Immature Embryo Rescue and Culture

  • Xiuli Shen
  • Fred G. GmitterJr.
  • Jude W. Grosser
Protocol
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 710)

Abstract

Embryo culture techniques have many significant applications in plant breeding, as well as basic studies in physiology and biochemistry. Immature embryo rescue and culture is a particularly attractive technique for recovering plants from sexual crosses where the majority of embryos cannot survive in vivo or become dormant for long periods of time. Overcoming embryo inviability is the most common reason for the application of embryo rescue techniques. Recently, fruit breeding programs have greatly increased the interest in exploiting interploid hybridization to combine desirable genetic traits of complementary parents at the triploid level for the purpose of developing improved seedless fruits. However, the success of this approach has only been reported in limited number of species due to various crossing barriers and embryo abortion at very early stages. Thus, immature embryo rescue provides an alternative means to recover triploid hybrids, which usually fail to completely develop in vivo. This chapter will provide a brief discussion of the utilization of interploid crosses between a monoembryonic diploid female with an allotetraploid male in a citrus cultivar improvement program, featuring a clear and comprehensive illustration of successful protocols for immature embryo rescue and culture. The protocols will cover the complete process from embryo excision to recovered plant in the greenhouse and can easily be adapted to other plant commodities. Factors affecting the success and failure of immature embryo rescue to recover triploid progeny from interploid crosses will be discussed.

Key words

Citrus Culture medium Embryo abortion Embryo developmental stage Genotypes Interploid hybridization Shoot tip grafting Triploid 

References

  1. 1.
    Bauer MJ (2006) The interploidy hybridization barrier in Zea mays L. University of Missouri-Columbia, Ph.D. dissertationGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Van Huylenbroeck J, Leus L, Van Bockstaele E (2005) Interploidy crosses in Roses: use of triploids. Acta Hort 690:109–112Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jansky S (2006) Overcoming hybridization barriers in potato. Plant Breed 125:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yan G, Ferguson AR, McNeilage MA, Murray BG (1997) Numerically unreduced (2n) gametes and sexual polyploidization in Actinidia. Euphytica 96:267–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Viloria Z, Grosser JW, Bracho B (2005) Immature embryo rescue, culture and seedling development of acid citrus fruit derived from interploid hybridization. Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 82:159–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Beuselinck PR, Steiner JJ, Rim YW (2003) Morphological comparison of progeny derived from 4x-2x and 4x-4x hybridization of Lotus glaber Mill. and L. corniculatus L. Crop Sci 43:1741–1746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jaskani MJ, Khan IA, Khan MM (2005) Fruit set, seed development and embryo germination in interploid crosses of citrus. Sci Hort 107:51–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fatta Del Bosco S, Siragusa M, Abbate L, Lucretti S, Tusa N (2007) Production and characterization of new triploid seedless progenies for mandarin improvement. Sci Hort 114:258–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Usman M, Ramzan M, Fatima B, Jaskani MJ, Khan MM (2002) Citrus germplasm enhancement by interploid hybridization 1. Reciprocal crosses of Kinnow and Succari. Int J Agri Bio 4:208–210Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Raza H, Khan MM, Khan AA (2003) Seedlessness in citrus. Int J Agri Biol 5:388–391Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jaskani MJ, Khan IA, Khan MM, Abbas H (2007) Frequency of triploids in different interploidal crosses of citrus. Pak J Bot 39:1517–1522Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fatima B, Usman M, Ramzan M, Khan MM, Khan IA (2002) Interploid hybridization of Kinnow and Sweet Lime. Pak J Agri Sci 39:132–134Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Reforgiato Recupero G, Russo G, Recupero S (2005) New promising citrus triploid hybrids selected from crosses between monoembryonic diploid female and tetraploid male parents. HortSci 40:516–520Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Park SM, Wakana A, Hiramatsu M, Uresino K (2002) A tetraploid hybrid plant from 4x x 2x crosses in Vitis and its origin. Euphytica 126:345–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wakana A, Sarikhani H, Hanada N, Fukudome I, Kajiwara K, Yasukochi K, Hiramatsu M, Sakai K (2007) Characteristics of seedless berries of triploid hybrid grapes (Vitis vinifera Complex) derived from eighteen crosses. J Fac Agr Kyushu Univ 52:337–344Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wakana A, Hiramatsu M, Park SM, Hanada N, Fufudome I, Xuan B (2002) Degree of abortion and germination rates in triploid seeds from crosses between diploid and tetraploid grapes (Vitis vinifera L. and V. complex). J Fac Agri Kyushu Univ 46:281–294Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wakana A, Fukudome I, Hanada N, Hiramatsu M, Sakai K, Kajiwara K (2008) ‘Bea-kei’, a new triploid seedless grape cultivar derived from a ‘Muscat Bailey A’ x ‘Kyoho’ cross. J Fac Agri Kyushu Univ 53:423–427Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wakana A, Park SM, Hiramatsu M, Hanada N, Fukudome I, Yasukochi K (2005) Characteristics of seedless berries of triploid hybrid grapes (Vitis complex) from reciprocal crosses between diploid ‘Muscat Bailey A’ and tetraploid ‘Red Pearl’. J Fac Agri Kyushu Univ 50:49–59Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yang D, Li W, Li S, Yang X, Wu J, Cao Z (2007) In vitro embryo rescue culture of F1 progenies from crosses between diploid and tetraploid grape varieties. Plant Growth Regul 51:63–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Heo JY, Park KS, Yun HK, Park SM (2007) Degree of abortion and germination percentage in seeds derived from interploid crosses between diploid and tetraploid grape cultivars. Hort Env Biotech 48:115–121Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pillay M, Ogundiwin E, Tenkouano A, Dolezel J (2006) Ploidy and genome composition of Musa germplasm at the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA). Afri J Biotech 5:1224–1232Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vuylsteke D (2000) Breeding bananas and plantains: from intractability to feasibility. Acta Hort 540:149–156Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tomekpe K, Jenny C, Escalant JV (2004) A review of conventional improvement strategies for Musa. InfoMusa 13:2–6Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jenny C, Tomekpe K, Bakry F, Escalant JV (2003) Conventional breeding of bananas. In: Jacome L, Lepoivre P, Martin D, Ortiz R, Romero R, Escalant JV (eds) Mycosphaerella leaf spot diseases of bananas: present status and outlook. The International Network for the Improvement of Banana and Plantain, Montpellier, France, pp 199–208Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Olsen RT, Ranney TG (2006) Fertility and inheritance of variegated and purple foliage across a polyploidy series in Hypericum androsaemum L. J Am Soc Hort Sci 131:725–730Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Olsen R (2006) Polyploid breeding in Hypericum Androsaemum L. HortSci 41:952Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jacob Y, Mastrantuono S, Ferrero F (2007) Interploid crosses in Anemone coronaria. Acta Hort 743:55–57Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kaori S, Yukio O, Michikazu H (2006) Intrasubgeneric and interploid cross compatibility in evergreen and deciduous azaleas. J Fac Agri Kyushu Univ 51:73–81Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sakai K, Ozaki Y, Ureshino K, Miyajima I, Wakana A, Okubo H (2008) Interploid crossing overcomes plastome-nuclear genome incompatibility in intersubgeneric hybridization between evergreen and deciduous azaleas. Sci Hort 115:268–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hirsch AM, Testolin R, Brown S, Chat J, Fortune D, Bureau JM, De Nay D (2001) Embryo rescue from interspecific crosses in the genus Actinidia (Kiwifruit). Plant Cell Rep 20:508–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Van Tuyl JM (1997) Interspecific hybridization of flower bulbs: a review. Acta Hort 430:465–476Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Tel-Zur N, Abbo S, Mizrahi Y (2005) Cytogenetics of semi-fertile triploid and aneuploid intergeneric vine cacti hybrid. J Hered 96:124–131PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Datson PM, Murray BG, Hammett KRW (2006) Pollination systems, hybridization barriers and meiotic chromosome behavior in Nemesia hybrids. Euphytica 151:173–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Williams EG, Maheswaran G, Hutchinson JF (1987) Embryo and ovule culture in crop improvement. Plant Breed Rev 5:181–236Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sokolov VA (2006) Imprinting in plants. Russ J Genet 42:1043–1052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Johnston SA, den Nijs TPM, Peloquin SJ, Hanneman RE (1980) The significance of genic balance to endosperm development in interspecific crosses. Theor Appl Genet 57:5–9Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Johnston SA, Hanneman RE (1995) The genetics of triploid formation and its relationship to endosperm balance number in potato. Genome 38:60–67PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Burton TL, Husband BC (2000) Fitness differences among diploids, tetraploids, and their triploid progeny in Chamerion angustifolium: mechanism of inviability and implications for polyploidy evolution. Evolution 54:1182–1191PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Navarro L, Olivares-Fuster O, Juarez J, Aleza P, Pina JA, Ballester-Olmos JF (2004) Application of biotechnology to citrus improvement in Spain. Acta Hort 632:221–234Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bridgen MP (1994) A review of plant embryo culture. HortSci 29:1243–1246Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sharma DR, Kaur R, Kumar K (1996) Embryo rescue in plants – a review. Euphytica 89:325–337Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Monnier M (1990) Culture of zygotic embryos of higher plants. In: Pollard JW, Walker JM (eds) Methods in molecular biology, vol 6, Plant cell and tissue culture. Humana Press, Totowa, pp 129–139Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Pierik RLM (1987) In vitro culture of higher plants. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp 139–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Sharma HC (1999) Embryo rescue following wide crosses. In: Hall RD (ed) Methods in molecular biology, vol 111, Plant cell culture protocols. Humana Press, Totowa, pp 293–307Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Yao JL, Cohen D (1996) Production of triploid Zantedeschia hybrids using embryo rescue. New Zealand J Crop Hort Sci 24:297–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Ramming DW (1990) The use of embryo culture in fruit breeding. HortSci 25:393–398Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Olsen RT, Ranney TG, Viloria Z (2006) Reproductive behavior of induced allotetraploid x Chitalpa and in vitro embryo culture of polyploidy progeny. J Am Soc Hort Sci 131:716–724Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Chi HS (2002) The efficiencies of various embryo rescue methods in interspecific crosses of Lilium. Bot Bull Acad Sin 43:139–150Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Raghavan V (2003) One hundred years of zygotic embryo culture investigations. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 39:437–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Collins GB, Grosser JW (1984) Culture of embryos. In: Vasil IK (ed) Cell Culture and Somatic Cell Genetics of Plants. Academic press, Orlando, Florida, pp 241–257Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Grosser JW, Gmitter FG Jr, Fleming GH, Chandler JL (2000) Application of biotechnology to citrus cultivar improvement at the Citrus Research and Education Center. Acta Hort 535:213–220Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Murashige T, Skoog F (1962) A revised medium for rapid growth and bioassay with tobacco tissue culture. Physiol Plant 15:473–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Murashige T, Tucker DPH (1969) Growth factors requirements of citrus tissue culture. Proc First Int Citrus Symp 3:1155–1161Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Niedz RP, Hyndman SE, Wynn ET, Bausher MG (2002) Normalizing sweet orange [C. sinensis (L.) Osbeck) somatic embryogenesis with semi-permeable membranes. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 38:552–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Grosser JW, Gmitter FG Jr (1990) Protoplast fusion and citrus improvement. Plant Breed Rev 8:339–374Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Deng XX, Grosser JW, Gmitter FG Jr (1992) Intergeneric somatic hybrid plants from protoplast fusion of Fortunella crassifolia cultivar Meiwa with Citrus sinensis cultivar Valencia. Sci Hort 49:55–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Kane ME (2000) Culture indexing for bacterial and fungal contaminants. In: Trigiano RN, Gray DJ (eds) Plant tissue culture concepts and laboratory exercise. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 427–431Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Kunisaki JT (1974) Tissue culture of tropical ornamental plants. HortSci 12:141–142Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Hartmann HT, Kester DE, Davies FT (1990) Plant propagation – principles and practices, 5th edn. Prentice Hall, New Jersey, p 199Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Muthan SB, Rathore TS, Rai VR (2006) Factors influencing in vivo and in vitro micrografting of sandalwood (Santalum album L.): an endangered tree species. J For Res 11:147–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Onay A, Pirinc V, Adiyaman F, Isikalan C, Tilkat E, Basaran D (2003) In vivo and in vitro micrografting of pistachio, Pistacia vera L. cv. “Siirt”. Turk J Biol 27:95–100Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Raharjo SHT, Litz RE (2005) Micrografting and ex vitro grafting for somatic embryo rescue and plant recovery in avocado (Persea americana). Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 82:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Humana Press 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xiuli Shen
    • 1
  • Fred G. GmitterJr.
    • 1
  • Jude W. Grosser
    • 1
  1. 1.IFAS, Citrus Research and Education CenterUniversity of FloridaLake AlfredUSA

Personalised recommendations