Factors influencing somatic embryogenesis and regeneration ability in somatic tissue culture of spring and winter rye

Abstract

Rye is an important crop in Northern and Eastern Europe. However, the application of various biotechnologies in rye breeding has been limited duo to its recalcitrant in tissue culture. In order to improve somatic tissue effi ciency, key factors affecting somatic embryogenesis and reproducible green plant regeneration of rye (Secale cereale L.) were evaluated and optimised. In this study, a total 27 rye genotypes including 10 spring and 17 winter genotypes were involved in the investigation. Genotype, culture medium, sugar, gel agent and auxin infl uenced somatic embryogenesis of immature embryo signifi cantly. One-two weeks cold pretreatment of young embryo enhanced somatic embryogenesis and green plant regeneration. In culture of immature embryos, infl orescences and leaf segments of the seedlings, explants signifi cantly infl uenced the culture effi ciency. Highest embryogenic callus yield resulted from rye immature embryo as explant compared to young infl orescence and leaf segment of seedling. Developmental stage of embryo played an important role in somatic embryogenesis. Late spherical coleoptile stage (embryo size 0.5-1mm in length) was optimal developmental stage of immature embryo for culture. Morphogenetic potential of embryogenic callus decreased with an increasing number of subcultures, and this ability could be maintained in vitro for a maximum of 8 months of culturing.

Identification of QTLs associated with albino plant formation and some new facts concerning green versus albino ratio determinants in triticale (×Triticosecale Wittm.) anther culture

“…The biggest number of OTLs connected with AR/100A were localized in subgenome R and the positive effect originated from 'Modus' allele. It could be connected with general recalcitrance in regard to the in vitro culture response in rye (Ma et al 2003;Ma and Pulli 2004;Targońska et al 2013). Generally problems associated with rye anther and microspore culture are poor embryogenic callus induction, low green plant regeneration and high proportion of albinos (Ma and Pulli 2004).…”

Development ofin vitroTechniques for the Important Medicinal PlantVeratrum californicum

“…Most probably small mature embryos had not developed well and had less active cells compared to big embryos. In previous works for immature embryo culture of monocot cereal plants, optimal embryo size was shown to vary from 0.5 ± 2 mm [15], [16]. Our results indicate that the influence of embryo size on somatic embryogenesis differs between mature and immature embryo cultures, and therefore requirements for embryo sizes are different.…”

The specificity and genetic background of the rye (Secale cereale L.) tissue culture response

“…In rye, as in other plant species, the genotype of the donor plant is one of the most important factors influencing TCR (Krumbiegel-Schroeren et al 1984; Linacero and Vazquez 1986; Rakoczy-Trojanowska and Malepszy 1993, 1995; Rakoczy-Trojanowska et al 1997; Popelka and Altpeter 2001; Ma and Pulli 2004). In general, the efficiency of rye TCR is low, usually around 20–30 %, although several genotypes respond much better, e.g., the inbred lines L318 and L22 (Rakoczy-Trojanowska and Malepszy 1993, 1995; Rakoczy-Trojanowska et al 1997; Popelka and Altpeter 2001), wild species S. africanum and S. kuprianovii (Rybczyński and Zduńczyk 1986), interspecific hybrids S. cereale  ×  S. vavilovii (Flehinghaus et al 1991; Flehinghaus-Roux et al 1995), some spring cultivars—Florida 401, Jo02 (Lu et al 1984; Immonen and Anttila 1999; Ma and Pulli 2004; Guo and Pulli 2000); and some winter cultivars—Zulpan, Amilo, Jussi (Guo and Pulli 2000; Ma et al 2004).…”

“…In general, the efficiency of rye TCR is low, usually around 20–30 %, although several genotypes respond much better, e.g., the inbred lines L318 and L22 (Rakoczy-Trojanowska and Malepszy 1993, 1995; Rakoczy-Trojanowska et al 1997; Popelka and Altpeter 2001), wild species S. africanum and S. kuprianovii (Rybczyński and Zduńczyk 1986), interspecific hybrids S. cereale  ×  S. vavilovii (Flehinghaus et al 1991; Flehinghaus-Roux et al 1995), some spring cultivars—Florida 401, Jo02 (Lu et al 1984; Immonen and Anttila 1999; Ma and Pulli 2004; Guo and Pulli 2000); and some winter cultivars—Zulpan, Amilo, Jussi (Guo and Pulli 2000; Ma et al 2004). However, apart from a few individual cases, the agronomic value and/or usefulness for breeding of these more compliant genotypes is rather low.…”