Transformation in Grapevine (Vitis spp.)

  • S. M. Colby
  • C. P. Meredith
Part of the Biotechnology in Agriculture and Forestry book series (AGRICULTURE, volume 23)


Woody perennials, a group that includes most fruit, nut, and timber crops, are particularly difficult to manipulate genetically. Because genetic gains in these species are made slowly, if at all, by conventional plant breeding methods, such crops stand to benefit significantly from genetic transformation. In grape (Vitis spp.), new cultivars are not only difficult to produce, but in the case of wine cultivars, breeders face the additional obstacle of commercial acceptability. In most wine-producing regions, ancient cultivars are economically well entrenched and quite resistant to displacement. In this context, the prospect of directed modification by transformation of specific traits in existing cultivars has tremendous appeal, and it is not surprising that most research groups concerned with grape improvement are working toward this goal.


Transgenic Plant Somatic Embryo Somatic Embryogenesis Adventitious Shoot Vitis Vinifera 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Baribault TJ, Skene KGM, Scott NS (1989) Genetic transformation of grapevine cells. Plant Cell Rep 8:137–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baribault TJ, Skene KGM, Cain PA, Scott NS (1990) Transgenic grapevines: regeneration of shoots expressing β-glucuronidase. J Exp Bot 229:1045–1049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barton KA, Whiteley HR, Yang N-S (1987) Bacillus thuringiensis δ-endotoxin expressed in transgenic Nicotiana tabacum provides resistance to lepidopteran insects. Plant Physiol 85:1103–1109PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bruce WB, Christensen AH, Klien T, Fromm M, Quail PH (1989) Photoregulation of a phytochrome gene promoter from oat transferred into rice by particle bombardment. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 86:9692–9696PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cain DW, Emershad RL, Tarailo RE (1983) In-ovulo embryo culture and seedling development of seeded and seedless grapes (Vitis vinifera L.). Vitis 22:9–14Google Scholar
  6. Colby SM (1990) Development of an Agrobacterium-mediated transformation system in grape (Vitis spp.). PhD Thesis, University of California, DavisGoogle Scholar
  7. Colby SM, Meredith CP (1990) Kanamycin sensitivity of cultured tissues of Vitis. Plant Cell Rep 9:237–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Colby SM, Juncosa AM, Stamp JA, Meredith CP (1991a) Development anatomy of direct shoot organogenesis from leaf petioles of Vitis vinifera L. Am J Bot 78:260–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Colby SM, Juncosa AM, Meredith CP (1991b) Cellular differences in Agrobacterium susceptibility and regenerative capacity restrict the development of transgenic grapevines. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 116:356–361Google Scholar
  10. Emershad RL, Ramming DW (1984) In-ovulo embryo culture of Vitis vinifera L. cv. Thompson Seedless’. Am J Bot 71:873–877CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Emershad RL, Ramming DW, Serpe MD (1989) In ovulo embryo development and plant formation from stenospermic genotypes of Vitis vinifera. Am J Bot 76:397–402Google Scholar
  12. FAO (1989) Production Yearbook 1988. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, RomeGoogle Scholar
  13. Fischhoff DA, Bowdish KA, Perlak FA, Marrone PG, McCormick SM, Niedermeyer JG, Dean DA, Kusano-Kretzmer K, Mayer EJ, Rochester DE, Rogers SG, Fraley RT (1987) Insect tolerant transgenic tomato plants. Bio/Teehnol 5:807–813Google Scholar
  14. Gerlach WL, Llewellyn D, Haseloff J (1987) Construction of a plant disease resistance gene from the satellite RNA of tobacco ringspot virus. Nature 328:802–805Google Scholar
  15. Goldy R, Emershad R, Ramming D, Chaparro J (1988) Embryo culture as a means of introgressing seedlessness from Vitis vinifera to V. rotundifolia. HortScience 23:886–889Google Scholar
  16. Gray DJ, Meredith CP (1992) Grape. In: Hammersehlag FA, Litz RE (eds) Biotechnology of perennial fruit crops. CAB International, Wallingford, UK, pp 229–262Google Scholar
  17. Guellec V, Chantal D, Branchard M, Tempe J (1990) Agrobacterium rhizogenes mediated transformation of grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.). Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 20:211–215Google Scholar
  18. Hilder VA, Gatehouse AMR, Sheerman SE, Barker RF, Boulter D (1987) A novel mechanism of insect resistance engineered into tobacco. Nature 330:160–163Google Scholar
  19. Hoekema A, Huisman MJ, Molendijk L, van den Elzen PJM, Cornelissen BJC (1989) The genetic engineering of two commercial potato cultivars for resistance to potato virus X. Bio/Technol 7:273–278Google Scholar
  20. Krul WR, Worley JF (1977) Formation of adventitious embryos in callus cultures of ‘Seyval’, a French hybrid grape. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 102:360–363Google Scholar
  21. Loesch-Fries LS, Merlo D, Zinnen T, Burhop L, Hill K, Krahn K, Jarvis N, Nelson S, Halk E (1987) Expression of alfalfa mosaic virus RNA 4 in transgenic plants confers virus resistance. EMBO J 6:1181–1188Google Scholar
  22. Martin L (1987) Genetic transformation and foreign gene expression in tissue of different woody species. MS Thesis, University of California, DavisGoogle Scholar
  23. McGranahan GH, Leslie CA, Uratsu SL, Martin LA, Dandekar AM (1988) Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of walnut somatic embryos and regeneration of transgenic plants. Bio/Technol 6:800–804Google Scholar
  24. Meyer P, Heidmann I, Forkmann G, Saedler H (1987) A new petunia flower color generated by transformation of a mutant with a maize gene. Nature 330:677–678Google Scholar
  25. Monette PL (1988) Grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.). In: Bajaj YPS (ed) Biotechnology in agriculture and forestry, vol 6. Crops II. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 3–37Google Scholar
  26. Mullins MG, Tang FC A, Facciotti D (1990) Agrobacterium-mediated genetic transformation of grapevines: transgenic plants of Vitis rupestris Scheele and buds of Vitis vinifera L. Bio/Technol 8:1041–1045Google Scholar
  27. Ofifringa R, De Groot MJA, Haagsman HJ, Does M J, van den Elzen, PJM, Hookaas PJJ (1990) Extrachromosomal homologous recombination and gene targeting in plant cells after Agrobacterium mediated transformation. EMBO J 9:3077–3084Google Scholar
  28. Paszowski J, Baur M, Bogucki A, Potrykus I (1988) Gene targeting in plants. EMBO J 7:4021–4026Google Scholar
  29. Paulus F, Huss B, Bonnard G, Ride M, Szegedi E, Tempe J, Petit A, Otten L (1989) Molecular systematics of biotype III Ti plasmids of Agrobacterium tumefaciens. Mol Plant-Microbe Interact 2:64–74Google Scholar
  30. Polito VS, McGranahan G, Pinney K, Leslie C (1989) Origin of somatic embryos from repetitively embryogenic cultures of walnut (Juglans regia L.): implications for Agrobacterium-mediated transformation. Plant Cell Rep 8:219–221Google Scholar
  31. Powell PA, Nelson RS, De B, Hoffmann N, Rogers SG, Fraley RT, Beachy RN (1986) Delay of disease development in transgenic plants that express the tobacco mosaic virus coat protein gene. Science 232:738–743Google Scholar
  32. Powell PA, Stark DM, Sanders PR, Beachy RN (1989) Protection against tobacco mosaic virus in transgenic plants that express tobacco mosaic virus antisense RNA. Proc Natl Acad Sei USA 86:6949–6952Google Scholar
  33. Sanchez-Serrano J J, Keil M, O’Connor A, Schell J, Willmitzer L (1987) Wound-induced expression of a potato proteinase inhibitor II gene in transgenic tobacco plants. EMBO J 6:303–306Google Scholar
  34. Sheehy, RE, Kramer M, Hiatt WR, (1988) Reduction of polygalacturonase activity in tomato fruit by antisense RNA. Proc Natl Acad Sei USA 85:8805–8809Google Scholar
  35. Smith CJS, Watson CF, Ray J, Bird CR, Morris PC, Schuch W, Grierson D (1988) Antisense RNA inhibition of polygalacturonase gene expression in transgenic tomatoes. Nature 334:724–726Google Scholar
  36. Spiegel-Roy P, Sahar N, Baron J, Lavi U (1985) In vitro culture and plant formation from grape cultivars with abortive ovules and seeds. J Am Soc Hortic Sei 110:109–112Google Scholar
  37. Stamp JA, Meredith CP (1988) Somatic embryogenesis from leaves and anthers of grapevine. Sei Hortic 35:235–250Google Scholar
  38. Stamp JA, Colby SM, Meredith CP (1990) Improved shoot organogenesis from leaves of grape. J Am Soc Hortic Sei 115:1038–1042Google Scholar
  39. Tsolova V (1990) Obtaining plants from crosses of seedless grapevine varieties by means of in vitro embryo culture. Vitis 29:1–4Google Scholar
  40. Ulian EC, Smith RH,Gould JH, McKnight TD (1988) Transformation of plants via the shoot apex. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol 24:951–954Google Scholar
  41. Vaeck M, Reynaerts A, Höfte H, Jansens S, De Beuckeleer M, Dean C, Zabeau M, van Montagu M, Leemans J (1987) Transgenic plants protected from insect attack. Nature 328:33–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. van der Krol AR, Lenting PE, Veenstra J, van der Meer IM, Koes RO, Geräts AGM, Mol JNM, Stuitjie AR (1988) An anti-sense chalcone synthase gene in transgenic plants inhibits flower pigmentation. Nature 333:866–869CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. van der Krol AR, Mur LA, de Lange P, Geräts AGM, Mol JA, Stuitje AR (1990) Antisense chalcone synthase genes in petunia: visualization of variable transgene expression. Mol Gen Genet 220:204–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wang Y-C, Klein TM, Fromm M, Cao J, Sanford JC, Wu R (1988) Transient expression of foreign genes in rice, wheat, and soyabean cells following particle bombardment. Plant Mol Biol 11:433–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Zohary D, Hopf M (1988) Domestication of plants in the Old World. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. M. Colby
    • 1
    • 2
  • C. P. Meredith
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute of Biological ChemistryWashington State UniversityPullmanUSA
  2. 2.BeniciaUSA
  3. 3.Department of Viticulture and EnologyUniversity of CaliforniaDavisUSA

Personalised recommendations