Embryo Rescue Techniques for Wide Hybridization

  • N. Inomata
Part of the Monographs on Theoretical and Applied Genetics book series (GENETICS, volume 19)

Abstract

In crop improvement it is necessary to expand gene resources by selective introgression of alien genes in a good agronomic base. This is more important if the existing genetic variability in the breeding material is limited, as is the case in oleiferous Brassica. Wide hybridization can be used to transfer the desirable variability. Usually, it is difficult to produce such hybrids due to cross-incompatibility barriers. These may result from either failure to bypass the sexual constraints or hybrid breakdown. Cross-incompatibility is primarily caused by incompatible pollen-pistil interaction which precludes the formation of a viable zygote. This phenomenon, however, has not been investigated extensively (Shivanna 1982). Hybrid breakdown, hybrid inviability and hybrid sterility are some other recognizable post-fertilization barriers (Raghvan 1986). They may result from arrested embryo development, endosperm disintegration, abnormal development of ovular tissue or chromosome and genetic instability. Hybrid inviability may result from the action of specific genes or due to disharmony between the nucleus of one species and the cytoplasm of another, or adverse embryo-endosperm interaction. Recent developments in biotechnology and embryo rescue techniques may provide new genetic variability for the breeding of cruciferous crops (Chiang et al. 1978, 1980; McNaughton et al. 1978; Mohapatra et al. 1987). Various embryo rescue techniques are: ovary, ovule and embryo culture. In case of an incompatible cross, after a certain period of growth of the hybrid embryo the incompatible reaction becomes acute and it is imperative to culture the embryo or ovule before initiation of the incompatibility reaction (Takeshita et al. 1980). For ovule culture, younger ovules (10–21 days old) can be used, but for embryo culture, older ovules should be used, depending upon the size of the embryo. Embryos cultured during the globular stage may not survive in vivo but such embryos can survive during ovule and ovary culture. These techniques will help in broadening the genetic base of crop brassicas through the exploitation of secondary and tertiary gene pools. Various aspects and achievements of embryo rescue techniques are discussed in this chapter.

Keywords

Sucrose Alba Vasil Kato Kinetin 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Agnihotri A, Gupta V, Lakshmikumaran MS, Shivanna KR, Prakash S, Jagannathan V (1990a) Production of Eruca-Brassica hybrid by embryo rescue. Plant Breed 104: 281–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agnihotri A, Shivanna KR, Raina SN, Lakshmikumaran MS, Prakash S, Jagannathan V (1990b) Production of Brassica napus x Raphanobrassica hybrids by embryo rescue: an attempt to introduce shattering resistance into B. napus. Plant Breed 105: 292–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bajaj YPS, Mahajan SK, Labana KS (1986) Interspecific hybridization of Brassica napus and B. juncea through ovary, ovule and embryo culture. Euphytica 35: 103–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Batra V, Prakash S, Shivanna KR (1990) Intergeneric hybridization between Diplotaxis siifolia, a wild species and crop Brassicas. Theor Appl Genet 80: 537–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Batra V, Shivanna KR, Prakash S (1989) Hybrids of wild Erucastrum gallicum and crop brassicas. Proc 6th Int Cong SABRAO, 1, pp 443–446Google Scholar
  6. Chiang BY, Chiang MS, Grant WF, Crete R (1980) Transfer of resistance to race 2 of Plasmodiophora hrassicae from Brassica napus to cabbage (B. oleracea spp. capitata). IV. A resistant I8-chromosome Bi plant and its B, progenies. Euphytica 29: 47–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chiang BY, Grant WF, Chiang MS (1978) Transfer of resistance to race 2 of Plasmodiophora hrassicae from Brassica napus to cabbage (B. oleracea var. capitata). II. Meiosis in the interspecific hybrids between B. napus and 2x and 4x cabbage. Euphytica 27: 81–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chiang MS, Chiang BY, Grant WF (1977) Transfer of resistance to race 2 of Plasmodiophora brassicae from Brassica napus to cabbage (B. oleracea var. capitata). I. Interspecific hybridization between B. napus and B. oleracea var. capitata. Euphytica 26: 319–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Collins GB, Grosser JW (1984) Culture of embryos. In: Vasil I.K. (ed.). Cell culture and somatic cell genetics of plants. 1: 241–257Google Scholar
  10. Delourme R, Eber F, Chevre AM (1989) Intergeneric hybridization of Diplotaxis erucoides with Brassica napus. I. Cytogenetic analysis of F1 and BCC progeny. Euphytica 41: 123–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hosoda T (1950) On new types of Brassica napus obtained from artificial amphidiploids. I. A new type as a forage crop. Ikushu Kenkyu (Tokyo) 4: 91–95Google Scholar
  12. Inomata N (1975) In vitro culture of ovaries of Brassica hybrids between 2x and 4x in Raphanus sativus. Jpn J Genet 50: 1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Inomata N (1976) Culture in vitro of excised ovaries in Brassica campestris L. I. Development of excised ovaries in culture media, temperature and light. Jpn J Breed. 26: 229–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Inomata N (1977) Production of interspecific hybrids between Brassica campestris and Brassica oleracea by culture in vitro of excised ovaries. I. Effects of yeast extract and casein hydrolysate on the development of excised ovaries. Jpn J Breed 27: 295–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Inomata N (1978) Production of interspecific hybrids between Brassica campestris and Brassica oleracea by culture in vitro of excised ovaries. II. Effects of coconut milk and casein hydrolysate on the development of excised ovaries. Jpn J Genet 53: 1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Inomata N (1979) Production of interspecific hybrids in Brassica campestris x B. oleracea by culture in vitro of excised ovaries. II. Development of excised ovaries on various media. Jpn J Breed 29: 115–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Inomata N (1980) Hybrid progenies of the cross, Brassica campestris x B. oleracea. I. Cytological studies on F hybrids. Jpn J Genet 55: 189–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Inomata N (1983) Hybrid progenies of the cross, Brassica campestris x B. oleracea. II. Crossing ability of F1 hybrids and their progenies. Jpn J Genet 58: 433–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Inomata N (1985a) A revised medium for in vitro culture of Brassica ovaries. In: Chapman GP, Mantell SH, Daniels RW (eds) The experimental manipulation of ovule tissue. Longman, London, pp 164–176Google Scholar
  20. Inomata N (1985b) Interspecific hybrids between Brassica campestris and B. cretica by ovary culture in vitro. Cruciferae Newslett 10: 92–93Google Scholar
  21. Inomata N (1986) Interspecific hybrids between Brassica campestris and B. hourgeaui by ovary culture in vitro. Cruciferae Newslett 11: 14–15Google Scholar
  22. Inomata N (1987) Interspecific hybrids between Brassica campestris and B. montana by ovary culture in vitro. Cruciferae Newslett 12: 8–9Google Scholar
  23. Karpechenko GD (1924) Hybrids of Raphanus sativus L. x Brassica oleracea L. J Genet 14: 375–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kumar PBAN, Shivanna KR (1986) Interspecific hybridization between Brassica fruticulosa and B. campestris. Cruciferae Newslett 11: 18Google Scholar
  25. Kumar PBAN, Shivanna KR, Prakash S (1988) Wide hybridization in Brassica-crossability barriers and studies on F hybrids and synthetic amphidiploid of B. fruticulosa x B. campestris. Sex Plant Repro. 1: 234–239Google Scholar
  26. Laibach F (1925) Das Taubwerden von Bastardsamen and die kuenstliche Auzucht frühausterbender Bastardembryonen. Z Bot 17: 417–459Google Scholar
  27. Mastsuzawa Y, Sarashima M (1984) Intergeneric hybrids between Raphanus sativus and Brassica nigra. Cruciferae Newslett 9: 29Google Scholar
  28. Matsuzawa Y, Sarashima M (1986) Intergeneric hybridization of Eruca, Brassica and Raphanus. Cruciferae Newslett 11: 17Google Scholar
  29. McNaughton H, Ross CL (1978) Interspecific and intergeneric hybridization in the Brassica with special emphasis on the improvement of forage crops. Ann Rep Scott Plant Breed Sta 75–110Google Scholar
  30. Mizushima U (1950) Karyogenetic studies of species and genus hybrids in the tribe Brassiceae of Cruciferae. Tohoku J Agric Res 1: 1–14Google Scholar
  31. Mizushima U (1952) Karyo-genetical studies on Brassiceae. Gihodo, Tokyo, p 112Google Scholar
  32. Mohapatra D, Bajaj YPS (1984) In vitro hybridization in an incompatible cross—Brassica juncea x Brassica hirta. Curr Sci 53: 489–490Google Scholar
  33. Mohapatra D, Bajaj YPS (1987) Interspecific hybridization in Brassica juncea x Brassica hirta using embryo rescue. Euphytica 36: 321–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mohapatra D, Bajaj YPS (1988) Hybridization in Brassica juncea x Brassica campestris through ovary culture. Euphytica 37: 83–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nishi S, Kawata J, Toda M (1959) On the breeding of interspecific hybrids between two genomes “o” and “a” of Brassica through the application of embryo culture techniques. Jpn J Breed 8: 215–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nishiyama I, Inomata N (1966) Embryological studies on cross incompatibility between 2x and 4x in Brassica. Jpn J Genet 41: 27–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Paulmann W (1987) Development of CMS using nucleo-cytoplasmic interactions between radish (R. sativus) and rape (B. napus). In: Proc. 7th Int Rapeseed Conf, Poznan-Poland, pp. 87–90Google Scholar
  38. Quazi MH (1988) Interspecific hybrids between Brassica napus L. and B. oleracea L. developed by embryo culture. Theor Appl Genet 75: 309–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Raghvan V (1986) Embryogenesis in angiosperms: a developmental and experimental study. Univ Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  40. Ripley VL, Arnison PG (1990) Hybridization of Sinapis alba L. and Brassica napus L. via embryo rescue. Plant Breed 104: 26–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Shivanna KR (1982) Pollen-pistil interaction and control of fertilization, In: Johri B.M. (ed.). Experimental embryology of vascular plants. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg Tokyo New York, pp 131–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Snorgerup S (1980) The wild forms of the Brassica oleracea group (2n = 18) and their possible relations to the cultivated ones. In: Tsunoda, S, Hinata K, Gômez-Campo C (eds) Brassica crops and wild allies. Jpn Sci Soc Tokyo, pp 121–132Google Scholar
  43. Takada M, Maruyama Y, Kunieda H, Hibino Y, Ujihara K, Yai H, Etsugawa K, Doi H, Tsuda K (1987) Studies on the breeding of artificially synthesized Brassica napus Hakuran with head formation habit and the establishment of cropping system of the F1 hybrids. Gifu Agric Res Cent 1: 1–185Google Scholar
  44. Takahata T (1988) Production of intergeneric hybrids between Moricandia arvensis (L). DC and Brassica oleracea L. through ovary culture. Jpn J Breed 38 (suppl. 2): 338–339Google Scholar
  45. Takahata T, Takeda T (1990) Intergeneric (intersubtribe) hybridization between Moricandia arvensis and Brassica A and B genome species by ovary culture. Theor Appl Genet 80: 38–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Takeshita M, Kato M, Tokumasu S (1980) Application of ovule culture to the production of intergeneric or interspecific hybrids in Brassica and Raphanus. Jpn J Genet 55: 337–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. White PR (1963) The cultivation of animal and plant cells. Ronald Press, New York, pp 228Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • N. Inomata

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations