Hort. Sci. (Prague), 2012, 39(3):101-107 | DOI: 10.17221/208/2011-HORTSCI

In vitro shoot multiplication as influenced by repeated subculturing of shoots of contemporary fruit rootstocks

T. Vujović1, Dj. Ružić1, R. Cerović2
1 Fruit Research Institute, Čačak, Serbia
2 Maize Research Institute, Zemun Polje, Belgrade, Serbia

In vitro shoots of vegetative rootstocks for cherry (Gisela 5 and Gisela 6), plum (Fereley Jaspi) and pear (Pyrodwarf) were repeatedly subcultured for 10 subcultures on Murashige and Skoog medium of unchanged hormonal composition. Shoot formation capacity decreased over repeated subculturing in all genotypes. The first significant decrease in multiplication index was observed after first subculture in Gisela 6 and Fereley Jaspi, while in Gisela 5 the decline occurred after second subculture, and remained at that level. As for Gisela 6 and Fereley Jaspi, multiplication index was mainly stable from second to forth subculture, whereupon the second decline in shoot formation was observed. Although Pyrodwarf showed very low multiplication capacity, shoot multiplication slightly increased over the first three subcultures and then declined. This irreversible decline could be due to residual effects of hormones. However, no visible morphological variations or aberrations of shoots were found in successive subcultures in any genotype. Quality of shoots in terms of shoot length varied during subculturing, but the highest quality was observed in later subcultures (from fifth subculture onwards). After subculturing, several media were evaluated for induction of rhizogenesis in order to achieve high rooting rates in tested rootstocks. The highest rooting ability (100%) among genotypes was observed in Fereley Jaspi, followed by Pyrodwarf and Gisela 6 (the best rooting percentage being 90% in both) and Gisela 5 (70%). Rooted shoots were successfully acclimatized under the mist system in greenhouse.

Keywords: cherry; plum; pear; micropropagation; rooting

Published: September 30, 2012  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Vujović T, Ružić D, Cerović R. In vitro shoot multiplication as influenced by repeated subculturing of shoots of contemporary fruit rootstocks. Hort. Sci. (Prague). 2012;39(3):101-107. doi: 10.17221/208/2011-HORTSCI.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Bommineni V.R., Mathews H., Samuel S.B., Kramer M., Wagner D.R., 2001. A new method for rapid in vitro propagation of apple and pear. HortScience, 36: 1102-1106. Go to original source...
    2. De Paoli G., Subirà E., Battistini A., 2002. In vitro rooting of Pyrodwarf and Cydomalus, two rootstocks for pear, under photoautotrophic conditions. Acta Horticulturae, 596: 463-467. Go to original source...
    3. Debnath S.C., 2004. Clonal propagation of dwarf raspberry (Rubus pubescens Raf.) through in vitro axillary shoot proliferation. Plant Growth Regulation, 43: 179-186. Go to original source...
    4. Fortuna F., Citernesi A.S., Morini S., Vitagliano C., Giovannetti M., 1996. Influence of arbuscular mycorrhizae and phosphate fertilization on shoot apical growth of micropropagated apple and plum rootstocks. Tree Physiology, 16: 757-763. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    5. Grant N.J., Hammat N., 1999. Increased root and shoot production during micropropagation of cherry and apple rootstocks: effect of subculture frequency. Tree Physiology, 19: 899-903. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    6. Hamad A.M., Taha R.M., 2008. Effect of sequential subcultures on in vitro proliferation capacity and shoot formation pattern of pineapple (Ananas comosus L. Merr.) over different incubation periods. Scientia Horticulturae, 117: 329-334. Go to original source...
    7. Hartman H.T., Kester D.E., 1983. Plant Propagation, Principles and Practices. New Jersey, Prentice-Hall Inc.
    8. Hussain T.M., Chandrasekhar T., Gopal G.R., 2007. High frequency shoot regeneration of Sterculia urens Roxb. an endangered tree species through cotyledonary node cultures. African Journal of Biotechnology, 6: 1643-1649.
    9. Koubouris G.,Vasilakakis M., 2006. Improvement of in vitro propagation of apricot cultivar Bebecou. Plant Cell Tissue and Organ Culture, 85: 173-180. Go to original source...
    10. Marino G., Rosati P, Sagrati F., 1985. Storage of in vitro cultures of Prunus rootstocks. Plant Cell Tissue and Organ Culture, 5: 73-78. Go to original source...
    11. Morini S., Loreti F., Sciutti R., 1990. Response of some Mr. S. plum clones to in vitro propagation. Acta Horiculturae, 283: 207-212. Go to original source...
    12. Muna A.S., Ahmad A.K., Mahmoud K., Abdul-Rahman K., 1999. In vitro propagation of a semi-dwarfing cherry rootstock. Plant Cell Tisssue and Organ Culturae, 59: 203-208. Go to original source...
    13. Murashige T., Skoog F., 1962. A revised medium for rapid growth and bioassays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiologya Plantarum, 15: 473-497. Go to original source...
    14. Nacheva L., Ivanova K., Manolov P., Zlatev Z., 2002. Possibilities for application of photoautotrophy in micropropagation of Dzhanka 4 (Prunus cerasifera Ehrt.) rootstock. Acta Horticulturae, 577: 199-205. Go to original source...
    15. Norton M.E., Norton C.R., 1986. Change in shoot proliferation with repeated in vitro subculture of shoots of woody species of Rosaceae. Plant Cell Tissue and Organ Culturae, 5: 187-197. Go to original source...
    16. Rathore J.S., Rathore V., Shekhawat N.S., Singh R.P., Liler G., Phulwaria M., Dagla H.R., 2004. Micropropagation of woody plants. In: Srivastava P.S., Narula A., Srivastava S. (eds), Plant Biotechnology and Molecular Markers. New Delhi, Anamaya Publishers: 195-205. Go to original source...
    17. Reed B., 1995. Screening Pyrus germplasm for in vitro rooting response. HortScience, 30: 1292-1294. Go to original source...
    18. Remphrey W.R., Palmer C.E., Blouw M.J., 1993. In vitro branching in relation to repeated subculture in two cultivars of Potentilla fruticosa. Plant Cell Tissue and Organ Culture, 32: 235-240. Go to original source...
    19. Ružić Đ., Cerović R., 1987. Radicazione di Colt micropropagato in vitro e in vivo (In vitro and in vivo rooting of micropropagated cherry rootstock Colt.). Rivista di Frutticoltura, 12: 73-75.
    20. Ružić Đ., Sarić M., Cerović R., Ćulafić Lj., 2003. Contents of macroelements and growth of sweet cherry rootstock in vitro. Biologia Plantarum, 47: 463-465. Go to original source...
    21. Ružić Đ., Vujović T., Milenković S., Cerović R., Miletić R., 2008. The influence of imidazole fungicides on multiplication in vitro of Pyrodwarf pear rootstock. Australian Journal of Crop Science, 1: 63-68.
    22. Sedlák J., Paprštein F., Erbenová M., 2008. In vitro propagation of the P-HL dwarfing sweet cherry rootstocks. Acta Horticulturae, 795: 395-400. Go to original source...
    23. Varjda R., Varjda T., 2001. The effest of cytokinin type and concentration and number of subcultures on the multiplication rate of some decorative plants. Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences, Biology and Ecology, 50: 22-32. Go to original source...
    24. Vujović T., Ružić Đ., Milenković S., 2007. Introduction of a new plum rootstock, Fereley Jaspi, into production of certified planting material by in vitro micropropagation. Journal of Pomology, 41: 71-77.
    25. Yeo D.Y., Reed B., 1995. Micropropagation of three Pyrus rootstock. HortScience, 30: 620-623. Go to original source...
    26. Yepes L.M., Adwinckle H.S., 1994. Micropropagation of thirteen Malus cultivars and rootstocks, and effect of antibiotics on proliferation. Plant Growth Regulation, 15: 55-67. Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content