Graft Compatibilities in Vitro

  • R. Moore
Part of the Biotechnology in Agriculture and Forestry book series (AGRICULTURE, volume 17)

Abstract

Micrografting is a means of propagation that involves fusing small pieces of tissue, either in vivo or in vitro. Although relatively new and cumbersome, micrografting has already produced startling results. For example, micrografting has been used to produce healthy citrus orchards and rejuvenate trees, and will be a valuable tool for investigating the transition from juvenile to adult growth (see review by Jonard 1986).

Keywords

Sugar Hydrolysis Cyanide Glycoside Kinetin 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ball EA (1969) Histology of mixed callus cultures. Bull Torrey Bot Club 96: 52 - 59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ball EA (1971) Growth of plant tissue upon a substrate of another kind of tissue. I. Qualitative observations. Z Pflanzenphysiol 65: 140 - 158Google Scholar
  3. Bevington KB (1976) Development of union abnormalities in grafts between lemon (Citrus limon) and Poncirus trifoliata. Aust J Agric Res 27: 661 - 668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Breen PJ, Muraoka T (1975) Seasonal nutrient levels and peach/plum graft incompatibility. J Amer Soc Hort Sci 100: 339 - 342Google Scholar
  5. Clarke AE, Knox RB (1978) Cell recognition in flowering plants. Q Rev Biol 53: 3 - 28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Clarke AE, Knox RB (1979) Plant and immunity. Dev Comp Immunol 3: 571 - 589PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Copes DL (1978) Anatomical symptoms of graft incompatibility in Pinus monticola and P. ponderosa. Silvae Genet 29: 77 - 82Google Scholar
  8. Deloire A, Hebânt C (1982) Peroxidase activity and lignification at the interface between stock and scion of compatible and incompatible grafts of Capsicum on Lycopersicon. Ann Bot 49: 887 - 891Google Scholar
  9. Fujii T, Nito N (1972) Studies on the compatibility of grafting fruit trees. I. Callus fusion between the rootstock and scion. J Jpn Soc Hortic Sci 41: 1-10Google Scholar
  10. Gautheret RJ (1945) Une voie nouvelle en biologie végétale. La culture des tissus. 3rd edn, L’Avenir de la Science-21. GallimardGoogle Scholar
  11. Gur A (1972) Chemical control of pear-quince graft incompatibility. In: Proc Symp on “pear growing.” 1972 September 4-8; Fruit Breeding Station, Angers, France: International Society for Horticultural Science, Fruit Section, Working Group on Pear, 1972, pp 253 - 264Google Scholar
  12. Gur A, Blum A (1972) The role of cyanogenic glycoside in incompatibility between peach scions and almond rootstocks. Hort Res 13: 1 - 10Google Scholar
  13. Gur A, Samish RM, Lifshitz E (1968) The role of the cyanogenic glycoside of the quince in the incompatibility between pear cultivars and quince rootstocks. Hort Res 8: 113 - 134Google Scholar
  14. Hartmann HT, Kester DE (1975) Plant propagation: principles and practices, 3rd edn. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJGoogle Scholar
  15. Hartmann HT, Kofranek AM, Rubatzky VE, Flocker WJ (1988) Plant science: growth, development, and utilization of cultivated plants, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJGoogle Scholar
  16. Herrero J (1951) Studies of compatible and incompatible graft combinations with special reference to hardy fruit trees. J Hortic Sci 26: 186 - 237Google Scholar
  17. Jeffree CE, Yeoman MM (1983) Development of intercellular connections between opposing cells in a graft union. New Phytol 93: 491 - 509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Juniper BE, Jeffree CE (1983) Plant surfaces. Edward Arnold, LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. Knox RB, Clarke AE (1980) Discrimination of self and non-self in plants. In: Marchalonic JJ, Cohen N (eds) Self/non-self discrimination, contemporary topics in immunology, vol 9. Plenum, New York, pp 1 - 36Google Scholar
  20. Mahlsted JP, Haber ES (1957) Plant propagation. John Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Malik NSA (1983) Grafting experiments on the nature of the decline in N2 fixation during fruit development in soybean. Physiol Plant 57: 561 - 564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Moore R (1982) Graft development in Kalanchôe blossfeldiana. J Exp Bot 33: 533 - 540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Moore R (1984a) A model for graft compatibility-incompatibility in higher plants. Am J Bot 71: 752 - 758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Moore R (1984b) The role of direct cellular contact in the formation of compatible autografts in Sedum telephoides. Ann Bot 54: 127 - 133Google Scholar
  25. Moore R (1984c) Cellular interactions during the formation of approach grafts in Sedum telephoides (Crassulaceae). Can J Bot 62: 2476 - 2484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Moore R (1984d) Ultrastructural aspects of graft incompatibility between bear and quince in vitro. Ann Bot 53: 447 - 451Google Scholar
  27. Moore R (1985) Studies of vegetative compatibility-incompatibility in higher plants. VII. Influences of individual organs on graft development. Tex J Sci 37: 201 - 211Google Scholar
  28. Moore R (1986) Graft incompatibility between pear and quince: the influence of metabolites of Cydonia oblonga on suspension cultures of Pyrus communis. Am J Bot 73: 1 - 4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Moore R, Walker DB (1981a) Studies of vegetative compatibility-incompatibility in higher plants. I. A structural study of a compatible autograft in Sedum telephoides ( Crassulaceae ). Am J Bot 68: 820-830Google Scholar
  30. Moore R, Walker DB (1981b) Studies of vegetative compatibility-incompatibility in higher plants. II. A structural study of an incompatible heterograft between Sedum telephoides (Crassulaceae) and Solanum pennellii ( Solanaceae ). Am J Bot 68: 831-842Google Scholar
  31. Moore R, Walker DB (1981c) Studies of vegetative compatibility-incompatibility in higher plants. III. The involvement of acid phosphatase in the lethal cellular senescence associated with an incompatible heterograft. Protoplasma 109: 317-334Google Scholar
  32. Moore R, Walker DB (1983) Studies of vegetative compatibility-incompatibility in higher plants. VI. Grafting of Sedum and Solanum callus tissue in vitro. Protoplasma 115: 114 - 121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Muller-Stoll WR (1938) Versuche iiber die Verwendbarkeit der B-Indolylessigsaure als verwachsungsôrderndes Mittel in der Rebenveredlung. Angew Bot 20: 218 - 238Google Scholar
  34. Muzik IJ (1958) Role of parenchyma cells in graft union in Vanilla orchid. Science 127: 82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Parkinson M, Yeoman MM (1982) Graft formation in cultured, explanted internodes. New Phytol 91: 711 - 719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sachs T (1981) The control of the patterned differentiation of vascular tissues. In: Woolhouse HW (ed) Advances in botanical research, vol 9. Academic Press, London, pp 151 - 262Google Scholar
  37. Shimomura T, Fuzihara K (1977) Physiological study of graft union formation in cactus. II. Role of auxin on vascular connection between stock and scion. J Jpn Soc Hortic Sei 45: 397-406Google Scholar
  38. Shimomura T, Fuzihara K (1978) Prevention of auxin-induced vascular differentiation in wound callus by surface-to-surface adhesion between calluses of stock and scion in cactus grafts. Plant Cell Physiol 19: 877 - 886Google Scholar
  39. Stoddard FL, McCully ME (1979) Histology of the development of the graft union in pea roots. Can J Bot 57: 1486 - 1501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stoddard FL, McCully ME (1980) Effects of excision of stock and scion organs on the formation of the graft union in Coleus: a histological study. Bot Gaz 141: 401 - 412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Yeoman MM, Kilpatrick DC, Miedzybrodzka MB, Gould AR (1978) Cellular interactions during graft formation in plants, a recognition phenomenon? Symp Soc Exp Biol 32: 139 - 160PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Zeevaart JAD (1982) Transmission of the floral stimulus from a long-short-day plant, Bryophyllum daigremontianum, to the short-long-day plant Echeveria harmsii. Ann Bot 49: 549 - 552Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Moore
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesWright State UniversityDaytonUSA

Personalised recommendations