Theoretical and Applied Genetics

, Volume 75, Issue 1, pp 151–156 | Cite as

Somatic hybridization between birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus L.) and L. conimbricensis Willd

  • R. L. Wright
  • D. A. Somers
  • R. L. McGraw
Originals
Received:
Accepted:

Summary

Somatic hybrid plants were produced by fusion of birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus) cv ‘Leo’ and L. conimbricensis Willd. protoplasts. Birdsfoot trefoil etiolated hypocotyl protoplasts were inactivated with iodoacetate to inhibit cell division prior to fusion with L. conimbricensis suspension culture protoplasts. L. conimbricensis protoplasts divided to form callus which did not regenerate plants. Thus, plant regeneration from protoplast-derived callus was used to tentatively identify somatic hybrid cell lines. Plants regenerated from three cell lines exhibited additive combinations of parental isozymes of phosphoglucomutase, and L. conimbricensis-specific esterases indicating that they were somatic hybrids. The somatic chromosome number of one somatic hybrid was 36. The other somatic hybrid exhibited variable chromosome numbers ranging from 33 to 40. These observations approximate the expected combination of the birdsfoot trefoil (2n=4x=24) and L. conimbricensis (2n=2x=12) genomes. Somatic hybrid flowers were less yellow than birdsfoot trefoil flowers and had purple keel tips, a trait inherited from the white flowered L. conimbricensis. Somatic hybrids also had inflorescence structure that was intermediate to the parents. Fifteen somatic hybrid plants regenerated from the three callus lines were male sterile. Successul fertilization in backcrosses with birdsfoot trefoil pollen has not yet been obtained suggesting that the hybrids are also female sterile. This is the first example of somatic hybridization between these two sexually incompatible Lotus species.

Key words

Lotus corniculatus Lotus conimbricensis Somatic hybridization Protoplast 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ahuja PS, Hadiuzzaman S, Davey MR, Cocking EC (1983) Prolific plant regeneration from protoplast-derived tissues of Lotus corniculatus L. (birdsfoot trefoil). Plant Cell Rep 2:101–104Google Scholar
  2. Barsby TL, Yarrow SA, Shepard JF (1984) Heterokaryon identification through simultaneous fluorescence of tetramethylrhodamine isothiocyanate and fluorescein isothiocyanate labelled protoplasts. Stain Technol 59:217–220Google Scholar
  3. Brecheisen DM (1971) An investigation of seed pod indehiscence and anatomy in Lotus japonicus Regel. MS Thesis, Purdue University, Lafayette, IndGoogle Scholar
  4. Buzzell RI, Wilsie CP (1963) Genetic investigations of brown keel tip color in Lotus corniculatus L. Crop Sci 3:128–130Google Scholar
  5. Cook FS, Waiden DB (1965) The male gametophyte of Zea mays L. Can J Bot 43:779–782Google Scholar
  6. Davis BJ (1964) Disc electrophoresis II. Method and application to human serum proteins. Ann NY Acad Sci 121:404–427Google Scholar
  7. Dawson CDR (1941) Tetrasomic inheritance in Lotus corniculatus L. J Genet 42:49–72Google Scholar
  8. Frearson EM, Power JB, Cocking EC (1973) The isolation, culture and regeneration of Petunia leaf protoplasts. Dev Biol 33:130–137Google Scholar
  9. Gamborg OL, Miller RA, Ojima K (1968) Nutrient requirements of suspension cultures of soybean root cells. Exp Cell Res 50:151–158Google Scholar
  10. Gershon D (1961) Breeding for resistance to pod dehiscence in birdsfoot trefoil, (Lotus corniculatus L.), and some studies of the anatomy of pods, cytology and genetics of several Lotus species and their interspecific hybrids. PhD Thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, NYGoogle Scholar
  11. Giri N, Taylor NL, Collins GB (1981) Chromosome numbers in some Trifolium species with a karyotype for T. physodes. Can J Genet Cytol 23:621–624Google Scholar
  12. Grant WF (1965) A chromosome atlas and interspecific hybridization index for the genus Lotus (Leguminosae). Can J Genet Cytol 7:457–471Google Scholar
  13. Grant WF, Marten GC (1985) Birdsfoot trefoil. In: Heath ME, Barnes RF, Metcalfe DS (eds) Forages. Iowa State University Press, Ames, pp 98–108Google Scholar
  14. Grant WF, Bullen MR, De Nettancourt D (1962) The cytogenetics of Lotus. I. Embryo-cultured interspecific diploid hybrids closely related to L. corniculatus L. Can J Genet Cytol 4:105–128Google Scholar
  15. Harms CT (1983) Somatic incompatibility in the development of higher plant somatic hybrids. Q Rev Biol 58:325–353Google Scholar
  16. Kao KN (1975) A nuclear staining method for plant protoplasts. In: Gamborg OL, Wetter LR (eds) Plant tissue culture methods. National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, pp 60–62Google Scholar
  17. Kao KN, Michayluk MR (1975) Nutritional requirements for growth of Vicia hajastana cells and protoplasts at a very low population density in liquid media. Planta 126:105–110Google Scholar
  18. McGraw RL, Beuselinck PR (1983) Growth and seed yield characteristics of birdsfoot trefoil. Agron J 75:443–446Google Scholar
  19. Medgyesy P, Menczel L, Maliga P (1980) The use of cytoplasmic streptomycin resistance: chloroplast transfer from Nicotiana tabacum into Nicotiana sylvestris, and isolation of their somatic hybrids. Mol Gen Genet 179:693–698Google Scholar
  20. Menczel L, Wolfe K (1984) High frequency of fusion induced in freely suspended protoplast mixtures by polyethylene glycol and dimethylsulfoxide at high pH. Plant Cell Rep 3:196–198Google Scholar
  21. Murashige T, Skoog F (1962) A revised medium for rapid growth and bioassays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol Plant 15:473–497Google Scholar
  22. Phillips RL, Keim WF (1968) Seed pod dehiscence in Lotus and interspecific hybridization involving L. corniculatus L. Crop Sci 8:18–21Google Scholar
  23. Power JB, Frearson EM, Hayward C, George D, Evans PK, Berry SF, Cocking EC (1976) Somatic hybridization of Petunia hybrida and P. parodii. Nature London 263:500–502Google Scholar
  24. Power JB, Berry SF, Chapman JV, Cocking EC (1980) Somatic hybridization of sexually incompatible Petunias: Petunia parodii, Petunia parviflora. Theor Appl Genet 57:1–4Google Scholar
  25. Uchimiya H (1982) Somatic hybridization between male sterile Nicotiana tabacum and N. glutinosa through protoplast fusion. Theor Appl Genet 61:69–72Google Scholar
  26. Uchimiya H, Murashige T (1974) Evaluation of parameters in the isolation of viable protoplasts from cultured tobacco cells. Plant Physiol 54:936–944Google Scholar
  27. Vallejos CE (1983) Enzyme activity staining. In: Tanksley SD, Orton TJ (eds) Isozymes in plant genetics and breeding. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 469–516Google Scholar
  28. Widholm JM (1982) The use of fluorescein diacetate and phenosafranine for determining the viability of cultured plant cells. Stain Technol 47:189–194Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. L. Wright
    • 1
  • D. A. Somers
    • 1
  • R. L. McGraw
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Agronomy and Plant GeneticsUniversity of MinnesotaSt. PaulUSA
  2. 2.Department of AgronomyUniversity of MissouriColumbiaUSA

Personalised recommendations