Abstract
The successful application of Agrobacterium transformation methods to a specific crop has its inherent problems. Firstly, it is dependent on the susceptibility of the species to Agrobacterium infection and on its potential to regenerate from transformed cells into fertile plants. Unfortunately, a number of reliable regeneration protocols, developed in the past decade, proved unsuitable for transformation with Agrobacterium. A possible explanation is the stress response of the plant tissue during cocultivation with the bacterium, which inhibits efficient regeneration. This is especially true for regeneration methods that need long (more than several months) and complex (several sequential hormone regimes) tissue culture phases. Also, for certain antibiotics that are used to stop bacterial growth, phytohormone activities are known. This may have detrimental effects on regeneration. Furthermore, somaclonal variation as a result of tissue culture poses a problem for plant genetic engineering: it is generally aimed at the introduction of only a specific trait carried by one or several genes into the target crop. All intrinsic qualities of the target cultivars should remain otherwise unchanged. Ideally, the tissue culture phase after transformation should be abandoned completely or kept to a minimal period.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Binding H, Nehls R, Kock R, Finger J, Mordhorst G (1981) Comparative studies on protoplast regeneration in herbaceous species of the Dicotyledoneae class. Z Pflanzenphysiol 101:119–130.
Bohorova NE, Cocking EC, Power JB (1986) Isolation, culture and callus regeneration of protoplasts of wild and cultivated Helianthus species. Plant Cell Rep 5:256–258.
Chee PP, Fober KA, Slightom JL (1989) Transformation of soybean (Glycine max) by infecting germinating seeds with Agrobacterium tumefaciens. Plant Physiol. 91:1212–1218.
Espinasse A, Lay C (1989) Shoot regeneration of callus derived from globular to torpedo embryos from 59 sunflower genotypes. Crop Sci 29:201–205.
Everett NP, Robinson KEP, Mascarenhas D (1987) Genetic engineering of sunflower (Helianthus annum L.). Bio/Technol 5:1201–1204.
Gould J, Devey M, Hasegawa O, Ulian UC, Peterson G, Smith RH (1991) Transformation of Zea mays L. using Agrobacterium tumefaciens and the shoot apex. Plant Physiol 95:426–434.
Greco B, Tanzarella OA, Carrozzo G, Blanco A (1984) Callus induction and shoot regeneration in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Plant Sci Lett 36:73–77.
Hoekema A, Hirsch PR, Hooykaas PJJ, Schilperoort RA (1983) A binary plasmid vector strategy based on separation of vir-and T-regions of the Agrobacterium tumefaciens Ti-plasmid. Nature 303:179–180.
Hood EE, Helmer GL, Fraley RT, Chilton MD (1986) The hypervirulence of Agrobacterium tumefaciens A282 is encoded in a region of pTiBo542 outside of T-DNA. J Bacteriol 168:1291–1301.
Jefferson RA, Kavanagh TA, Bevan MW (1987) GUS fusions: β-glucuronidase as a sensitive and versatile gene fusion marker in higher plants. EMBO J 6:3901–3907.
Jegla DE, Sussex IM (1989) Cell lineage patterns in the shoot meristem of the sunflower embryo in the dry seed. Dev Biol 131:215–225.
Koekman BP, Hooijkaas PJJ, Schilperoort RA (1982) A functional map of the replication region of the octopine Ti plasmid. Plasmid 7:119–132.
McCabe DE, Swain FS, Martinell BJ, Christou P (1988) Stable transformation of soybean (Glycine max) by particle acceleration. Bio/Technol 6:923–926.
McCann AW, Cooley G, Van Dreser J (1988) A system for routine plantlet regeneration of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) from immature embryo-derived callus. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 14:103–110.
Monsan P (1991) Pioneer Hi-Bred halves the time for achieving stable sunflower transformation. Biotechnol News 11(6): 3.
Murashige T, Skoog F (1962) A revised medium for rapid growth and bioassays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol Plant 15:473–497.
Power CJ (1987) Organogenesis from Helianthus annuus inbreds and hybrids from the cotyledons of zygotic embryos. Am J Bot 74:497–503.
Schmitz P, Schnabl H (1989) Regeneration and evacuolation of protoplasts from mesophyll, hypocotyl and petioles from Helianthus annuus L. J Plant Physiol 135:223–227.
Schrammeijer B, Sijmons PC, van den Elzen PJM, Hoekema A (1990) Meristem transformation of sunflower via Agrobacterium. Plant Cell Rep 9:55–60.
Ulian E, Smith R, Gould J, McKnight T (1988) Transformation of plants via the shoot apex. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol 24:951–954.
Vancanneyt G, Schmidt R, O’Connor-Sanchez A, Willmitzer L, Rocha-Sosa M (1990) Construction of an intron-containing marker gene: splicing of the intron in transgenic plants and its use in monitoring early events in Agrobacterium-mediated plant transformation. Mol Gen Genet 220:245–250.
Witrzens B, Scowcroft WR, Downes RW, Larkin PJ (1988) Tissue culture and plant regeneration from sunflower (Helianthus annuus) and interspecific hybrids (H. tuberosus x H. annuus). Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 13:61–76.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1993 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schrammeijer, B., Hoekema, A., Sijmons, P.C. (1993). Transformation in Helianthus annuus L. (Sunflower). In: Bajaj, Y.P.S. (eds) Plant Protoplasts and Genetic Engineering III. Biotechnology in Agriculture and Forestry, vol 22. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-78006-6_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-78006-6_19
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-78008-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-78006-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive