.S., Wessler, W. and Dellaporta, S.L. 1987. Inactivation of the maize transposable element Activator (Ac) associated with DNA modification. EMBO J. 6: 295–302.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Chopra, P.S., Athma, P. and Peterson, T. 1996. Alleles of the maize P gene with distinct specificities encode Myb-homologous proteins with C-terminal replacements. Plant Cell 8: 1149–1158.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Csink, A.K. and Henikoff, S. 1998. Something from nothing: the evolution and utility of satellite repeats. Trends Genet. 14: 200–204.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Cubas, P., Vincent, C. and Coen, E. 1999. An epigenetic mutation responsible for natural variation in floral symmetry. Nature 401: 157–161.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. D'Amato, F. 1977. Cytogenetics of differentiation in tissue and cell cultures. In: J. Reinert and V.P.S. Bajaj (Eds.) Plant Cell, Tissue, and Organ Culture, Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 343–357.Google Scholar
  19. D'Amato, F. 1985. Cytogenetics of plant cell and tissue culture and their regenerates. CRC Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 3: 73–112.Google Scholar
  20. Dahleen, L.S., Stuthman, D.D. and Rines, H.W. 1991. Agronomic trait variation in oat lines derived from tissue culture. Crop Sci. 31: 90–94.Google Scholar
  21. Dennis, E.S., Brettell, R.I.S. and Peacock, W.J. 1987. A tissue culture induced Adh1 null mutant of maize results from a single base change. Mol. Gen. Genet. 210: 181–183.Google Scholar
  22. Duncan, R.R. 1997. Tissue culture-induced variation and crop improvement. Adv. Agron. 58: 201–240.Google Scholar
  23. Earle, E.B. and Gracen, V.E. 1985. Somaclonal variation in progeny of plants from corn tissue culture. In: R. Henke et al. (Eds.) Progagation of Higher Plants through Tissue Culture, Plenum, New York, pp. 139–152.Google Scholar
  24. Finnegan, E.S., Brettell, R.I.S. and Dennis, E.S. 1993. The role of DNA methylation in the regulation of plant expression. In: J.P. Jost and H.P. Saluz (Eds.) DNAMethylation: Molecular Biology and Biological Significance, Birkhauser, Basel, pp. 218–261.Google Scholar
  25. Fukui, K. 1983. Sequential occurrence of mutations in a growing rice callus. Theor. Appl. Genet 65: 225–230.Google Scholar
  26. Groose, R.W. and Bingham, E.T. 1986. An unstable anthocyanin mutation recovered from tissue culture of alfalfa. 1. High frequency of reversion upon reculture. 2. Stable nonrevertants derived from reculture. Plant Cell Rep. 5: 104–110.Google Scholar
  27. Hang, A. and Bregitzer, P. 1993. Chromosomal variations in immature embryo-derived calli from six barley cultivars. J. Hered. 84: 105–108.Google Scholar
  28. Hirochika, H., Sugimoto, K., Otsuki, Y., Tsugawa, H. and Kanda, M. 1996. Retrotransposons of rice involved in mutations induced by tissue culture. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93: 7783–7788.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Johnson, S.S., Phillips, R.L. and Rines, H.W. 1987. Possible role of heterochromatin in chromosome breakage induced by tissue culture in oats (Avena sativa L.). Genome 29: 439–446.Google Scholar
  30. Kaeppler, S.M. and Phillips, R.L. 1993a. DNA methylation and tissue culture-induced variation in plants. In Vitro Cell Dev. Biol. 29: 125–130.Google Scholar
  31. Kaeppler, S.M. and Phillips, R.L. 1993b. Tissue culture-induced DNA methylation variation in maize. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 90: 8773–8776.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Kaeppler, S.M., Phillips, R.L. and Olhoft, P. 1998. Molecular basis of heritable tissue culture-induced variation in plants. In: Jain et al. (Ed.) Somaclonal Variation and Induced Mutations in Crop Improvement. Current Plant Science and Biotechnology in Agriculture vol. 32, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands, pp. 465–484.Google Scholar
  33. Kidwell, K.K. and Osborn, T.C. 1993. Variation among alfalfa somaclones in copy number of repeated DNA sequences. Genome 36: 906–912.Google Scholar
  34. Larkin, P.J. 1987. Somaclonal variation: history, method, and meaning. Iowa State J. 61: 393–434.Google Scholar
  35. Larkin, P.J. and Scowcroft, W.R. 1981. Somaclonal variation: a novel source of variability from cell cultures for plant improvement. Theor. Appl. Genet. 60: 197–214.Google Scholar
  36. Larkin, P.J. and Scowcroft, W.R. 1983. Somaclonal variation and crop improvement. In: T. Kosuge et al. (Eds.) Genetic Engineering of Plants: An Agricultural Perspective, Plenum, New York, pp. 289–314.Google Scholar
  37. Lee, M.L. and Phillips, R.L. 1987a. Genomic rearrangements in maize induced by tissue culture. Genome 29: 122–128.Google Scholar
  38. Lee, M.L. and Phillips, R.L. 1987b. Genetic variability in progeny of regenerated maize (Zea mays L.) plants. Genome 29: 344–355.Google Scholar
  39. Lee, M.L. and Phillips, R.L. 1988. The chromosomal basis of somaclonal variation. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 39: 413–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lee, M.L., Geadelman, J.L. and Phillips, R.L. 1988. Agronomic evaluation of inbred lines derived from tissue cultures of maize. Theor. Appl. Genet. 75: 841–849.Google Scholar
  41. LoSchiavo, F., Pitto, L., Giuliano, G., Torti, G., Nuti-Ronchi, V., Marazatti, D., Vergara, R., Orselli, S. and Terzi, M. 1989. DNA methylation of embryogenic carrot cell cultures and its variations as caused by mutation, differentiation, hormones, and hypomethylating drugs. Theor. Appl. Genet. 77: 325–331.Google Scholar
  42. Lund, G., Das, O.P. and Messing, J. 1995. Tissue-specific DNaseIsensitive sites of the maize P gene and their changes upon epimutation. Plant J. 7: 797–807.Google Scholar
  43. Marcotrigiano, M. and Jagannathan, K. 1988. Paulownia tomentosa 'Somaclonal Snowstorm'. HortScience 23: 226–227.Google Scholar
  44. Matzke, M.A. and Matzke, A.J.M. 1996. Stable epigenetic states in differentiated plant cells: implications for somaclonal variation and gene silencing in transgenic plants. In: Russo et al. (Eds.) Epigenetic Mechanisms of Gene Regulation, Cold Spring Harbor Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY, pp. 377–392.Google Scholar
  45. McClintock, B. 1984. The significance of responses of the genome to challenge. Science 226: 792–801.Google Scholar
  46. Messing, J. and Grossniklaus, U. 1999. Genomic imprinting in plants. Res. Probl. Cell Differ. 25: 23–40.Google Scholar
  47. Olhoft, P.M. 1996. DNA methylation pattern changes induced by maize tissue culture. M.S. thesis, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN.Google Scholar
  48. Olhoft, P.M. and Phillips, R.L. 1999. Genetic and epigenetic instability in tissue culture and regenerated progenies. In: H.R. Lerner (Ed.) Plant Responses to Environmental Stresses: From Phytohormones to Genome Reorganization, Marcel Dekker, New York, pp. 111–148.Google Scholar
  49. Oono, K. 1985. Putative homozygous mutants in regenerated plants of rice. Mol. Gen. Genet. 198: 377–384.Google Scholar
  50. Orton, T.J. 1984. Genetic variation in somatic tissues: method or madness? Adv. Plant Path. 2: 153–189.Google Scholar
  51. Patterson, G.I., Thorpe, C.J. and Chandler, V.L. 1993. Paramutation, an allelic interaction, is associated with a stable and heritable reduction of transcription of the maize b regulatory gene. Genetics 135: 881–894.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Peschke, V.M. and Phillips, R.L. 1991. Activation of the maize transposable element Suppressor-mutator (Spm) in tissue culture. Theor. Appl. Genet. 81: 90–97.Google Scholar
  53. Peschke, V.M. and Phillips, R.L. 1992. Genetic implications of somaclonal variation in plants. Adv. Genet. 30: 41–75.Google Scholar
  54. Peschke, V.M., Phillips, R.L. and Gengenbach, B.G. 1987. Discovery of transposable element activity among progeny of tissue culture-derived maize plants. Science 238: 804–807.Google Scholar
  55. Peschke, V.M., Phillips, R.L. and Gengenbach, B.G. 1991. Genetic and molecular analysis of tissue culture-derived Ac elements. Theor. Appl. Genet. 82: 121–129.Google Scholar
  56. Phillips, R.L., Kaeppler, S.M. and Olhoft, P. 1994. Genetic instability of plant tissue cultures: breakdown of normal controls. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91: 5222–5226.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Razin, A. and Riggs, A.D. 1993. DNA methylation and embryogenesis. In: J.P. Jost and H.P. Saluz (Eds.) DNAMethylation: Molecular Biology and Biological Significance, Birkhauser, Basel, pp. 343–357.Google Scholar
  58. Rhoades, M.M. and Dempsey, E. 1972. On the mechanism of chromatin loss induced by the B chromosome of maize. Genetics 71: 73–96.Google Scholar
  59. Rhoades, M.M. and Dempsey, E. 1973. Chromatin elimination induced by the B chromosome of maize. J. Hered. 64: 12–18.Google Scholar
  60. Richards, E.J. 1997. DNA methylation and plant development. Trends Genet. 13: 319–323.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Selker, E.U. and Stevens, J.N. 1985. DNA methylation at asymetric sites is associated with numerous transition mutations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 82: 8114–8118.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Sun, Z.X. and K.L. Zheng. 1990. Somaclonal variation in rice. In: Y.P.S. Bajaj (Ed.) Biotechnology in Agriculture and Forestry, Vol. 3, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 288–325.Google Scholar
  63. Sunderland, N. 1973. Nuclear cytology. In: H.E. Street (Ed.) Plant Tissue and Cell Culture, 2nd ed., Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 177–205.Google Scholar
  64. Veilleux, R.E. and Johnson, A.T. 1998. Somaclonal variation: molecular analysis, transformation interaction, and utilization. Plant Breed. Rev. 16: 229–268.Google Scholar
  65. Wolffe, A.P. and Matzke, M.A. 1999. Epigenetics: regulation through repression. Science 286: 481–486.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Zehr, B.E., Williams, M.E., Duncan, R.D. et al. 1987. Somaclonal variation among the progeny of plants regenerated from callus cultures of seven inbred lines of maize. Can. J. Bot. 61: 491–499.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shawn M. Kaeppler
    • 1
  • Heidi F. Kaeppler
    • 1
  • Yong Rhee
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of AgronomyUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations