Plant Cell Reports

, Volume 15, Issue 8, pp 561–565 | Cite as

Stress-induced microspore embryogenesis in tobacco: an optimized system for molecular studies

  • Alisher Touraev
  • Andi Ilham
  • Oscar Vicente
  • Erwin Heberle-Bors


Specific stress treatments applied to isolated tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) microspores efficiently induced haploid embryo formation in vitro. A heat shock at 33 or 37°C in the presence of sugar, as well as sucrose-starvation at 25°C, resulted in the formation of embryogenic microspores. A combination of both treatments had an additive effect. Under optimal induction conditions all viable microspores in the culture were embryogenic and developed subsequently into pollen embryos by culture at 25°C in a sugar-containing medium, with induction frequencies of more than 70% with respect to the initial microspore population. A high fraction of the early pollen embryos continued their development in vitro, giving rise to haploid plants. In contrast to other available systems for microspore/pollen embryogenesis, the new protocol allows the production of homogeneous populations of embryogenic microspores and early globular embryos in large-scale cultures, without any purification step, and is therefore well suited for biochemical and molecular work.


Embryo Formation Haploid Plant Induction Frequency Globular Embryo Microspore Embryogenesis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.







Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Benito Moreno RM, Macke F, Alwen A, Heberle-Bors E (1988a) Planta 176:145–148Google Scholar
  2. Benito Moreno RM, Macke F, Hauser M-T, Alwen A, Heberle-Bors E (1988b) In: Cresti M, Gori P, Pacini E (eds) Sexual reproduction in higher plants, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 137–142Google Scholar
  3. Cordewener JHG, Busink R, Traas JA, Custers JBM, Dons HJM, Van Lookeren Campagne MM (1994) Planta 195:50–56Google Scholar
  4. Garrido D, Charvat B, Benito Moreno RM, Alwen A, Vicente O, Heberle Bors E (1991) In: Negrutiu I, Gharti-Chhetri G (eds) A laboratory guide for cellular and molecular plant biology. Birkhäuser, Basel, pp 59–69Google Scholar
  5. Garrido D, Eller N, Heberle-Bors E, Vicente O (1993) Sex Plant Reprod 6:40–45Google Scholar
  6. Heberle-Bors E (1989) Sex Plant Reprod 2:1–10Google Scholar
  7. Heberle-Bors E, Reinert J (1981) Protoplasma 109:249–255Google Scholar
  8. Horner M, Street HE (1978) Ann Bot 42:763–777Google Scholar
  9. Kyo M, Harada H (1986) Planta 168:427–432Google Scholar
  10. Kyo M, Harada H (1990) J Plant Physiol 137:525–529Google Scholar
  11. Lichter R (1985) In: Sorensen H (ed) Cruciferous crops: production, utilization, description, Volume II. Nijhoff/Junk, Dordrecht Boston Lancaster, pp 268–277Google Scholar
  12. Morrison RA, Evans DA (1988) Biotechnology 6:684–690Google Scholar
  13. Murashige T, Skoog F (1962) Physiol Plant 15:473–497Google Scholar
  14. Pechan PM, Bartels D, Brown DCW, Schell J (1991) Planta 184:161–165Google Scholar
  15. Pechan PM, Keller WA (1988) Physiol Plant 74:377–384Google Scholar
  16. Sunderland N, Wicks FM (1971) J Exp Bot 5:213–226Google Scholar
  17. Tupý J, Ríhová L, Zárský V (1991) Sex Plant Reprod 4:284–287Google Scholar
  18. Vergne P, Delvallée I, Dumas C (1987) Stain Technol 62:299–304Google Scholar
  19. Vicente O, Benito Moreno RM, Heberle-Bors E (1991) Cell Biol Rev 25:295–306.Google Scholar
  20. Zárský V, Garrido D, Eller N, Tupý J, Vicente O, Schöffl F, Heberle-Bors E (1995) Plant Cell Environ 18:139–147Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alisher Touraev
    • 1
  • Andi Ilham
    • 1
  • Oscar Vicente
    • 1
  • Erwin Heberle-Bors
    • 1
  1. 1.Vienna Biocenter, Institute of Microbiology and GeneticsUniversity of ViennaViennaAustraia

Personalised recommendations