Journal of Plant Biochemistry and Biotechnology

, Volume 19, Issue 1, pp 119–122 | Cite as

Study of Antioxidant Enzymes Activity during Organogenesis and In Vitro Propagation of Asiatic Hybrid Lily

Short Communication

Abstract

A protocol for indirect differentiation of shoots / roots from leaf callus of Asiatic hybrid lily was developed through in vitro methods. The involvement of antioxidant enzymes, like, SOD, POX and CAT, and their isoenzymes during organogenesis in the morphogenetic callus was stud ied.The activity of these enzymes was increased during early development and differentiation of callus. SOD activity increased significantly as compared to POX and CAT during root formation, while it decreased in shoot formation and the decrease was significant in POX and CAT enzymes. The results indicate that the organogenesis is a very complicated biological process involving up and down regulation of a number of antioxidant enzymes, which seem to play an important role during organogenesis of Lilium callus.

Key words

antioxidant enzymes Asiatic hybrid lily isoenzymes POX SOD CAT 

Abbreviations

CAT

catalase

EDTA

ethylene diaminetetra acetic acid

NAA

α-naphthaleneacetic acid

POX

peroxidase

PVP

polyvinylpolypyrrolidone

PMSF

phenazine methosulfate

SOD

superoxide dismutase

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Dadlani NK, In Cut flowers of Asia, (MK Papademetriou, Editors), FAO of UN, RAP Publication No. 1998114, Thailand, (1998) pp 85.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Misra P & Datta SK, Curr Sci, 81 (2001) 1530.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Misra P & Kochhar S, J Plant Biochem Biotechnol, 17 (2008) 45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bacchetta L, Remotti PC, Bernardini C & Saccardo F, Plant Cell Tissue and Organ Cult. 74 (2003) 37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Varshney A, Dharran V & Srirrastarra PS, In Vitro Cell Dev Biol — Plant, 36 (2000) 383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Seon JH, Kim YS, Son SH & Paek KY, Acta Horticult, 520 (2000) 53.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lian ML, Chakrabarty D & Paek KY, Biol. Plant, 46 (2003) 199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Han B-H, Yae B-W, Yu H-J & Paek KY, Sci Horticult 103 (2005) 351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Agarwal V & Subhan S, Plant Cell Biotech Mol Biol 4 (2003) 83.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Khanna-Chopra R & Sabarinath S, BBRC 320 (2004) 1187.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Benson EE, In Vitro Cell Dev Biol — Plant, 36 (2000) 163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chakrabarty D, Chatterjee J & Datta SK, Plant Growth Regul, 53 (2007) 107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chakrabarty D & Datta SK, Acte Physiol Plant 30 (2008) 325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Murashige T & Skoog F, Physiol Plant 15 (1962) 473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lowry OH, Roserbrough NJ, Farr AL & Randall HJ, J Biol Chem, 193 (1951) 265.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Beauchamp C & Fridorrich I, Ann Biochem 44 (1971) 276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kochhar S & Kochhar VK, Plant Sci 168 (2005) 921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kochhar S & Kochhar VK, Planta 228 (2008) 307.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gupta S & Datta S, Biol Plant 47 (2003) 179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Marinescu G, Badea E, Babeanu C & Glodeanu E, Plant Peroxidase Newsletter 14 (1999) 79.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Plant Transformation LaboratoryNational Botanical Research Institute, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR)LucknowIndia
  2. 2.Plant Physiology and Biotechnology DivisionNational Botanical Research Institute, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR)LucknowIndia

Personalised recommendations