Skip to main content
Log in

A comparison of somatic chromosomal instability in tissue culture regenerants from Medicago media Pers

  • Published:
Plant Cell Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Two cultivars (Heinrichs, Reaver) and two breeding lines (Br1, Le1) from Medicago media were cultured in a media protocol consisting of a high concentration 2,4-D induction step. Regenerants were produced from all four stocks. Representative samples from each regenerant population along with the corresponding control population were cytologically analyzed for chromosomal and pollen abnormalities. While numerical changes in chromosome numbers were found in all regenerant populations, there was considerable variation between the four stock groups. Heteroploidy was observed for both hypo and hyper aneuploid regenerants, but there were no differences in pollen stainability between hypo and hyper aneuploid regenerants and ‘euploid’ regenerants. Tissue culture regenerants generally produced a lower pollen stainability percent as compared to control populations grown from seeds. Gross and cryptic changes in chromosomes, or hormonal carry over effects or both were considered causes for poor pollen stainability in tissue culture regenerants. Cytological analyses indicate that the cultivar might play an important role in the cytological stability or instability of regenerant populations. Exploitation of this naturally existing situation to produce ‘euploid’ regenerants for field experiments and to obtain gross cytological stability in somaclones is discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bayliss, M.W. 1980. Chromosomal variation in plant tissues in culture. Int. Rev. Cytol. Suppl. 11A:113–144.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Blaydes, D.F. 1966. Interaction of kinetin and various inhibitors in the growth of soybean tissue. Physiol. Plant. 19:748–753.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Constantin, M.J. 1981. Chromosome instability in cell and tissue cultures of regenerated plants. Environ. Exp. Bot. 21:359–368.

    Google Scholar 

  4. D'Amato, F. 1977. Cytogenetics of differentiation in tissue in cell cultures. p. 343–357. In J. Reinert and Y.P.S. Bajaj (ed.) Applied and fundamental aspects of plant cell, tissue and organ culture. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Evans, D.A. and S.M. Reed. 1981. Cytogenetic techniques. p. 213–240. In T.A. Thorpe (ed.) plant tissue culture, methods and applications in agriculture. Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Groose, R.W. and E.T. Ringham. 1984. Variation in plants regenerated from tissue culture of tetraploid alfalfa heterozygous for several traits. Crop Sci. 24:655–658.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Johnson, L.B., D.L. Stuteville, S.E. Schlarbaum and D.Z. Skinner. 1984. Variation in phenotype and chromosome number in alfalfa protoclones regenerated from non-mutagenized calli. Crop Sci. 24:948–951.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kao, K.N. and M.R. Michayluk. 1980. Plant regeneration from mesophyll protoplasts of alfalfa. Z. Pflanzen Physiol. 96:135–141.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Larkin, P.J. and W.R. Scowcroft. 1981. Somaclonal variation — a novel source of variability from cell cultures for plant improvement. Theor. Appl. Genet. 60:197–214.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Maheshwaran, G. and E.G. Williams. 1985. Origin and development of somatic embryoids formed directly on immature embryos of Trifolium repens in vitro. Ann. Bot. 56:619–630.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Meins, F. 1983. Heritable variation in plant cell culture. Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol. 34:327–346.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Mazentsev, A.V. 1981. Mass regeneration of plants from the cells and protoplasts of lucerne (in Russian). Dokl. Vses. Akad. S. Kh. Nauk im. V.1. Lenina 4:22–23.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Nagarajan, P., J.S. McKenzie and P.D. Walton. 1986. Embryogenesis and plant regeneration of Medicago spp. in tissue culture. Pl. Cell. Rep. 5:77–80.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ogura, H.K. 1976. Cytological chimeras in original regenerants from tobacco tissue. Japan. J. Genetics 51:161–174.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Rehfeldt, G.E., S.P. Wells and J.Y. Woo. 1983. Chromosomal imbalances in Douglasfir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). Can J. Genet. Cytol. 25:113–116.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Reisch, B. and E.T. Bingham. 1980. The genetic control of bud formation from callus cultures of diploid alfalfa. Plant Science Letters 20:71–77.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Schenk, R.U. and A.C. Hildebrandt. 1972. Medium and techniques for induction and growth of monocotyledonous and dicotyledonous plant cell cultures. Can J. Bot. 50:199–204.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Shepard, J.F., D. Bidney and E. Shahin. 1980. Potato protoplasts in crop improvement. Science (Washington, D.C.) 208:17–24.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Torrey, J.G. 1977. Cytodifferentiation in cultured cells and tissues. Hort. Sci. 12 (2):138–139.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Communicated by F. Constabel

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nagarajan, P., Walton, P.D. A comparison of somatic chromosomal instability in tissue culture regenerants from Medicago media Pers. Plant Cell Reports 6, 109–113 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00276665

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00276665

Key words

Navigation