Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
DOI 10.1007/s00468-013-0882-0
ORIGINAL PAPER
Received: 31 January 2013 / Revised: 4 April 2013 / Accepted: 11 April 2013 / Published online: 1 May 2013
Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013
Abbreviations
A
Maturation medium, DCR basal medium
supplemented with: 75 lM ABA, 9 g L-1 of
Gelrite, 4.5 % (w/v) sucrose, and ED amino
acid mixture
ABA Abscisic acid
AC
Activated charcoal
B
Maturation medium, DCR medium supplemented
with: 75 lM ABA and 9 g L-1 of Gelrite, 4.5 %
(w/v) sucrose and ED amino acid mixture with
1,650 mg L-1 of glutamine
BA
N6-benzyladenine
C
Maturation medium, DCR basal medium
supplemented with: 75 lM ABA, 9 g L-1 of
Gelrite, 6 % (w/v) sucrose and ED amino acid
mixture
D
Maturation medium, DCR medium supplemented
with: 75 lM ABA and 9 g L-1 of Gelrite, 6 %
(w/v) sucrose and ED amino acid mixture with
1,650 mg L-1 glutamine
2,4-D 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid
DBA 9 lM 2,4D and 2.7 lM BA
DCR Gupta and Durzan basal medium (Gupta and
Durzan 1985)
DKI
9 lM 2,4D and 2.7 lM Kinetin
DNB 4.5 lM 1-Naphthaleneacetic acid, 4.5 lM 2,4D
and 2.7 lM BA
ECLs Established cell lines
ED
EDM amino acid mixture
EDM Embryo development medium (Walter et al. 1998)
ET
Embryogenic tissue
FW
Fresh weight
LP
Quorin and Lepoivre medium (Quoirin and Lepoivre
1977, modified by Aitken-Christie et al. 1988)
SE
Somatic embryogenesis
123
1340
Introduction
Pinus halepensis Mill., commonly named Aleppo pine, is a
species native to the Mediterranean region and is widespread from Spain to Algeria (Botella et al. 2010). Temperature and precipitation requirements generally confine
its distribution to sub-humid areas of the Mediterranean. Its
main area of distribution is Southern Europe (Spain, Italy
and Greece) and Northern Africa (Algeria, Tunisia and
Morocco). In these regions, as described by Lambardi et al.
(1993), Aleppo pine is of a great economic importance due
to its adaptability to dry, calcareous and poor soils. In light
of predictions of global drying and warming for this region,
there is some concern about the physiological ability of P.
halepensis to persevere in large afforestations in the future
(Oliveras et al. 2003; Maestre and Cortina 2004). This
species is especially suitable for the reforestation of marginal and submarginal areas because it is one of the most
drought resistant pine species (Klein et al. 2011). Moreover, in marine stands, P. halepensis forests are important
both for defence against the saline winds and for landscape
purposes (Lambardi et al. 1993). In Spain, virtually all
natural stands are distributed over the whole Eastern coast,
though due to its important ecological plasticity it has also
been intensively used for afforestation in North-Western
areas of the Iberian Peninsula, very often out of its natural
habitat range (Abello 1998).
In vitro vegetative propagation from physiologically
juvenile tissue has been successful in a number of conifer
species (Moncalean et al. 2005). This phenomenon has led
many organizations to focus on production of elite families
through juvenile tissue propagation in the short-term, either
for operational use or for clonal tests, while they continue
to research methods for propagation of selected mature
trees (De Diego et al. 2008, 2010).
Conventional seed orchards provide genetically
improved seeds, but, as stated by Park et al. (1998) traditional breeding strategies combined with in vitro vegetative
propagation have shown advantages. These include additional genetic gain achieved by capturing non-additive
genetic variation and the capacity of introducing clones to
meet market goals at a higher speed. In this sense, propagation via somatic embryogenesis (SE) from immature
zygotic embryos is an effective method of propagation
when combined with other technologies, such as cryopreserving the embryogenic tissue (ET) and selecting elite
clones in field tests (Park 2002). This system offers the
capability to produce large numbers of somatic embryo
derived plantlets (Montalban et al. 2010) as well as to use
the somatic embryos for organogenesis procedures and thus
provide further amplification (Montalban et al. 2011a).
However, this technology has a number of bottlenecks in
the Pinus genus, namely, a narrow competence window for
123
1341
123
1342
DKI
(lM)
DNB
(lM)
Benzyladenine
2.7
2.7
Kinetin
2.7
2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic
acid
4.5
1-Naphthaleneacetic acid
4.5
123
1343
Maturation
After 18 weeks from the beginning of the experiments, the
number of mature somatic embryos per Petri dish was
recorded and the number of mature somatic embryos per
gram was calculated.
Germination
After 18 weeks on germination medium the number of
germinated somatic embryos per gram of ET and the
overall germinated somatic embryos related to the total
number of somatic embryos introduced (conversion, %)
was calculated.
The results for all the experiments carried out were
analysed by ANOVA, and significant differences between
means were determined by the Tukey post hoc test at a
significance level of p \ 0.05.
Germination
Mature somatic embryos from maturation experiments
(Fig. 1f) were collected and cultured on half strength LP
[(Quoirin and Lepoivre 1977) modified by Aitken-Christie
et al. (1988)] supplemented with 2 g L-1 AC and 10 g L-1
Difco agar granulated. Ten to twenty mature somatic
embryos per Petri dish were cultured.
The plants (Fig. 1g) were sub-cultured once onto fresh
medium of the same composition every 6 weeks. Cultures
were maintained at 21 1 C under a 16-h photoperiod at
120 lmol m-2s-1 provided by cool white fluorescent tubes
(TLD 58 W/33; Philips, France).
After 1824 weeks on germination medium, the plants
were transferred to sterile peat: perlite (7:3, v/v) and
acclimatized in a greenhouse under controlled temperatures
at 21 2 C and progressively decreasing humidity from
90 to 60 % (Fig. 1h).
Results
Initiation and proliferation
Experiment 1
From the 2,310 megagametophytes cultured on EDM
medium, only one initiation of ET was observed and it did
not continue to proliferate. On LP medium, 25 initiations of
ET from the 2,310 megagametophytes cultured were
recorded; 52 % of these initiations were obtained from
families 4 and 5 at collection dates 10 and 11. From the 25
initiations observed, only three of them led to ECLs (data
not shown).
DCR medium gave the best results. The initiation of ET
on DCR medium was significantly affected by the seed
family and the collection date tested (Table 3). There was
also a significant (p \ 0.01) interaction among the mother
trees and the weeks studied (Table 3). Family 4 produced a
significantly (p B 0.05) higher initiation percentage
(25.6 %) than family 1 (8.3 %) (Table 4). The rest of the
Sucrose (%)
Maturation medium A
4.5
Maturation medium B
4.5
Maturation medium C
Maturation medium D
6
6
123
1344
Table 3 ANOVA for embryogenic tissue initiation and proliferation (%) in Pinus halepensis megagametophytes from seven open-pollinated
trees cultured on DCR medium (Gupta and Durzan 1985) at six collection dates
Source
df
ET Initiation (%)
Mean square
ET Proliferation (%)
F test
p value
Mean square
F test
p value
\0.05
724.07
3.02
\0.01
140.21
2.90
1,441.43
6.01
\0.001
94.13
1.94
n.s.
30
84
715.50
239.68
2.99
\0.01
72.28
239.68
1.49
n.s.
S9C
Error
n.s. non-significant
Table 4 Embryogenic tissue (ET) initiation (%) in Pinus halepensis in seven open-pollinated trees cultured on DCR medium (Gupta and Durzan
1985) at six collection dates, different letters show significant differences at p \ 0.01 by Tukeys post hoc test (M SE)
Seed
family
ET initiation (%)
Collection date
6th
12 July
7th
19 July
6.7 6.7cd
10.0 5.8cd
30.0 0.0
abcd
16.7 8.8
bcd
0.0 0.0d
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
6
7
8th
26 July
cd
6.7 6.7
26.7 6.7
abcd
23.3 3.3abcd
10.0 10
cd
cd
6.7 3.3
46.7 24.0
abcd
ab
16.7 3.3
bcd
14.3 2.5
ab
9th
2 August
0.0 0.0d
10th
9 August
6.7 6.7cd
10.0 5.8cd
30.0 5.8
abcd
3.3 3.3
26.7 8.8
abcd
20.0 11.6abcd
26.7 8.8abcd
10.0 5.8
cd
cd
0.0 0.0
16.7 16.7
0.0 0.0
13.3 3.3
bcd
11th
16 August
bcd
63.3 8.8
ab
20.0 0.0
abcd
a
cd
6.7 6.7
53.3 8.8
abc
70.0 0.0a
Mean
16.7 8.8bcd
13.3 6.7
16.1 3.1ab
16.7 3.3
bcd
23.9 4.4ab
13.3 8.8bcd
16.7 12.0
bcd
26.7 21.9
abcd
13.3 8.8
bcd
28.1 6.1
8.3 2.5b
bcd
25.6 5.8a
30.0 15.3
abcd
12.2 4.6ab
33.3 17.6
abcd
21.7 6.9ab
13.3 3.3
bcd
19.5 3.8
ab
Mean
14.3 4.9
6.7 2.3
27.1 4.7
Embryo
stage
1.5
(Proembryonary
stage)
(Cleavage polyembryonary
stage)
(Early bullet
stage)
(Bullet stage)
(Late bullet
stage)
20.6 4.7ab
In the last row, the embryo stage is shown. Means followed by the same letter (a, b, c or d) are not significantly different at p \ 0.05 Tukeys post
hoc test
123
1345
ET Proliferation (%)
25
20
Experiment 1
15
a
ab
10
ab
ab
5
b
0
3
Seed family
Fig. 2 Embryogenic tissue (ET) proliferation (%) in megagametophytes from seven seed families of Pinus halepensis cultured on DCR
medium (Gupta and Durzan 1985) (M SE). Different letters show
significant differences at p \ 0.05 by Tukeys post hoc test
Experiment 2
In this experiment twelve media were tested. These media
differed in the nitrogen source, the plant growth regulator
combinations or the gellan gum concentration. The
ANOVA showed that only the nitrogen source used had a
significant effect on ET initiation and no interaction was
observed (Table 5). Thus, the media containing ED amino
acid mixture presented an initiation percentage of 36.4 %,
whereas the media supplemented with 1 g L-1 casein
hydrolysate and 500 mg L-1 L-glutamine had an initiation
percentage of 15.4 % (data not shown).
When analysing the proliferation stage, it was observed
that this was only significantly (p \ 0.05) influenced by the
growth regulators (Table 5). At this stage, we also
observed no interactions between the factors studied.
Namely, the combinations of growth regulators DKI and
DNB gave significantly (p \ 0.05) better results (12 and
11.5 %, respectively) than DBA (3.3 %) (Fig. 3).
Table 5 ANOVA for embryogenic tissue (ET) initiation and proliferation (%) in Pinus halepensis megagametophytes cultured on DCR
medium (Gupta and Durzan 1985) supplemented with different amino
acid mixtures [(A), ED or 1 g L-1 casein hydrolysate and
Source
df
ET initiation (%)
ET proliferation (%)
Mean square
F test
p value
Mean square
F test
p value
8,294.81
18.22
\0.001
443.41
3.12
n.s.
132.90
0.29
n.s.
594.14
4.19
\0.05
n.s.
1.56
0.003
n.s.
208.10
1.47
A9H
182.13
0.40
n.s.
133.98
0.94
n.s.
A9G
H9G
1
2
380.52
143.81
0.83
0.31
n.s.
n.s.
0.54
206.37
0.004
1.45
n.s.
n.s.
15.29
0.03
n.s.
119.45
0.84
n.s.
64
457.73
A9H9G
Error
141.96
n.s. non-significant
123
1346
ET Proliferation (%)
25
20
a
15
10
b
5
0
DKI
DBA
DNB
Discussion
In a first experiment the effect of culture medium, collection date and seed family on ET initiation and proliferation
in Pinus halepensis were analysed. Our results show that
these SE stages were strongly affected by culture medium
with the best results obtained after culture on DCR (Gupta
and Durzan 1985) medium. This medium was also found to
be the best for organogenesis in this species (Lambardi
et al. 1993) and for organogenesis and SE in other Pinus
Table 6 ANOVA for the number of mature somatic embryos and germinated somatic embryos per gram (FW) of embryogenic tissue (ET) in
Pinus halepensis
Source
df
Mean square
F test
p value
Mean square
F test
p value
\0.001
\0.001
ECL
12
263,388.29
23.36
61,330.15
13.49
AC
10,520.27
0.93
n.s.
3,617.36
0.80
n.s.
12
21,929.27
1.94
\0.05
3,226.48
0.71
n.s.
100
11,274.42
ECL 9 AC
Error
4,547.41
The embryogenic tissue from thirteen embryogenic cell lines (ECLs) was suspended in liquid EDM medium, supplemented with 2 g L-1 of
activated charcoal (AC) or without AC. Somatic embryos were germinated on half strength LP (Quoirin and Lepoivre 1977, modified by AitkenChristie et al. 1988) supplemented with 2 g L-1 AC
n.s. non-significant
123
1347
1000
800
600
400
200
H29
H153
H217
H30
H239
H195
H47
H45
H32
H60
H150
H58
0
H49
H29
H30
H32
H45
H47
H49
H58
H60
H150
H153
H195
H217
H239
270.0
30.0
32.3
19.5
30.2
4.0
10.0
11.0
0.0
101.8
58.2
171.0
42.6
52.8a
10.9c
11.7c
9.0c
15.5c
4.0c
8.0d
6.2c
0.0c
20.6bc
15.8c
32.9ab
11.0c
Table 8 ANOVA for the number of mature somatic embryos and the number of germinated somatic embryos per gram (FW) of embryogenic
tissue (ET) in Pinus halepensis
Source
df
Mean square
F test
p value
Mean square
F test
p value
58,053.39
15.71
\0.001
50,344.79
17.17
\0.001
60,029.64
19.25
\0.001
46,334.89
15.80
\0.001
6
24
22,196.51
3,694.79
6.01
\0.001
19,909.98
2,932.41
6.79
\0.001
ECL 9 M
Error
The ET was cultured on different maturation media (A, B, C and D). Somatic embryos were germinated on half strength LP (Quoirin and
Lepoivre 1977, modified by Aitken-Christie et al. 1988) supplemented with 2 gL-1 of activated charcoal
123
1348
Table 9 Mature somatic embryos per gram (FW) of embryogenic tissue (ET) in Pinus halepensis (M SE)
ECL
Mean
Low sucrose
High sucrose
Low glutamine
A
High glutamine
B
Low glutamine
C
h19
28.6 14.3c
81.0 26.5bc
47.6 47.6c
h41
89.7 7.4
bc
h42
115.6 27bc
Mean
78.0 15.8
68.4 23.8
142.2 49.5bc
b
97.2 21.0
High glutamine
D
71.4 16.5bc
c
247.9 52.5
51.3 31.2
435.6 54.1a
88.9 17.8bc
243.7 61.6
70.5 14.4
57.1 14.0b
114.3 27.9b
195.6 45.5a
The ET was cultured on different maturation media (A, B, C and D). Different letters show significant differences at p \ 0.001 by Tukeys post
hoc test. In the last row and the last column appear the mean for the number of somatic embryos (%) on the ECLs and maturation media tested,
respectively (M SE)
Means followed by the same letter (a, b, c or d) are not significantly different at p \ 0.05 Tukeys post hoc test
Table 10 Germinated somatic embryos per gram (FW) of embryogenic tissue (ET) in Pinus halepensis (M SE)
ECL
High sucrose
High glutamine
B
Low glutamine
C
33.3 33.3bc
h19
28.6 14.3c
66.7 26.5bc
h41
bc
64.1 19.6
bc
115.6 49.5
bc
h42
Mean
72.7 8.6
bc
97.8 19.4
66.3 12.5
Mean
82.1 19.1
188.0 40.8
400.0 61.1
207.1 58.0
High glutamine
D
52.4 17.2bc
21.4 11.3
75.6 24.8
bc
49.8 12.2
45.2 11.2b
86.5 21.2b
172.2 43.8a
The ET was cultured on different maturation media (A, B, C and D). Somatic embryos were germinated on half strength LP (Quoirin and
Lepoivre 1977, modified by Aitken-Christie et al. 1988) supplemented with 2 g L-1 of activated charcoal (AC). Different letters show significant
differences at p \ 0.001 by Tukeys post hoc test. In the last row and the last column appear the mean for the number of somatic embryos (%) on
the ECLs and maturation media tested, respectively (M SE)
Means followed by the same letter (a, b, c or d) are not significantly different at p \ 0.05 Tukeys post hoc test
123
1349
References
Abello MA (1998) Historia y Evolucion de las Repoblaciones
Forestales en Espana. Universidad Complutense de Madrid,
Madrid, p 749
Aitken-Christie J, Singh AP, Davies H (1988) Multiplication of
meristematic tissue: a new tissue culture system for radiata pine.
In: Hanover JW, Keathley DE (eds) Genetic manipulation of
woody plants. Plenum Publishing Corp, New York, pp 413432
Aronen T, Pehkonen T, Ryyananen L (2009) Enhancement of somatic
embryogenesis from immature zygotic embryos of Pinus
sylvestris. Scan J For Res 24:372383
Botella L, Santamara O, Dez JJ (2010) Fungi associated with the
decline of Pinus halepensis in Spain. Fungal Divers 40:111
Breton D, Harvengt L, Trontin JF, Bouvet A, Favre JM (2005) High
subculture frequency, maltose-based and hormone-free medium
sustained early development of somatic embryos in maritime
pine. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol-Plant 41:494504
Choudhury H, Kumaria S, Tandon P (2008) Induction and maturation
of somatic embryos from intact megagametophyte explants in
Khasi pine (Pinus kesiya Royle ex. Gord.). Curr Sci 95:
14331438
Correia S, Cunha AE, Salgueiro L, Canhoto JM (2012) Somatic
embryogenesis in Tamarillo (Cyphomandra betacea):
approaches to increase efficiency of embryo formation and plant
development. Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 109(1):143152
Davis JM, Becwar MR (2007) Developments in tree cloning.
Developments in fibres and Fibre treatment series. PIRA
International Ltd, Surrey, p 69
123
1350
De Diego N, Montalban IA, Fernandez de Larrinoa E, Moncalean P
(2008) In vitro regeneration of Pinus pinaster adult trees. Can J
For Res 38:26072615
De Diego N, Montalban IA, Moncalean P (2010) In vitro regeneration
of adult Pinus sylvestris L. trees. S Afr J Bot 76:158162
Divakaran SP, Nair AS (2011) Somatic embryogenesis from bract
cultures in diploid Musa acuminate cultivars from South India.
Sci Hortic 131:99102
Fernandez-Guijarro B, Celestino C, Toribio M (1995) Influence of
external factors on secondary embryogenesis and germination in
somatic embryos from leaves of Quercus suber L. Plant Cell Tiss
Org Cult 41:99106
Gaj MD (2004) Factors influencing somatic embryogenesis induction
and plant regeneration with particular reference to Arabidopsis
thaliana (L.) Heynh. Plant Grow Reg 43:2747
Gerdakanenh M, Mozafari AA, Sioseh-mardah A, Sarabi B (2011)
Effects of different aminoacids on somatic embryogenesis of
strawberry (Fragaria x Ananassa Duch.). Acta Physiol Plant
33(5):18471852
Gupta PK, Durzan DJ (1985) Shoot multiplication from mature trees
of Douglas fir and sugar pine. Plant Cell Rep 4:177179
Hargreaves CL, Reeves CB, Find JI, Gough K, Josekutty P, Skudder
DB, Van der Maas SA, Sigley MR, Menzies MI, Low CB,
Mullin TJ (2009) Improving initiation, genotype capture, and
family representation in somatic embryogenesis of Pinus radiata
by a combination of zygotic embryo maturity, media, and
explant preparation. Can J For Res 39:15661574
Hargreaves CL, Reeves CB, Find JI, Gough K, Menzies MI, Low CB,
Mullin TJ (2011) Overcoming the challenges of family and
genotype representation and early cell line proliferation in
somatic embryogenesis from control-pollinated seeds of Pinus
radiata. New Zeal J For Sci 41:97114
Klein T, Cohen S, Yakir D (2011) Hydraulic adjustment underlying
drought resistance of Pinus halepensis. Tree Physiol 31:637648
Klimaszewska K, Park YS, Overton C, MacEacheron I, Bonga JM
(2001) Optimized somatic embryogenesis in Pinus strobus L.
In Vitro Cell Dev Biol-Plant 37:392399
Klimaszewska K, Trontin JF, Becwar M, Devillard C, Park YS, LeluWalter MA (2007) Recent progress on somatic embryogenesis of
four Pinus spp. Tree For Sci Biotechnol 1:1125
Krajnakova J, Gomory D, Haggman H (2008) Somatic embryogenesis
in Greek fir. Can J For Res 38:760769
Kumar GK, Thomas TD (2012) High frequency somatic embryogenesis and synthetic seed production in Clitoria Ternatea Linn.
Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 110(1):141151
Lambardi M, Sharma KK, Thorpe TA (1993) Optimization of in vitro
bud induction and plantlet formation from ma-ture embryos of
Aleppo pine (Pinus halepensis Mill.). In Vitro Cell Dev BiolPlant 29:189199
Lelu-Walter MA, Bernier-Cardou M, Klimaszewska K (2006)
Simplified and improved somatic embryogenesis for clonal
propagation of Pinus pinaster (Ait.). Plant Cell Rep
25(8):767776
Lelu-Walter MA, Bernier-Cardou M, Klimaszewska K (2008) Clonal
plant production from self- and cross-pollinated seed families of
Pinus sylvestris (L.) through somatic embryogenesis. Plant Cell
Tiss Org Cult 92(1):31-45
MacKay JJ, Becwar MR, Park YS, Corderro JP, Pullman GS (2006)
Genetic control of somatic embryogenesis initiation in loblolly
pine and implications for breeding. Tree Genet Genomes 2:19
Maestre FT, Cortina J (2004) Are Pinus halepensis plantations useful
as a restoration tool in semiarid Mediterranean areas? For Ecol
Manage 198:303317
Maruyama TE, Hosoi Y (2012) Post-maturation treatment improves
and synchronizes somatic embryo germination of three species
of Japanese pines. Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 110:4552
123
1351
Walter C, Find JI, Grace LJ (1998) Somatic embryogenesis and
genetic transformation in Pinus radiata. In: Jain SM, Gupta PK,
Newton RJ (eds) Somatic embryogenesis in woody plants, vol 4.,
Kluwer Academic PubDordrecht, The Netherlands, pp 491504
Yildirim T, Kaya Z, Isik K (2006) Induction of embryogenic tissue
and maturation of somatic embryos in Pinus brutia TEN. Plant
Cell Tiss Org Cult 87:6776
123