| Literature DB >> 35296723 |
Petr Sedlák1, Vladimíra Sedláková2, Jakub Vašek2, Dukagjin Zeka3, Daniela Čílová2, Martina Melounová2, Matyáš Orsák4, Jaroslava Domkářová5, Petr Doležal6, Pavel Vejl2.
Abstract
Somatic hybridization has been frequently used to overcome sexual incompatibility between potato and its secondary germplasm. The primary objective of this study was to produce and evaluate somatic hybrids of Solanum tuberosum (Stub) and S. bulbocastanum (Sblb) for breeding purposes. In 2007, 23 somatic hybrids were produced using an electrofusion of mesophyll protoplasts of diploid (2n = 2x = 24) potato line StubDH165 and S. bulbocastanum PI24351 (Sblb66). Phenotype of somatic hybrids in field conditions were evaluated, together with constitution and stability of 30 nuclear (ncSSR) and 27 cytoplasmic (cpSSR) microsatellite markers and content of main glycoalkaloids. All somatic hybrids had very high field resistance against late blight, but the plants were infertile: the viability of pollen grains insignificantly varied between 0.58 and 8.97%. A significant somaclonal variation was observed in terms of the morphology of plants, the date of emergence, the quantity of harvested tubers, the content of glycoalkaloids in foliage, and nuclear microsatellite markers (ncSSR). The analysis of ncSSR identified five distinct genotypes of hybrids partly associated with phenotype variations. The process of somatic hybridization with regeneration of shoots was identified as the most likely source of somaclonal variation because the ncSSR genotypes of hybrids, which were maintained in vitro, remained stable for more than 10 years. The infertile somatic hybrids have no practical breeding potential, but they are considered very suitable for advanced studies of the differential expression of genes in the pathways linked to dormancy of tubers and synthesis of glycoalkaloids.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35296723 PMCID: PMC8927101 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-08424-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.996
Characteristics of parents and somatic hybrids.
| Ref. number | Genotype code | GRIN identification number | Origin (pedigree) | NcSSR genotype | Ploidy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 07S0500005 | NA | 2n = 2x = 24 | ||
| 2 | 07S0300335 | NA | 2n = 2x = 24 | ||
| 3 | REG28F | NA | Somatic hybrid, callus 10 | A | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 4 | REG30F | 07S0200434 | Somatic hybrid, callus 10 | B | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 5 | REG32F | 07S0200435 | Somatic hybrid, callus 10 | B | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 6 | REG38F | 07S0200436 | Somatic hybrid, callus 10 | B | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 7 | REG39F | NA | Somatic hybrid, callus 10 | A | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 8 | REG40F | NA | Somatic hybrid, callus 10 | A | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 9 | REG42F | NA | Somatic hybrid, callus 10 | B | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 10 | REG70F | NA | Somatic hybrid, callus 10 | A | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 11 | REG71F | NA | Somatic hybrid, callus 10 | A | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 12 | REG72F | NA | Somatic hybrid, callus 10 | B | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 13 | REG34F | 07S0200437 | Somatic hybrid, callus 11 | C | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 14 | REG44F | 07S0200438 | Somatic hybrid, callus 11 | C | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 15 | REG45F | NA | Somatic hybrid, callus 11 | C | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 16 | REG46F | 07S0200439 | Somatic hybrid, callus 11 | C | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 17 | REG48F | NA | Somatic hybrid, callus 11 | C | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 18 | REG49F | NA | Somatic hybrid, callus 11 | A | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 19 | REG50F | NA | Somatic hybrid, callus 11 | A | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 20 | REG51F | NA | Somatic hybrid, callus 11 | A | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 21 | REG67F | NA | Somatic hybrid, callus 11 | C | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 22 | REG68F | NA | Somatic hybrid, callus 11 | A | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 23 | REG69F | NA | Somatic hybrid, callus 11 | C | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 24 | REG35F | 07S0200441 | Somatic hybrid, callus 12 | D | 2n = 4x = 48 |
| 25 | REG52F | 07S0200442 | Somatic hybrid, callus 12 | E | 2n = 4x = 48 |
More associated data are available under accession numbers of GRIN database (http://grinczech.vurv.cz/gringlobal/search.aspx). The ncSSR genotype (A–E) refers on specific set of microsatellite alleles further characterized in Table 2. Sblb—Solanum bulbocastanum, Stub—S. tuberosum ssp. tuberosum; Sphu—S. phureja.
Incidence of StubDH-specific, Sblb-specific, combined, new and null alleles of ncSSR markers in parents and in groups of somatic hybrids classified according the specific ncSSR genotype (A–E).
| Combined alleles | New alleles | Null alleles | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 42 | NA | 5 | NA | 0 | |
| NA | 18 | 5 | NA | 12 | |
| ncSSR genotype A | 41 | 16 | 5 | 1 | 15 |
| ncSSR genotype B | 40 | 16 | 5 | 1 | 16 |
| ncSSR genotype C | 42 | 16 | 5 | 1 | 14 |
| ncSSR genotype D | 41 | 16 | 5 | 1 | 15 |
| ncSSR genotype E | 41 | 14 | 5 | 1 | 17 |
Figure 1Genetic distances in the ncSSR of somatic hybrids indicates somaclonal variation dividing the somatic hybrids into five distanced groups. Designed in Darwin 6 software[35], processed in Zoner Photo Studio 14.
Figure 2Flowers of somatic hybrids (a, b) compared to Sblb66 (c) and Stub cv. ‘Apta’ (d), intermediate characteristics of somatic hybrids visible in habitus of plants (e—from the left: StubDH165, somatic hybrid, Sblb66) and leaves (f—from the left: Sblb66, StubDH165, somatic hybrid), example of tuber of somatic hybrids (g), entire plant of somatic hybrid (h), entire plant of Sblb66 (i). Processed in Zoner Photo Studio 14.
The comparison of the ncSSR genotype groups (A, B, C, D) of somatic hybrids with parent Sblb66 in characteristics showing significant somaclonal variation (P < 0.05).
| Characteristics | Genotype | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | B | C | D | ||
| Uprightness of the stem | 9.0b | 5.0ab | 3.0a | 4.9ab | 5.0ab |
| Stem thickness | 4.4a | 6.0ab | 6.25ab | 6.1ab | 6.50b |
| Crown diameter | 1.2a | 4.0ab | 5.75ab | 5.2ab | 7.58b |
| Manifestation of inflorescence | 3.4a | 6.5ab | 7.63ab | 6.8ab | 8.17b |
| Tuber shape | 9.0b | 5.5a | 5.25a | 6.0ab | 5.83a |
| Color of the flesh | 7.0b | 4.5a | 6.50ab | 5.0ab | 4.67a |
| Number of tubers per plot | 40.0b | 160.75a | 115.57a | 139.91a | 135.0a |
| Weight of tubers per plot (kg) | 0.05a | 4.55 cd | 2.29b | 5.71d | 2.38bc |
| Number of tubers over 3 cm per plot | NA | 80.00ab | 54.14a | 90.46b | 57.50ab |
| Weight of tubers over 3 cm per plot (kg) | NA | 3.55ab | 1.73a | 5.20b | 1.70a |
| Chaconine in tubers (mg kg−1) | 18.80a | 481.10b | 549.68b | 478.06b | 594.63b |
| Solanine in tubers (mg kg−1) | 15.15a | 490.44b | 560.43b | 512.46b | 524.03b |
| Total glycoalkaloids in tubers (mg kg−1) | 33.95a | 971.54b | 1110.11b | 990.52b | 1118.65b |
| Chaconine in foliage (mg kg−1) | 35.45a | 1022.09bc | 567.37ab | 1161.08c | 2694.67d |
| Solanine in foliage (mg kg−1) | 23.75a | 288.57bc | 161.99ab | 276.72c | 784.30d |
| Total glycoalkaloids in foliage (mg kg−1) | 59.20a | 1310.67bc | 729.37ab | 1437.79c | 3478.97d |
Footnotes (a, b… etc.) indicate placement of mean values into homogeneous groups.