The third vegetative generation of a field-grown transgenic pineapple clone shows minor side effects of transformation on plant physiological parameters
详细信息 查看全文
- 作者：Lourdes Yabor ; Bárbara Valle…
- 关键词：Ananas comosus (L.) Merr ; Plant transformation ; Field performance
- 刊名：Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture
- 出版年：2016
- 出版时间：May 2016
- 年：2016
- 卷：125
- 期：2
- 页码：303-308
- 全文大小：355 KB
- 参考文献：Aragón C, Carvalho L, González J, Escalona M, Amâncio S (2012) The physiology of ex vitro pineapple (Ananas comosus L. Merr. var MD-2) as CAM or C3 is regulated by the environmental conditions. Plant Cell Rep 31:757–769CrossRef PubMed
Bewley JD, Black M (1995) Seeds: physiology of development and germination. Plenum Press, New York
Broglie KE, Gaynor JJ, Broglie RM (1986) Ethylene-regulated gene expression: molecular cloning of the genes encoding an endochitinase from Phaseolus vulgaris. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 83:6820–6824CrossRef PubMed PubMedCentral
Christensen AH, Sharrock RA, Quail PH (1992) Maize polyubiquitin genes: structure, thermal perturbation of expression and transcript splicing, and promoter activity following transfer to protoplasts by electroporation. Plant Mol Biol 18:675–689CrossRef PubMed
Conner AJ, Glare TR, Nap JP (2003) The release of genetically modified crops into the environment. Part II. Overview of ecological risk assessment. Plant J 33:19–46CrossRef PubMed
EFSA (2010) Statistical considerations for the safety evaluation of GMOs. EFSA J 8:59
EFSA (2011) Guidance on selection of comparators for the risk assessment of genetically modified plants and derived food and feed. EFSA J 9:1–20
Espinosa P, Lorenzo JC, Iglesias A, Yabor L, Menéndez E, Borroto J, Hernández L, Arencibia A (2002) Production of pineapple transgenic plants assisted by temporary immersion bioreactors. Plant Cell Rep 21:136–140CrossRef
Faize M, Malnoy M, Dupuis F, Chevalier M, Parisi L, Chevreau E (2003) Chitinases of Trichoderma atroviride induce Scab resistance and some metabolic changes in two cultivars of apple. Phytopathology 93:1496–1504CrossRef PubMed
Franck A, Guilley H, Jonard G, Richards K, Hirth L (1980) Nucleotide sequence of cauliflower mosaic virus DNA. Cell 21:285–294CrossRef PubMed
González R, Serrato R, Molina J, Aragón C, Olalde V, Pulido L, Dibut B, Lorenzo JC (2013) Biochemical and physiological changes produced by Azotobacter chroococcum (INIFAT5 strain) on pineapple in vitro-plantlets during acclimatization. Acta Physiol Plant 35:3483–3487CrossRef
Gurr S, McPherson J, Bowles D (1992) Lignin and associated phenolic acids in cell walls. In: Wilkinson DL (ed) Molecular plant pathology. Oxford Press, Oxford, pp 51–56
IFST (2014) Genetic modification and food. Institute of Food Science and Technology http://www.ifstorg/knowledge-centre/information-statements/genetic-modification-and-food-0 . Accessed 16 Aug 2015
Kamoun S (2001) Non-host resistance to Phytophthora: novel prospects for a classical problem. Plant Biol 4:295–300
Kluge M, Ting I (1978) Crassulacean acid metabolism: analysis of an ecological adaptation. Springer, BerlinCrossRef
Lorenzo JC, Ojeda E, Espinosa A, Borroto C (2001) Field performance of temporary immersion bioreactor-derived sugarcane plants. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol-Plant 37:803–806CrossRef
Martínez-Montero ME, Ojeda E, Espinosa A, Sánchez M, Castillo R, González-Arnao MT, Engelmann F, Lorenzo JC (2002) Field performance of cryopreserved callus-derived sugarcane plants. Cryo-Letters 23:21–26PubMed
Osmond CB, Austin MP, Berry JA, Billings WD, Boyer JS, Dacey JWH, Nobel PS, Smith SD, Winner WE (1987) Stress physiology and the distribution of plants. BioScience 37:38–48 CrossRef
Pérez G, Yanez E, Isidrón M, Lorenzo JC (2009) Phenotypic and AFLP characterization of two new pineapple somaclones derived from in vitro culture. Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 96:113–116CrossRef
Pérez G, Yanez E, Mbogholi A, Valle B, Sagarra F, Yabor L, Aragón C, González J, Isidrón M, Lorenzo JC (2012) New pineapple somaclonal variants: P3R5 and Dwarf. Am J Plant Sci 3:1–11CrossRef
Porra R (2002) The chequered history of the development and use of simultaneous equations for the accurate determination of chlorophylls a and b. Photosynth Res 73:149–156CrossRef PubMed
Py C, Lacoeuilhe JJ, Teisson C (1987) The pineapple: cultivation and uses. Maisonneuve & Larose, Paris
Schlumbaum A, Match F, Vogeli U, Boller T (1986) Plant chitinases differ in antifungal activity. Nature 324:325–367CrossRef
Singh NK, Nelson DE, Kuhn D, Hasegawa PM, Bressant RA (1989) Molecular cloning of osmotin and regulation of its expression by ABA and adaptation to low water potential. Plant Physiol 90:1096–1101CrossRef PubMed PubMedCentral
Sripaoraya S, Keawsompong S, Insupa P, Power JB, Davey MR, Srinives P (2006) Genetically manipulated pineapple: transgene stability, gene expression and herbicide tolerance under field conditions. Plant Breed 125:411–413CrossRef
Thompson CJ, Movva NR, Tizard R, Crameri R, Davies JE, Lauwereys M, Botterman J (1987) Characterization of the herbicide-resistance gene bar from Streptomyces higroscopicus. EMBO J 6:2523–2527
Torres AC, Nagata RT, Ferl RJ, Bewick TA, Cantliffe DJ (1999) In vitro assay selection of glyphosate resistance in lettuce. J Am Soc Hort Sci 1:86–89
Ventura J, Zambolim L, Chaves G (1996) Tissue culture technique for rapid clonal propagation of pineapple cultivars. Acta Hort 425:161–166
Woloshuk CP, Meulenhoff JS, Sela-Buurlage M, Van den Elzen PJM, Cornelissen BJC (1991) Pathogen-induced proteins with inhibitory activity toward Phytophthora infestans. Plant Cell 3:619–628CrossRef PubMed PubMedCentral
Yabor L, Arzola M, Aragón C, Hernández M, Arencibia A, Lorenzo JC (2006) Biochemical side effects of genetic transformation of pineapple. Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 86:63–67CrossRef
Yabor L, Aragón C, Hernández M, Arencibia A, Lorenzo JC (2008) Biochemical side effects of the herbicide FINALE on bar gene-containing transgenic pineapple plantlets. Euphytica 164:515–520CrossRef
Yabor L, Valle B, Carvajal C, Aragón C, Hernández M, González J, Daquinta M, Arencibia A, Lorenzo JC (2010) Characterization of a field-grown transgenic pineapple clone containing the genes chitinase, AP24, and bar. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 46:1–7CrossRef
Yanes PE, González J, Sánchez R (2000) A technology of acclimatization of pineapple vitroplants. Pineap News 7:24 - 作者单位：Lourdes Yabor (1)
Bárbara Valle (1)
René Carlos Rodríguez (1)
Carlos Aragón (1)
Jutta Papenbrock (2)
Christoph C. Tebbe (3)
José Carlos Lorenzo (1)
1. Laboratory for Plant Breeding, Bioplant Center, University of Ciego de Avila, Ciego de Ávila, 69450, Cuba
2. Institute of Botany, Leibniz University Hannover, Herrenhaeuser Str. 2, 30419, Hannover, Germany
3. Federal Research Institut for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries, Thünen Insititut of Biodiversity, Brunswick, Germany - 刊物类别：Biomedical and Life Sciences
- 刊物主题：Life Sciences
Plant Sciences
Plant Physiology - 出版者：Springer Netherlands
- ISSN：1573-5044
文摘
Genetic modifications of pineapple provide the potential to increase fungal resistance without the use of pesticides. Previously, we developed a procedure for pineapple callus transformation, introducing the antifungal chitinase and AP24 genes, and the herbicide-tolerance conferring bar gene as a selectable marker. The three recombinant genes were under the control of the constitutively expressing promoters OCS-35S CaMV-rice actin I, 35S CaMV, and maize Ubi1, respectively. The objective of this study was to analyze whether these genetic modifications caused unintentional side effects on growth-related properties under field conditions. We analyzed the third vegetative generation of a transgenic pineapple clone, approximately 7 years after the genetic modification occurred. Plant height and diameter, chlorophyll and phenolic contents, fruit mass and D leaf (middle-age) mass, water content, succulence, sap pH, transpiration, CO2 assimilation, and water use efficiency were recorded and compared to a micro-propagated cultivar. A macro-propagated variant was also cultivated at the field site in order to distinguish unintended effects of the propagation method from that of the genetic modification. While all parameters analyzed in this study were highly similar to each other for the three cultivars, statistically analyses revealed significant deviations of the genetically modified variant for the succulence index being higher at in the morning and evening, carbon dioxide assimilation being lower at noon and, at night, the water use efficiency was lower. The minor deviations were all within the range which can be expected between common cultivars grown together.