| Literature DB >> 31214232 |
Sylvie Weckx1, Dirk Inzé2,3, Ludo Maene1.
Abstract
The oil palm (Elaeis guineensis Jacq.) is typically propagated in vitro by indirect somatic embryogenesis, a process in which somatic cells of an explant of choice are, via an intermediate phase of callus growth, induced to differentiate into somatic embryos. The architecture of the oil palm, lacking axillary shoots, does not allow for vegetative propagation. Therefore, somatic embryogenesis is the only alternative to seed propagation, which is hampered by long germination times and low germination rates, for the production of planting material. The current oil palm somatic embryogenesis procedure is associated with several difficulties, which are described in this review. The limited availability of explants, combined with low somatic embryo initiation and regeneration rates, necessitate the proliferation of embryogenic structures, increasing the risk for somaclonal variants such as the mantled phenotype. Several ways to improve the efficiency of the tissue culture method and to reduce the risk of somaclonal variation are described. These include the use of alternative explants and propagation techniques, the introduction of specific embryo maturation treatments and the detection of the mantled abnormality in an early stage. These methods have not yet been fully explored and provide interesting research field for the future. The development of an efficient oil palm micropropagation protocol is needed to keep up with the increasing demand for palm oil in a sustainable way. Mass production of selected, high-yielding palms by tissue culture could raise yields on existing plantations, reducing the need for further expansion of the cultivated area, which is often associated with negative environmental impacts.Entities:
Keywords: mantled abnormality; micropropagation; oil palm (Elaeis guineensis Jacq.); somaclonal variation; somatic embryogenesis; tissue culture
Year: 2019 PMID: 31214232 PMCID: PMC6558080 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2019.00722
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Plant Sci ISSN: 1664-462X Impact factor: 5.753
Figure 1Oil palm tree architecture. The oil palm is built up of a single stem without branches, topped by 40–50 mature leaves. It only has one apical meristem, located below a cylinder of immature leaves, which are used as explants for somatic embryogenesis. Each leaf has an inflorescence meristem in its axil.
Figure 2Oil palm fruit bunch. After pollination, female inflorescences develop into fruit bunches consisting of up to 2,000 fruits, which are rich in palm oil and palm kernel oil.
Figure 3Different steps of indirect somatic embryogenesis from oil palm zygotic embryos. (A) Immature zygotic embryos are cultivated on a callus induction medium containing high auxin concentrations to induce cell dedifferentiation. (B) After 8 weeks, the formation of primary, nodular callus can be observed. (C) After 16 weeks, nodular calli have developed into embryogenic callus, that can be proliferated on semi-solid or liquid proliferation media. (D) Embryogenic cells are transferred to a culture medium with reduced auxin concentrations to initiate the formation of somatic embryos. (E) After a subsequent maturation phase in which the embryos accumulate storage material and acquire desiccation tolerance, germination starts. (F) Plantlets having a well-developed shoot and root system are being formed.
Oil palm somatic embryogenesis protocols.
| Immature zygotic embryo | Wan Nur Syuhada et al., | CI | 2,4-D 9.95 | 0 | Sucrose 30 | Phytagel 2.5 | MS macronutrients + Y3 micronutrients | 28°C | SI: 1 m | Callus: 41.25% |
| PC | 2,4-D 25 | No, suspension culture | MS | 28°C, dark | ||||||
| SE/M/R | NAA 0.1 | Phytagel 2.5 | n.i. | |||||||
| Thuzar et al., | CI | 2,4-D 9.05 | 0 | Sucrose 30 | Phytagel 3 | N6 | 27°C | SI: 3 m | Callus: 81% | |
| SE/M | 2,4-D 0.45 | 2 | 3–5m, SI: 1 m | |||||||
| R | – | 0.5 | 3–6 m | |||||||
| Mature zygotic embryo | Balzon et al., | CI | Picloram 450 | 2.5 | Sucrose 20–30 | Phytagel 2.5 | MS | 25°C, dark | 150 d, SI: 1 m | |
| PC(1−3) | Picloram 40 | 0 | Sucrose 20-30(1−2) | Up to 12 w, no subculture | ||||||
| SE/M | 2-ip 12.3 | 0–0.3 | Sucrose 20–30 | 90 d, SI: 1 m | ||||||
| R | – | 0–2.5 | Sucrose 20–30 | Phytagel 2.5 or no (TIS) | 1/2 MS or MS | 25°C | 3 subcultures of 30 d | |||
| RT(2−3) | IBA 53.7 | 0 | Sucrose 30 | Double-phase: phytagel 2.5 + liquid layer | MS | 25°C | Up to 150 d | |||
| Monteiro et al., | CI | Picloram 450 | 2.5 | Sucrose 30 | Phytagel 2.5 | MS | 25°C, dark | 5 m, SI: 1 m | Callus: 69.3–81.1% | |
| PC | 2,4-D 5 | 0 | No, liquid culture | 210 d, SI: 2 w | ||||||
| SE/M | – | 2.5 | Phytagel 2.5 | 1/2 MS | Up to 12 m | |||||
| R | MS | n.i. | n.i. | |||||||
| Kanchanapoom and Domyoas, | CI | 2,4-D 9.05 | 0 | Sucrose 30 | Gelrite 1.5 | Y3 | 27°C20 μmol m−2s−115 h d−1 photoperiod | 8 w | Embryogenesis: 8.33% | |
| PC/SE | 2,4-D 2.26 | 1/2 MS | 16 w, SI: 8 w | |||||||
| M | 2,4-D 0.45 | 0.5 | 5 w | |||||||
| R | BA 11.10 | SI: 8 w | ||||||||
| Teixeira et al., | PC | 2,4-D 10 | 0 | Sucrose 15 + glucose 5 | No, suspension culture | Y3 | 26-27°C, dark | SI: bi-weekly | ||
| Immature male inflorescence | Jayanthi et al., | CI | 2,4-D 150 | 3 | Sucrose 30 | Agar 8 | Y3 | 27°C, dark | 4–6 subcultures of 4 m, with gradual auxin reduction of 50% | Callus: 42–72% |
| SE/M/R | BA 18 | 27°C | n.i. | |||||||
| RT | IAA 23 | 0.5 | Sucrose 60 | n.i. | ||||||
| Immature female inflorescence | Guedes et al., | CI | 2,4-D | 3 | Sucrose 30 | Phytagel 2.5 | MS | 25°C, dark | Up to 42 w | Embryogenic callus: 54.8% |
| Teixeira et al., | CI | 2,4-D 475 | 3 | Sucrose 30 | Gelrite 2.2 | 1/2 MS macronutrients + 1/1 MS micronutrients | 27–29°C, dark | 81 w, | Callus: 30–50% | |
| SE/M | NAA 15 | 0 | Y3 | n.i. | n.i. | |||||
| R | – | 3 | Sucrose 20 | 1/2 MS | n.i. | 8 w | ||||
| Immature leaf | Hashim et al., | CI | NAA 27–54 | 0 | Sucrose 30 | Agar 7 | MS | Dark | Up to 1 year, SI: 3 m | 40–29,115 shoots produced from a single ortet isolation |
| SE/PE/M | Half of CI concentration, followed by a gradual reduction | 28°C | Up to 30 m, SI: 2 m | |||||||
| R | NAA 0.11 | Gelrite 2.5 | 2–3 m | |||||||
| RT | NAA 1.1 | No, liquid of double-phase | 2–3 m | |||||||
| Gomes et al., | CI | Picloram 450 | 2.5 | Sucrose 30 | Phytagel 2.5 | MS | 25°C, dark | Up to 8 subcultures of 30 d | Callus: 22.3% | |
| SE | 2-ip 12.3 | 0 | 25°C | 6 subcultures of 30 d | ||||||
| M | – | 2.5 | No, TIS | 2 subcultures of 30 d | ||||||
| Corrêa et al., | CI | 2,4-D 800 | 3 | Sucrose 30 | Phytagel 2.5 | Y3 | 27°C, dark | 90 d | Callus: 0.28–52.05% | |
| PC | 2,4-D 9 | 0 | 60 d | |||||||
| SE/M | 2,4-D 0.1 | n.i. | 60 d | |||||||
| R | NAA 0.54 | 0 | 27°C | 60 d | ||||||
| Constantin et al., | CI | NAA 107.41 | 0 | Commercial sugar 50 | Agar 9 | MS | 28°C, dark | SI: 12 w for explant and 8 w once callus is formed | Callus: 1.39–30.56% | |
| PC/SE/M | Gradual auxin reduction of 25% during each subculture | 29°C | SI: 6 w | |||||||
| de Touchet et al., | PC | 2,4-D 362-452 | 1 | Glucose 20 | No, suspension culture | MS | 27°C | SI: 4–6 w | 4-fold weight increase after 1 month | |
| Young plantlet | Jayanthi et al., | SE | 2,4-D 40 | 3 | Sucrose 30 | Agar 8 | 3 | 27°C, dark | 8 w, SI: 1 m | Direct embryogenesis with a rate of 80–100% |
| R | BA 2 | n.i. | n.i. | n.i. | 27°C | n.i. | ||||
| Scherwinski-Pereira et al., | CI | Picloram 450 | 0.3 | Sucrose 30 | Phytagel 2.5 | MS | 25°C, dark | 12 w, no subculture | Embryogenic callus: 41.5% | |
| SE/M | NAA 0.6 | 0.3 | SI: 4 w | |||||||
| R | – | 1 | Sucrose 20 | 1/2 MS | 25°C | n.i. |
CI, callus induction; PC, proliferation of callus; PE, proliferation of embryoids; SE, somatic embryo initiation; M, somatic embryo maturation; R, plantlet regeneration; RT, rooting; n.i, no information provided; SI, subculture interval; d, days; w, weeks; m, months.
Figure 4Phenotype of mantled fruits. Mantled fruits are characterized by the presence of extra carpels, arising from a feminization of the staminodes present in female flowers. In slightly mantled palms, mantled flowers might develop into fruits, having a reduced oil content. In more severe cases, flowers are aborted, leading to a total production loss.
Pros and cons of different explants suitable for oil palm somatic embryogenesis.
| Immature leaves | Established protocol | Ortet damaged upon harvest; Limited availability | 8 w | 21 w | Up to 52% | Alwee et al., |
| Zygotic embryos | High reactivity; Free of microorganisms; No damage to ortet upon harvest; High availability | Unknown genotype | 6 w | 12 w | Up to 97.5% | Balzon et al., |
| Immature | Higher availability than leaf explants | Ortet damaged upon harvest | 8 w | 42 w | Up to 72% | Teixeira et al., |
| Roots | No damage to ortet upon harvest; High availability | Contamination? | – | – | – | |
| Mature inflorescences | No damage to ortet upon harvest; High availability | Contamination? | – | – | – |
The pros and cons of different explant types, as well as the number of weeks necessary to obtain primary and embryogenic callus and the callus formation rate of each explant type, are listed. w, number of weeks after explant inoculation on callus induction medium.
Figure 5Challenges associated with oil palm tissue culture. Because the oil palm does not form any offshoots, tissue culture is based on indirect somatic embryogenesis, a process with very low efficiencies. The low efficiency of somatic embryogenesis, combined with the limited availability of immature leaf explants, necessitate the extensive proliferation of embryogenic structures to allow mass propagation of oil palm. However, proliferation of embryogenic structures strongly increases the risk for somaclonal variation, including the mantled abnormality, which is limiting oil yields. This sequence of events accumulating in the formation of mantled palms with reduced oil yields, can be interrupted at several points. Interventions such as an increased efficiency of somatic embryogenesis, the use of alternative micropropagation methods not based on somatic embryogenesis or the use alternative explant types with higher availability could limit the incidence of somaclonal variation, while the early detection of mantled palms could avoid the planting of mutated trees in the field. All these interventions provide interesting fields for future research and could contribute to the establishment of an improved oil palm micropropagation protocol not hampered by somaclonal variation.