Somatic Embryo Induction and Plantlet Regeneration of Fraxinus velutina

doi:10.11983/CBB15222

Abstract

Abstract: Using explants of Fraxinus velutina, we investigated the effects of basic medium, plant growth regulators, and concentrations of antioxidant medium, and culturing conditions on the induction of somatic embryogenesis in Fraxinus velutina. The best regeneration medium was Murashige and Skoog (MS) basal medium with Gamborg B5 vitamin supplementation, with 2.0 mg·L^-1 6-benzyladenine (6-BA), 0.1 mg·L^-1 naphthaleneacetic acid (NAA) at 20-day dark culture followed by light intensity of 100-120 μmol·m^-2·s^-1 irradiation for 14 h·d^-1, and the culture temperature was (25±2)°C at daytime and (18±2)°C at night. More than 81.2% radicle segments produced adventitious shoots, with a mean number of adventitious shoots per explant of 9.3. The optimal growing medium was modified WPM medium supplemented with 0.5 mg·L^-1 6-BA, 0.2 mg·L^-1 ZT and 0.01 mg·L^-1 NAA. More than 97.3% regeneration plantlets were able to root after transfer to modified half-strength MS medium supplemented with 1.0 mg·L^-1 indole-3-butyric acid, 0.05 mg·L^-1 NAA and 20 g·L^-1 sucrose; 97.8% of the plantlets survived.

Liping Yan, Li Li, Cuilan Liu, Dejun Wu, Yinhua Wang, Fei Ren, Liangjun Zhao. Somatic Embryo Induction and Plantlet Regeneration of Fraxinus velutina[J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2016, 51(6): 807-816.

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://www.chinbullbotany.com/EN/10.11983/CBB15222

https://www.chinbullbotany.com/EN/Y2016/V51/I6/807

Figures/Tables 8

References 32

[1]	陈之群, 刘志敏 (2006). 绒毛白蜡茎段的组织培养及植株再生. 安徽农业科学 34, 472-473.
[2]	洪源范, 沈雨佳, 洪青, 李顺鹏 (2006). 大叶白蜡的离体培养与快速繁殖. 植物生理学通讯 42, 1139-1141.
[3]	胡峰, 施琼, 黄烈健 (2014). 黑木相思愈伤组织诱导及植株再生. 植物学报 49, 603-610.
[4]	孔冬梅, 谭燕双, 沈海龙 (2003). 白蜡树属植物的组织培养和植株再生. 植物生理学通讯 39, 677-680.
[5]	孔冬梅, 沈海龙, 冯丹丹, 张莉杰 (2006). 水曲柳体细胞胚与合子胚发生的细胞学研究. 林业科学 42, 130-133.
[6]	李素华, 何松林 (2009). 基本培养基和激素对常青白蜡腋芽诱导的影响. 贵州农业科学 37, 175-176.
[7]	刘琳, 俞斌, 黄鹏燕, 赵华, 彭俊华, 陈鹏, 彭良才 (2013). 芒不同基因型愈伤组织诱导及分化的差异. 植物学报 48, 192-198.
[8]	孙桂君, 孔冬梅, 张丽杰, 沈海龙 (2010). 取材时期和母树来源对水曲柳体细胞胚诱导的影响. 东北林业大学学报 38, 28-30.
[9]	王彩云, 白吉刚, 杨玉萍, 赵路明, 季华 (1999). 对节白蜡的组织培养及植株再生. 植物生理学通讯 35, 299-300.
[10]	王磊, 李淑娟, 徐云刚, 詹亚光 (2008). 绒毛白蜡成熟胚和茎段培养繁殖体系的建立. 林业科技 33(3), 1-3.
[11]	杨玲, 单琳, 沈海龙, 祁永会 (2012). 花曲柳体胚发生和植株再生. 林业科学 48(4), 49-53.
[12]	张翠叶, 辛福梅, 杨小林, 洛桑曲杰 (2014). 川滇高山栎体胚诱导关键影响因素研究. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版) 1, 51-56.
[13]	张存旭, 姚曾玉, 赵忠 (2005). 栓皮栎体胚诱导关键影响因素研究. 林业科学 41(2), 174-177.
[14]	Arnold S, Sabala I, Bozhkov1 P, Dyachok J, Filonova L (2002). Developmental pathways of somatic embryo- genesis.Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 69, 233-249.
[15]	Bates S, Preece JE, Navarrete NE, Van WJ, Gaffney GR (1992). Thidiazuron stimulates shoot organogenesis and somatic embryogenesis in white ash (Fraxinus anericana L.). Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 31, 21-29.
[16]	Capuana M, Petrini G, Marco AD, Giannini R (2007). Plant regeneration of common ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.) by somatic embryogenesis.In Vitro Cell Dev Biol-Plant 43, 101-110.
[17]	Gamborg OL, Miller RA, Ojima K (1968). Nutrient require- ments of suspension cultures of soybean rootcells.Exp Cell Res 50, 151-158.
[18]	Hammatt N (1994). Shoot initiation in the leaflet axils of compound leaves from micropropagated shoots of juvenile and mature common ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.).J Exp Bot 45, 871-875.
[19]	Hammatt N (1996). Fraxinus excelsior L. (common ash). In: Bajaj PS ed. Biotechnology in Agriculture and Forestry: Trees IV, Vol. 35. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlin. pp. 172-193.
[20]	Kim MS, Schumann CM, Klopfenstein NB (1997). Effects of thidiazuron and benzyladenine on axillary shoot proliferation of three green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica Mar- sh.) clones.Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 48, 45-52.
[21]	Lemmetyinen J, Keinonen-Mettala K, Lannenpaa M, Weissenberg K, Sopanen T (1998). Activity of the CaMV 35S promoter in various parts of transgenic early flower- ing birch clones.Plant Cell Rep 18, 243-248.
[22]	Manzanera JA, Astorrga R, Bueno MA (1993). Somatic embryo induction and germination in Quercus L.Silvae Genetica 42, 2-3.
[23]	McCown BH, Lloyd G (1981). Woody Plant Medium (WPM) —a mineral nutrient formulation for microculture of woody plant species.Hortscience 16, 453.
[24]	Murashige T, Skoog F (1962). A revised medium for rapid growth and bio assays with tohaoco tissue cultures.Physiol Plant 15, 473-497.
[25]	Oh MJ, Na HR, Choi HK, Liu JR, Kim SW (2010). High frequency plant regeneration system for Nymphoides coreana via somatic embryogenesis from zygotic embryo- derived embryogenic cell suspension cultures.Plant Biotech Rep 4, 125-128.
[26]	Preece JE, Bates S (1991). In vitro studies with white ash (Fraxinus americana) nodules. In: Ahuja MR ed. Woody Plant Biotechnology. New York: Plenum Press. pp. 37-44.
[27]	Silveira CE, Corrignies A (1994). Period of harvest spr- outing ability of cuttings and in vitro plant regeneration in Fraxinus excelsior.Can J Bot 72, 261-267.
[28]	Tabtett AM, Hammatt N (1992). Regeneration of shoots from embryo hypocotyls of common ash (Fraxinus excelsior).Cell Rep 11, 514-518.
[29]	Tonon G, Capuana M, Marco AD (2000). Plant regenera- tion of Fraxinus angustifolia by in vitro shoot organogenesis.Sci Hortic 87, 291-301.
[30]	Tonon G, Capuana M, Rossi C (2001). Somatic embryo- genesis and embryo encapsulation in Fraxinus angustifolia Vhal.J Hortic Sci BioTech 76, 753-757.
[31]	Wilhelm E (2000). Somatic embryogenesis in oak (Quercus spp.).In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 36, 349-357.
[32]	Zhou HH, Li M, Zhao X, Fan XC, Guo AG Affiliated withZhengzhou Fruit Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CAAS)(2010). Plant regeneration from in vitro leaves of the peach rootstock ‘Nemaguard’ (Prunus persica×P. davidiana).Plant Cell Tiss Organ Cult 101, 79-87.

Basal medium	6-BA (mg·L^-1)	NAA (mg·L^-1)	Callus induction rate (%)	Induction rate of somatic embryo (%)	Somatic embryo shoot regeneration rate (%)
MS	2.0	0.1	79.4±10.7 b	34.6±5.3 b	61.2±12.8 b
Modified MS	2.0	0.1	89.3±12.2 a	59.8±4.5 a	81.2±14.5 a
WPM	2.0	0.1	71.2±8.4 c	25.4±5.3 c	41.2±9.3 c
Modified WPM	2.0	0.1	75.5±9.8 c	25.9±4.7 c	45.7±11.4 c

Basal medium	6-BA (mg·L^-1)	NAA (mg·L^-1)	Callus induction rate (%)	Induction rate of somatic embryo (%)	Somatic embryo shoot regeneration rate (%)
MS	2.0	0.1	79.4±10.7 b	34.6±5.3 b	61.2±12.8 b
Modified MS	2.0	0.1	89.3±12.2 a	59.8±4.5 a	81.2±14.5 a
WPM	2.0	0.1	71.2±8.4 c	25.4±5.3 c	41.2±9.3 c
Modified WPM	2.0	0.1	75.5±9.8 c	25.9±4.7 c	45.7±11.4 c

Explant type	Callus induction rate (%)	Induction rate of somatic embryo (%)	Somatic embryo shoot regeneration rate (%)
Cotyledon	57.5±11.6 b	23.8±5.9 b	21.7±8.8 b
Epicotyl	29.4±10.7 c	10.8±5.5 bc	4.7±2.9 c
Hypocotyl	35.7±9.3 c	11.4±5.3 c	5.1±2.3 c
Radicle	85.5±11.8 a	65.9±12.7 a	75.9±10.5 a

Explant type	Callus induction rate (%)	Induction rate of somatic embryo (%)	Somatic embryo shoot regeneration rate (%)
Cotyledon	57.5±11.6 b	23.8±5.9 b	21.7±8.8 b
Epicotyl	29.4±10.7 c	10.8±5.5 bc	4.7±2.9 c
Hypocotyl	35.7±9.3 c	11.4±5.3 c	5.1±2.3 c
Radicle	85.5±11.8 a	65.9±12.7 a	75.9±10.5 a

Darkness (days)	6-BA (mg·L^-1)	NAA (mg·L^-1)	Induction rate of somatic embryo (%)	Somatic embryo shoot regeneration rate (%)
0	2.0	0.1	10.8±3.7 c	0 c
10	2.0	0.1	30.8±5.5 b	41.2±9.3 b
20	2.0	0.1	59.7±7.1 a	79.2±14.5 a
30	2.0	0.1	25.9±4.8 a	45.7±11.4 c