Establishment of a Highly Efficient In Vitro Propagation System of Diospyros lotus
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Plant Materials
2.2. Drug Information
2.3. Sterilization of Explants
2.4. Induction and Culture of Axillary Buds
2.5. Leaf Disc Callus Induction
2.6. Induction of Adventitious Shoots from Callus
2.7. Observation of Callus Tissue Morphology
2.8. Adventitious Shoot Proliferation in Culture
2.9. Rooting Culture
2.10. Conditions of the Culture
2.11. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Sterilization of Explants
3.2. Induction and Culture of Axillary Buds
3.3. Leaf-Disc Callus Induction
3.4. Induction of Adventitious Shoots from Calli
3.5. Growth of Calli after Multiple Induction of Adventitious Shoots
3.6. Morphological Observation of Calli
3.7. Adventitious Shoot Proliferation
3.8. Rooting Culture
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
6. Patents
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Liu, Z.C.; Cao, W.; Xue, X.J.; Guo, Z.P.; Liu, L.K. Study on genetic diversity of phenotypic traits in wild populations of different Diospyros lotus. J. Henan Inst. Sci. Technol. 2021, 49, 19–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, T.; Yu, Z.; Xia, L.; Yang, Y.; Wang, R. Cluster analysis based on morphologi caltraits of dateplum (Diospyros lotus) germplasm resources. J. Fruit Sci. 2014, 31, 566–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rauf, A.; Uddin, G.; Siddiqui, B.S.; Khan, H. In vivo sedative and muscle relaxants activity of Diospyros lotus. Asian Pac. J. Trop. Biomed. 2015, 5, 277–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koekemoer, T.C.; Swanepoel, B.; Rashed, K.; Van De Venter, M. Diospyros lotus L. fruit: A potential antidiabetic functional food targeting intestinal starch hydrolysis. Egypt. J. Chem. 2021, 64, 2445–2451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, X.; Jiang, Z.; Shen, Y.; Li, F.; Yu, X.; Qu, S. In vitro regeneration and Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated genetic transformation of D. lotus (Diospyros lotus L.). Sci. Hortic. 2018, 236, 229–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dai, Z.G.; Guo, J.; Guo, J.C.; Zheng, W.M. Persimmon seedling raising and grafting technology. Chin. Fruits Veg. 2012, 173, 36–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, W.T.; Jiao, M.; Wang, J.H. Progress in the genomics of medicinal plants. Guangdong Agric. Sci. 2021, 48, 138–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wei, W.H.; Yang, Y.T.; Bai, Y.J.; Yijie, W.; Wenlong, Y.; Ruijin, Z. Culture study of D. lotus stem segment. Mod. Hortic. 2020, 43, 27–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grover, A.; Singh, S.; Pandey, P.; Patade, V.Y.; Gupta, S.M.; Yadav, A.; Jadon, A.; Bhatt, H.; Prakash, O.; Bhatt, B.B.; et al. Efficient tissue culture independent agrobacterium mediated gen etic transformation protocols for solanum lycopersicum. Plant Cell Biotechnol. Mol. Biol. 2015, 16, 20–28. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, N.N. Establishment of Crispr/cas9 technology and its application on Diospyros lotus L. Cent. China Agric. Univ. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, M.; Takeishi, H.; Katayama, A.; Tao, R. Genetic transformation of Japanese persimmon with Flowering locus T (FT) gene and Terminal flower 1 (TFL1) homologues gene. Acta Hortic. 2013, 996, 159–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmadpoor, F.; Zare, N.; Asghari, R.; Sheikhzadeh, P. Sterilization protocols and the effect of plant growth regulators on callus induction and secondary metabolites production in in vitro cultures Melia azedarach L. AMB Express 2022, 12, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Li, Z.; Tan, X.F.; Yuan, J.; Lu, K.; Zhang, L.; Lin, Q.; Lv, J.B. Tissue culture and highly efficient rooting of Camellia oleifera ‘Huashuo’. Plant Physiol. J. 2014, 50, 1721–1726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, M.; Ruichao, H.; Dekui, Z.; Riming, H. Research advances in the tissue culture of woody ornamental plant. J. Anhui Agric. Sci. 2012, 40, 1956–1958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cijiang, C.; Kunying, W.; Wenwen, Z.; Chunpeng, L.; Wei, W.; Hang, Z. Effect of sterilizing method and concentration of ZT on blueberry plantlet in vitro proliferation. J. Tianjin Agric. Coll. 2019, 26, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, Q.X.; Huang, M.L.; Wu, X.P.; Zhuang, D.H. Plant regeneration from leaves of date plum (Diospyros lotus L.). Sci. Agric. Sin. 2008, 41, 607–612. [Google Scholar]
- Xie, Q.X.; Zhuang, D.H. Developing of plant regeneration system from leaf explants of date plum (Diospyros oleifera Cheng). China Agric. Sci. Bull. 2008, 8, 136–139. [Google Scholar]
- Li, C.; Fu, J.M.; Wang, S.; Wen, Y.F.; Yan, C.; Sun, P.; Diao, F.S.; Han, W.J. Establishment of Tissue Culture Regeneration System of Diospyros kaki cv. Youhou. J. Northwest For. Coll. 2016, 31, 159–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, K.; Jia, C.F. Study on Tissue Culture “Fuyu” Persimmon (Diospyros kaki Thunb.). J. Baoding Teach. Coll. 2007, 69, 51–52+62. [Google Scholar]
- Nauli, R.; Yuniati, R.; Handayani, W. In vitro culture of leaf explant Melasto ma malabathricum L. on Murashige & Skoog (1962) modified medium with thidiazuron (TDZ) and 1-naphthaleneacetic acid (NAA). IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2020, 481, 012025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tetsumura, T. Effect of types of cytokinin used for in vitro shoot proliferation of japanese persimmon on the subsequent rooting of shoots. Acta Hortic. 1997, 436, 143–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmad, I.; Khan, T.; Ashraf, I.; Nafees, M. Lethal effects of secondary metabolites on plant tissue culture. Am. Eurasian J. Agric. Environ. Sci. 2013, 13, 539–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, L.J.; Wang, H. Research progress on tissue culture and existing problems of forest plants. For. Sci. Res. 2016, 29, 464–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gong, Y.F.; Chen, F.; Zhang, Z.P.; Zhang, M.X.; Su, M.J.; Yang, Z.H.; Wei, Y.B.; Zhang, y.y.; Gao, Z.R.; Wei, Y.J. A review of studies on rooting of plant tissue culture seedlings. Anhui Agric. Sci. 2022, 50, 5–8. [Google Scholar]
75% Ethanol | Disinfectant | Disinfection Time | Browning Rate % | Contamination Rate % | Axillary Bud Survival Rate % |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
25 sec | 2% NaClO | 15 min | 30.8 ± 3.6d (33) | 36.7 ± 5.3b (33) | 25.0 ± 1.6b (23) |
25 sec | 20 min | 45 ± 1.2c (41) | 33.3 ± 1.3b (30) | 21.7 ± 4.2b (20) | |
25 sec | 25 min | 51.7 ± 4.4b (47) | 30.0 ± 3.2bc (27) | 18.3 ± 3.6c (16) | |
25 sec | 5% NaClO | 8 min | 36.7 ± 2.1d (33) | 36.6 ± 5.3b (33) | 26.7 ± 4.7b (24) |
25 sec | 10 min | 43.4 ± 4.8c (40) | 35.0 ± 2.2b (32) | 21.6 ± 5.8b (19) | |
25 sec | 12 min | 65.0 ± 4.2a (59) | 16.7 ± 3.3d (15) | 18.3 ± 6.3c (16) | |
25 sec | 0.1% HgCl2 | 20 min | 33.7 ± 2.5e (12) | 21.3 ± 7.5c (19) | 45.0 ± 7.3a (41) |
25 sec | 25 min | 35.0 ± 1.9e (13) | 11.7 ± 2.5d (11) | 53.3 ± 6.6a (48) | |
25 sec | 30 min | 42.1 ± 4.5d (28) | 11.2 ± 3.2e (10) | 46.7 ± 9.5a (42) | |
25 sec | 10% H2O2 | 8 min | 38.4 ± 3.2d (35) | 48.3 ± 2.4a (43) | 13.3 ± 3.3c (12) |
25 sec | 16 min | 39.9 ± 5.4c (41) | 40.8 ± 5.6a (37) | 19.3 ± 2.3c (17) | |
25 sec | 24 min | 64.4± 8.8a (58) | 23.3 ± 3.7c (21) | 11.7 ± 2.4c (11) |
Culture Medium | 6-BA mg/L | NAA mg/L | Sprouting Rate % | Sprouting Time D |
---|---|---|---|---|
1/2 MS | 0 | 0 | 3.2 ± 0.2e (3) | 29.3 ± 3.4 a |
1/2 MS | 1 | 0 | 27.3 ± 5.7d (25) | 22.0 ± 2.7 b |
1/2 MS | 2 | 0 | 30.4 ± 1.3d (27) | 20.4 ± 5.9 bc |
1/2 MS | 3 | 0 | 25.2 ± 6.9d (23) | 21.8 ± 5.4 b |
1/2 MS | 1 | 0.5 | 42.4 ± 2.2c (38) | 19.6 ± 3.3 c |
1/2 MS | 2 | 0.5 | 67.1 ± 4.7a (60) | 17.2 ± 1.9 c |
1/2 MS | 3 | 0.5 | 53.3 ± 6.6b (48) | 21.4 ± 4.7 b |
1/2 MS | 1 | 1 | 22.7 ± 3.6d (20) | 23.7 ± 5.8 b |
1/2 MS | 2 | 1 | 25.8 ± 8.2d (23) | 23.0 ± 3.6 b |
1/2 MS | 3 | 1 | 24.2 ± 3.3d (22) | 26.1 ± 2.7 a |
(1/2N) MS | 2 | 0.5 | 55.6 ± 3.8b (50) | 22.5 ± 2.3 b |
MS | 2 | 0.5 | 40.2 ± 8.2c (36) | 23.6 ± 1.9 b |
WPM | 2 | 0.5 | 43.5 ± 6.1c (39) | 20.4 ± 4.7 bc |
Culture Medium | BA mg/L | NAA mg/L | Rate of Callus Induction % | Browning Rate % |
---|---|---|---|---|
1/2 MS | 1.0 | 0 | 3.6 ± 1.6g (3) | 8.0 ± 1.3d |
1/2 MS | 2.0 | 0 | 15.2 ± 3.3f (14) | 7.3 ± 1.2d |
1/2 MS | 3.0 | 0 | 22.5 ± 3.6e (20) | 11.3 ± 2.3c |
1/2 MS | 1.0 | 0.5 | 55.4 ± 6.7c (50) | 6.2 ± 1.6d |
1/2 MS | 2.0 | 0.5 | 82.3 ± 3.7a (74) | 6.7 ± 1.7d |
1/2 MS | 3.0 | 0.5 | 67.4 ± 2.6b (61) | 11.5 ± 3.3c |
1/2 MS | 1.0 | 1.0 | 40.5 ± 3.3d (36) | 15.0 ± 4.4bc |
1/2 MS | 2.0 | 1.0 | 55.2 ± 2.6c (50) | 18.9 ± 1.3b |
1/2 MS | 3.0 | 1.0 | 43.7 ± 2.7d (39) | 25.3 ± 3.5a |
(1/2N) MS | 2.0 | 0.5 | 72.5 ± 8.7b (65) | 8.7 ± 4.5d |
MS | 2.0 | 0.5 | 80.5 ± 9.3a (72) | 19.7 ± 2.3b |
WPM | 2.0 | 0.5 | 44.3 ± 8.6d (40) | 11.7 ± 3.3c |
Culture Medium | 2iP mg/L | TDZ mg/L | NAA mg/L | Sucrose Concentration g/L | The Average Number of Adventitious Shoots | Adventitious Shoot Induction Rate (%) | Growth Condition |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1/2 MS | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | No adventitious shoots. |
1/2 MS | 0 | 1 | 0 | 40 | 0 | 0 | No adventitious shoots. |
1/2 MS | 0 | 2 | 0 | 40 | 1.2 ± 0.3f | 10.2 ± 2.7e | The leaves showed severe browning and the buds were prone to die. |
1/2 MS | 0 | 3 | 0 | 40 | 1.7 ± 0.5f | 14.5 ± 4.4e | The basal leaves showed severe browning. |
1/2 MS | 1 | 0 | 0 | 40 | 0 | 0 | No adventitious shoots. |
1/2 MS | 2 | 0 | 0 | 40 | 0 | 0 | No adventitious shoots. |
1/2 MS | 3 | 0 | 0 | 40 | 0 | 0 | No adventitious shoots. |
1/2 MS | 1 | 1 | 0.5 | 40 | 2.0 ± 1.3e | 30.4 ± 2.2c | The leaves were curled and small, and the buds were prone to die. |
1/2 MS | 2 | 1 | 0.5 | 40 | 2.3 ± 0.8e | 42.8 ± 3.1b | The leaves were large, and the adventitious shoots were prone to die. |
1/2 MS | 3 | 1 | 0.5 | 40 | 1.4 ± 0.3f | 36.7 ± 5.6c | The leaves were small and thin, with more cluster buds. |
1/2 MS | 1 | 2 | 0.5 | 40 | 4.2 ± 2.4c | 42.9 ± 7.3b | The leaves were smaller and grew more vigorously. |
1/2 MS | 2 | 2 | 0.5 | 40 | 7.9 ± 3.3a | 75.2 ± 8.4a | The leaves were large and green, and they grew extremely vigorously. |
1/2 MS | 3 | 2 | 0.5 | 40 | 5.5 ± 2.5b | 47.6 ± 3.3b | The leaves were fine, and the stem was tall and thick. |
1/2 MS | 1 | 3 | 0.5 | 40 | 2.2 ± 1.3e | 31.1 ± 3.4c | The basal leaves showed severe browning. |
1/2 MS | 2 | 3 | 0.5 | 40 | 4.2 ± 1.7c | 34.6 ± 9.2c | The leaves were yellow and the stems were short. |
1/2 MS | 3 | 3 | 0.5 | 40 | 1.1 ± 0.4f | 21.3 ± 1.1d | The leaves were curled up, and the stems were thick and long. |
1/2 MS | 2 | 2 | 0.5 | 30 | 4.1 ± 1.6c | 30.6 ± 5.4c | The basal leaves showed severe browning. |
1/2 MS | 2 | 2 | 0.5 | 50 | 4.4 ± 2.8c | 45.2 ± 6.7b | The leaves were yellow and small, and the base callus was severely browned. |
(1/2N) MS | 2 | 2 | 0.5 | 40 | 3.9 ± 1.5d | 41.3 ± 5.8b | The leaves were relatively green, and the stems were slender. |
MS | 2 | 2 | 0.5 | 40 | 2.7 ± 1.2e | 44.5 ± 7.6b | The leaves were pale green and small, and the stems were thick and long. |
WPM | 2 | 2 | 0.5 | 40 | 2.9 ± 2.15e | 39.6 ± 4.1c | The leaves were large and green, and they grew extremely vigorously. |
Generation of Differentiation | Adventitious Shoot Number | Unstable Bud Induction Rate % | Growth Condition |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 4.7 ± 1.3a | 77.8 ± 4.1a (70) | The leaves were green but small, with smaller indefinite shoots. |
2 | 5.3 ± 2.1a | 80.0 ± 4.9a (72) | The leaves were large and green, and the adventitious shoots grew vigorously. |
3 | 5.1 ± 2.3a | 75.5 ± 11.1a (68) | The leaves were large, green, and robust. |
4 | 2.1 ± 1.4b | 46.7 ± 4.9c (42) | The leaves were dry and grew very weakly. |
5 | 1.0 ± 0.4b | 31.1 ± 2.49d (28) | The basal leaves showed severe browning. |
Proliferation Algebra | Cell Area μm2 | Number of Cells | Cellular Morphology |
---|---|---|---|
First generation | 751.4 ± 16.6c | 75 ± 11a | The cell wall was intact, and the cells were arranged closely and regularly. The cells were mostly elliptical, and the cells near the bud point gathered inward and gradually became smaller. |
Second generation | 738.9 ± 25.2c | 74 ± 10a | The cell wall was intact, and the cells showed a tight, regular arrangement. The lateral cells were large, and the cell wall in the area behind the bud point was completely broken. |
Third generation | 766.6 ± 31.5c | 74 ± 12a | The cell wall was intact. The cell showed a close, regular arrangement. The lateral cells were long strips, and the internal test cells gradually became more relaxed. |
Fourth generation | 903.5 ± 43.7b | 57 ± 9b | The cell wall had ruptured, and the cells became loose and irregular. Most of the nuclei disappeared. |
Fifth generation | 1266.3 ± 14.9a | 51 ± 6b | The cell wall had ruptured, the cells were loose and irregular, and the agglomeration in the callus had completely disappeared. |
IAA mg/L | 2iP mg/L | ZT mg/L | Multiplication Coefficient | Average Plant Height cm | Growth |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.5 | 0 | 0 | 1.4 ± 0.3f | 1.3 ± 0.3d | Small leaves but long stems. |
0.05 | 1 | 1.5 | 3.5 ± 1.4e | 1.2 ± 0.2d | The leaves were long, yellow, and soft, and the stem sections were weak. |
0.05 | 2 | 1.5 | 5.5 ± 2.2c | 1.5 ± 0.1d | Leaves were small, but the overall growth was more prosperous. |
0.05 | 3 | 1.5 | 4.2 ± 2.3d | 1.4 ± 0.6d | The leaves were relatively thin, and some stem segments were weak and short. |
0.05 | 1 | 2 | 4.6 ± 1.7d | 2.6 ± 0.7b | The leaves were curled up, and the stems were soft but tall. |
0.05 | 2 | 2 | 7.6 ± 3.6a | 3.7 ± 0.5a | The leaves were green and large, and the stem segments were thick and tall. |
0.05 | 3 | 2 | 6.3 ± 2.5b | 2.9 ± 0.5b | The leaves were soft and yellow, and the leaves fell from the stems. |
0.05 | 1 | 2.5 | 4.5 ± 1.5d | 2.1 ± 0.6c | The leaves were smaller and more new shoots showed browning at the base. |
0.05 | 2 | 2.5 | 4.9 ± 1.2d | 2.3 ± 0.3c | Overall, the leaves were pale yellow with excessive base calli. |
0.05 | 3 | 2.5 | 2.7 ± 1.5f | 2.0 ± 0.5c | The leaves were small and soft, and the stem segments were short and weak. |
0 | 2 | 2 | 5.9 ± 2.1b | 1.5 ± 0.3d | The leaves were relatively green, with short and soft stems. |
0 | 1 | 0 | — | 1.2± 0.1d | No proliferation buds appeared. |
0 | 2 | 0 | — | 1.1± 0.2d | No proliferation buds appeared. |
0 | 3 | 0 | — | 1.3 ± 0.4d | No proliferation buds appeared. |
0 | 0 | 1 | — | 1.2 ± 0.1d | No proliferation buds appeared. |
0 | 0 | 2 | 1.1 ± 0.5f | 1.5 ± 0.2d | The leaves were yellow and a large number of calli were produced at the base. |
0 | 0 | 3 | 1.3 ± 0.5f | 1.5 ± 0.3d | The stems were short and a large number of calli were produced at the base. |
IBA mg/L | NAA mg/L | Sucrose Concentration g/L | Take Root Rate % | Adventitious Roots Number |
---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.5 | 0 | 15 | 15.3 ± 1.3d (14) | 2.3 ± 1.5d |
0.5 | 0.5 | 15 | 32.1 ± 1.4c (29) | 3.2 ± 1.7c |
0.5 | 1.0 | 15 | 28.4 ± 4.1c (26) | 2.5 ± 1.4e |
1.0 | 0 | 15 | 24.6 ± 3.1c (22) | 4.2 ± 0.2b |
1.0 | 0.5 | 15 | 40.1 ± 2.6b (36) | 3.4 ± 1.2c |
1.0 | 1.0 | 15 | 23.2 ± 4.7c (21) | 2.2 ± 0.2d |
1.5 | 0 | 15 | 22.1 ± 1.3c (20) | 1.5 ± 0.7e |
1.5 | 0.5 | 15 | 40.4 ± 3.5b (36) | 1.5 ± 1.1e |
1.5 | 1.0 | 15 | 21.0 ± 2.4c (19) | 4.7 ± 2.3b |
1.0 | 0.5 | 20 | 70.2 ± 2.2a (63) | 9.6 ± 2.3a |
1.0 | 0.5 | 25 | 50.1 ± 2.6b (45) | 3.4 ± 1.2c |
0 | 0.5 | 20 | 0 | 0 |
0 | 1.0 | 20 | 0 | 0 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Liu, Y.; Lu, X.; Zhang, H.; Li, S.; Li, Z. Establishment of a Highly Efficient In Vitro Propagation System of Diospyros lotus. Forests 2023, 14, 366. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14020366
Liu Y, Lu X, Zhang H, Li S, Li Z. Establishment of a Highly Efficient In Vitro Propagation System of Diospyros lotus. Forests. 2023; 14(2):366. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14020366
Chicago/Turabian StyleLiu, Yang, Xiaoyu Lu, Hui Zhang, Shuzhan Li, and Ze Li. 2023. "Establishment of a Highly Efficient In Vitro Propagation System of Diospyros lotus" Forests 14, no. 2: 366. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14020366
APA StyleLiu, Y., Lu, X., Zhang, H., Li, S., & Li, Z. (2023). Establishment of a Highly Efficient In Vitro Propagation System of Diospyros lotus. Forests, 14(2), 366. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14020366