Plant Cell Reports

, Volume 31, Issue 1, pp 167–177 | Cite as

High-throughput assessment of transgene copy number in sugarcane using real-time quantitative PCR

  • Rosanne E. CasuEmail author
  • Alexandra Selivanova
  • Jai M. Perroux
Original Paper


Accurate and timely detection of transgene copy number in sugarcane is currently hampered by the requirement to use Southern blotting, needing relatively large amounts of genomic DNA and, therefore, the continued growth and maintenance of bulky plants in containment glasshouses. In addition, the sugarcane genome is both polyploid and aneuploid, complicating the identification of appropriate genes for use as references in the development of a high-throughput method. Using bioinformatic techniques followed by in vitro testing, two genes that appear to occur once per base genome of sugarcane were identified. Using these genes as reference genes, a high-throughput assay employing RT-qPCR was developed and tested using a group of sugarcane plants that contained unknown numbers of copies of the nptII gene encoding kanamycin resistance. Using this assay, transgene copy numbers from 3 to more than 50 were identified. In comparison, Southern blotting accurately identified the number of transgene copies for one line and by inference for another, but was not able to provide an accurate estimation for transgenic lines containing numerous copies of the nptII gene. Using the reference genes identified in this study, a high-throughput assay for the determination of transgene copy number was developed and tested for sugarcane. This method requires much less input DNA, can be performed much earlier in the production of transgenic sugarcane plants and allows much more efficient assessment of numerous potentially transgenic lines than Southern blotting.


Transgene copy number Transgenic sugarcane Polyploid RT-qPCR High-throughput 



The authors would like to thank Janine Nielsen for expert technical advice and assistance, and Drs. Anne Rae, Graham Bonnett, Danny Llewellyn and Linda Tabe for critical reading of the manuscript. AS was supported by a CSIRO Plant Industry Summer Studentship.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

299_2011_1150_MOESM1_ESM.doc (38 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 38 kb)
299_2011_1150_MOESM2_ESM.ppt (226 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (PPT 225 kb)


  1. Aitken KS, Jackson PA, McIntyre CL (2005) A combination of AFLP and SSR markers provides extensive map coverage and identification of homo(eo)logous linkage groups in a sugarcane cultivar. Theor Appl Genet 110:789–801PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Meyers EW, Lipman DJ (1990) Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol 215:403–410PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Arencibia AD, Carmona ER, Tellez P, Chan MT, Yu SM, Trujillo LE, Oramas P (1998) An efficient protocol for sugarcane (Saccharum spp. L.) transformation mediated by Agrobacterium tumefaciens. Transgenic Res 7:213–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beltrán J, Jaimes H, Echeverry M, Ladino Y, López D, Duque M, Chavarriaga P, Tohme J (2009) Quantitative analysis of transgenes in cassava plants using real-time PCR technology. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 45:48–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bower R, Birch RG (1992) Transgenic sugarcane plants via microprojectile bombardment. Plant J 2:409–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bubner B, Baldwin IT (2004) Use of real-time PCR for determining copy number and zygosity in transgenic plants. Plant Cell Rep 23:263–271PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bull TA, Glasziou KT (1963) The evolutionary significance of sugar accumulation in Saccharum. Aust J Biol Sci 16:737–742Google Scholar
  8. Casu RE, Jarmey JM, Bonnett GD, Manners JM (2007) Identification of transcripts associated with cell wall metabolism and development in the stem of sugarcane by Affymetrix GeneChip Sugarcane Genome Array expression profiling. Funct Integr Genomics 7:153–167PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. D’Hont A, Grivet L, Feldmann P, Rao S, Berding N, Glaszmann JC (1996) Characterisation of the double genome structure of modern sugarcane cultivars (Saccharum spp.) by molecular cytogenetics. Mol Gen Genet 250:405–413PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Elliott AR, Campbell JA, Brettell RIS, Grof CPL (1998) Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of sugarcane using GFP as a screenable marker. Aust J Plant Physiol 25:739–743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fan MJ, Chen S, Kung YJ, Cheng YH, Bau HJ, Su TT, Yeh SD (2009) Transgene-specific and event-specific molecular markers for characterization of transgenic papaya lines resistant to Papaya ringspot virus. Transgenic Res 18:971–986PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fraley RT, Rogers SG, Horsch RB, Sanders PR, Flick JS, Adams SP, Bittner ML, Brand LA, Fink CL, Fry JS, Galluppi GR, Goldberg SB, Hoffmann NL, Woo SC (1983) Expression of bacterial genes in plant cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 80:4803–4807PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Grivet L, Arruda P (2002) Sugarcane genomics: depicting the complex genome of an important tropical crop. Curr Opin Plant Biol 5:122–127PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ingham DJ, Bee S, Money S, Hansen G (2001) Quantitative real-time PCR assay for determining transgene copy number in transformed plants. BioTechniques 31:132–140PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Joyce P, Kuwahata M, Turner N, Lakshmanan P (2010) Selection system and co-cultivation medium are important determinants of Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of sugarcane. Plant Cell Rep 29:173–183PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mason G, Provero P, Vaira AM, Accotto GP (2002) Estimating the number of integrations in transformed plants by quantitative real-time PCR. BMC Biotechnol 2:20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Paterson AH, Bowers JE, Chapman BA (2004) Ancient polyploidization predating divergence of the cereals, and its consequences for comparative genomics. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:9903–9908PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Piperidis G, Piperidis N, D’Hont A (2010) Molecular cytogenetic investigation of chromosome composition and transmission in sugarcane. Mol Genet Genomics 284:65–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ramakers C, Ruijter JM, Deprez RHL, Moorman AFM (2003) Assumption-free analysis of quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) data. Neurosci Lett 339:62–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Sambrook J, Fritsch EF, Maniatis T (1989) Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual, 2nd edn. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, PlainviewGoogle Scholar
  21. Southern EM (1975) Detection of specific sequences among DNA fragments separated by gel electrophoresis. J Mol Biol 98:503–517PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sreenivasan T, Ahloowalia B, Heinz D (1987) Cytogenetics. In: Heinz D (ed) Sugarcane improvement through breeding. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 211–253Google Scholar
  23. Welbaum G, Meinzer F (1990) Compartmentation of solutes and water in developing sugarcane stalk tissue. Plant Physiol 93:1147–1153PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rosanne E. Casu
    • 1
    Email author
  • Alexandra Selivanova
    • 1
  • Jai M. Perroux
    • 1
  1. 1.CSIRO Plant IndustryQueensland Bioscience PrecinctSt LuciaAustralia

Personalised recommendations