Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture (PCTOC)

, Volume 102, Issue 3, pp 297–307 | Cite as

A comparative analysis of the development and quality of nursery plants derived from somatic embryogenesis and from seedlings for large-scale propagation of coffee (Coffea arabica L.)

  • Andrea Menéndez-Yuffá
  • Dominique Barry-Etienne
  • Benoît Bertrand
  • Frédéric Georget
  • Hervé Etienne
Original Paper

Abstract

Plants of Coffea arabica L. derived via somatic embryogenesis, namely, somaclones, were evaluated with C. arabica seedlings grown in the nursery. At the time of their transfer to the nursery, somaclones of C. arabica cvs. Caturra and Costa Rica 95 (Catimor) were smaller and less vigorous than seedlings of the same cultivars. Following an initial slow growth for a period of 10 weeks, somaclones began to grow faster than seedlings until both groups of plants were equal in size at 21 weeks (entire duration of growth in the nursery). Comparisons of aerial and root systems of 30-cm long somaclones and seedlings of two cultivars revealed that plants of somaclones were more vigorous than seedlings, based on the higher number of leaves (13–16 vs. 9), larger leaf area (1060–1280 vs. 730–890 cm2), and greater dry weight of aerial organs (8.5–12 vs. 7.0–7.5 g). For cv. Caturra, the root dry weight of somaclones was significantly greater than that of seedlings (2.7 vs. 1.9 g) and was attributable to the large diameter roots (>0.5 mm). Analysis of 176,000 F1 hybrid somaclones revealed that these exhibited more heterogeneous growth than did the seedlings derived from zygotic embryos; moreover, there was a genotype effect. Almost 9–20% of somaclones required an additional 3–4 months of growth in the nursery, and 8–12% were culled for other undesirable horticultural attributes. Only 0.10–0.23% of somaclones displayed variant phenotypes. The observed somaclone vigor in the nursery was carried over to field performance as these plants were more precocious than seedlings and yielded coffee beans 1 year earlier than seedlings.

Keywords

Embryo conversion Micropropagation Rubiaceae Somaclone 

References

  1. Ameha M (1983) Heterosis in crosses of indigenous coffee selected for yield and resistance to coffee berry disease. I. First breeding stage. Acta Hortic 140:155–161Google Scholar
  2. Attree SM, Moore D, Sawhney VK, Fowke LC (1991) Enhanced maturation and desiccation tolerance of white spruce [Picea glauca (Moench) Voss] somatic embryos: effects of a non-plamolysing water stress and abscisic acid. Ann Bot 68:519–525Google Scholar
  3. Barry-Etienne D, Bertrand B, Vásquez N, Etienne H (1999) Direct sowing of Coffea arabica somatic embryos mass-produced in a bioreactor and regeneration of plants. Plant Cell Rep 19:111–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barry-Etienne D, Bertrand B, Schlongvoïgt A, Etienne H (2002a) The morphological variability within a population of coffee somatic embryos produced in a bioreactor affects the regeneration and the development of plants in the nursery. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 68:153–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barry-Etienne D, Bertrand B, Vásquez N, Etienne H (2002b) Comparison of somatic embryogenesis-derived coffee (Coffea arabica L.) plantlets regenerated in vitro or ex vitro conditions: morphological, mineral and water characteristics. Ann Bot 90:77–85CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bertrand B, Etienne H, Cilas C, Charrier A, Baradat P (2005) Coffea arabica hybrid performance for yield, fertility and bean weight. Euphytica 141:255–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carman JG (1988) Improved somatic embryogenesis in wheat by partial simulation of the in ovulo oxygen, growth regulator and desiccation environments. Planta 175:417–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Côte FX, Folliot M, Domergue R, Dubois C (2000) Field performance of embryogenic cell suspension-derived banana plants (Musa AAA, cv. Grande naine). Euphytica 112:245–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ducos JP, Alenton R, Reano JF, Kanchanomai C, Deshayes A, Pétiard V (2003) Agronomic performance of Coffea canephora P. trees derived from large-scale somatic embryo production in liquid medium. Euphytica 131:215–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dussert S, Davey MW, Laffargue A, Doulbeau S, Swennen R, Etienne H (2006) Oxidative stress, phospholipids loss and lipid hydrolysis during drying and storage of intermediate seeds. Physiol Plant 127:192–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Etienne H (2005) Protocol of somatic embryogenesis: coffee (Coffea arabica L. and C. canephora P.). In: Jain SM, Gupta PK (eds) Protocols for somatic embryogenesis in woody plants. Series: Forestry sciences, vol 77. Springer SBS, Dordrecht, pp 167–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Etienne H, Bertrand B (2001) The effect of the embryogenic cell suspension micropropagation technique on the trueness to type, field performance, bean biochemical content and cup quality of Coffea arabica trees. Tree Physiol 21:1031–1038PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Etienne H, Solano W, Pereira A, Bertrand B, Berthouly M (1997) Coffee in vitro plantlet acclimatization protocol. Plantations Rech Dév 4:304–311Google Scholar
  14. Grossnickle SC, Major JE, Folk RS (1994) Interior spruce seedlings compared with emblings produced from somatic embryogenesis. 1. Nursery development, Fall acclimation, and over-winter storage. Can J For Res 24:1376–1384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jaligot E, Beulé T, Rival A (2002) Methylation-sensitive RFLPs: characterisation of two oil palm markers showing somaclonal variation-associated polymorphism. Theor Appl Genet 104:1263–1269CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Marum L, Rocheta M, Maroco J, Margarida Oliveira M, Miguel C (2009) Analysis of genetic stability at SSR loci during somatic embryogenesis in maritime pine (Pinus pinaster). Plant Cell Rep 28:673–682CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Montes S (1982) Comportamiento en el vivero de plantulas de Coffea arabica L. variedad Caturra, obtenidas mediente el cultivo in Vitro de embriones. Cultivos Trop 1:93–100Google Scholar
  18. Murashige T, Skoog F (1962) A revised medium for rapid growth and bioassays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol Plant 15:473–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nsangou M, Greenwood M (1998) Physiological and morphological differences between somatic, in vitro germinated, and normal seedlings of red spruce (Picea rubens Sarg.). Can J For Res 28:1088–1092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. O’Neill GA, Russell JH, Hooge BD, Ott PK, Hawkins CBD (2005) Estimating gains from genetic tests of somatic emblings of interior spruce. For Genet 12:57–66Google Scholar
  21. Teisson C, Alvard D (1995) A new concept of plant in vitro cultivation liquid medium: temporary immersion. In: Terzi M et al (eds) Current issues in plant molecular and cellular biology. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 105–110Google Scholar
  22. Van der Vossen HAM, Walyaro DJ (1981) The coffee breeding programme in Kenya: a review of progress made since 1971 and plan of action for the coming years. Kenya Coffee 46:113–130Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea Menéndez-Yuffá
    • 1
  • Dominique Barry-Etienne
    • 2
  • Benoît Bertrand
    • 3
  • Frédéric Georget
    • 3
  • Hervé Etienne
    • 3
  1. 1.Facultad de Ciencias, Instituto de Biología ExperimentalUniversidad Central de VenezuelaColinas de Bello Monte, CaracasVenezuela
  2. 2.ALCINAMontpellierFrance
  3. 3.Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement–Département des Systèmes Biologiques (CIRAD-BIOS)UMR-RPBMontpellierFrance

Personalised recommendations