| Literature DB >> 28798758 |
Shanwen Ye1, Changyang Cai1, Huibo Ren1, Wenjia Wang1, Mengqi Xiang1, Xiaoshan Tang1, Caiping Zhu1, Tengfei Yin1, Li Zhang1, Qiang Zhu1.
Abstract
Genetic engineering technology has been successfully used in many plant species, but is limited in woody plants, especially in bamboos. Ma bamboo (Dendrocalamus latiflorus Munro) is one of the most important bamboo species in Asia, and its genetic improvement was largely restricted by the lack of an efficient regeneration and transformation method. Here we reported a plantlet regeneration and Agrobacterium-mediated transformation protocol by using Ma bamboo young shoots as explants. Under our optimized conditions, embryogenic calluses were successfully induced from the excised young shoots on callus induction medium and rapidly grew on callus multiplication medium. Shoots and roots were regenerated on shoot induction medium and root induction medium, respectively, with high efficiency. An Agrobacterium-mediated genetic transformation protocol of Ma bamboo was established, verified by PCR and GUS staining. Furthermore, the maize Lc gene under the control of the ubiquitin promoter was successfully introduced into Ma bamboo genome and generated an anthocyanin over-accumulation phenotype. Our methods established here will facilitate the basic research as well as genetic breeding of this important bamboo species. Key achievements: A stable and high efficiency regeneration and Agrobacterium-mediated transformation protocol for Ma bamboo from vegetative organ is established.Entities:
Keywords: Ma bamboo; regeneration; shoots; transformation
Year: 2017 PMID: 28798758 PMCID: PMC5529393 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2017.01298
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Plant Sci ISSN: 1664-462X Impact factor: 5.753
Effects of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) on compact callus induction from nodule of the young shoot.
| 0 | 2 mg/L | 4 mg/L | 8 mg/L | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | – | 31.83 ± 7.57 | 33.5 ± 6.80 | 36.67 ± 4.46 |
| IBA (0.5 mg/L) | – | 29.33 ± 6.50 | 37.83 ± 4.71 | 53.17 ± 4.07 |
| KT (3 mg/L) | – | 9.67 ± 3.14 | 12.67 ± 4.93 | 12.50 ± 9.22 |
| TDZ (0.01 mg/L) | – | 12.17 ± 3.37 | 19.17 ± 6.08 | 21.83 ± 6.62 |
Effects of phytohormones on shoot induction.
| 0 | NAA 0.5 mg/L | NAA 1 mg/L | IAA 0.5 mg/L | IAA 1 mg/L | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BAP 2 mg/L | 22.2 ± 2.77 | 49.96 ± 2.35 | 19 ± 2.56 | 30.77 ± 4.54 | 20.27 ± 1.84 |
| BAP 6 mg/L | 13.5 ± 0.83 | 29.74 ± 6.45 | 14.92 ± 5.74 | 6.01 ± 2.46 | 35.7 ± 3.27 |
| TDZ 0.01 mg/L | 24.62 ± 1.36 | 46.61 ± 2.30 | 11.85 ± 2.31 | 17.32 ± 0.65 | 14.89 ± 3.94 |
| TDZ 0.1 mg/L | 49.47 ± 1.51 | 49.55 ± 12.49 | 14.26 ± 3.71 | 14.84 ± 3.62 | 7.23 ± 1.19 |
| ZT 0.5 mg/L | 14.25 ± 0.31 | 15.54 ± 5.84 | 44.03 ± 2.67 | 28.56 ± 2.88 | 5.39 ± 1.23 |
| ZT 1 mg/L | 6.81 ± 1.32 | 11.22 ± 2.22 | 23.98 ± 1.12 | 24.69 ± 2.38 | 28.81 ± 4.40 |
Effects of phytohormones on root induction.
| NAA 0.5 mg/L | IBA 0.5 mg/L | IAA 0.5 mg/L | |
|---|---|---|---|
| NAA 0.5 mg/L | 52.84 ± 0.66 | 39.98 ± 0.85 | 51.39 ± 1.87 |
| IBA 0.5 mg/L | 52.9 ± 1.92 | 44.32 ± 1.83 | 55.68 ± 1.83 |
| IAA 0.5 mg/L | 22.89 ± 1.62 | 65.76 ± 2.06 | 72.83 ± 1.66 |