Advertisement

Improving callus regeneration of Miscanthus × giganteus J.M.Greef, Deuter ex Hodk., Renvoize ‘M161’ callus by inhibition of the phenylpropanoid biosynthetic pathway

  • Cassandra Doll Downey
  • Jerzy Zoń
  • Andrew Maxwell Phineas JonesEmail author
Plant Tissue Culture
  • 48 Downloads

Abstract

In previous studies, the regeneration rates of Miscanthus × giganteus J.M.Greef, Deuter ex Hodk., Renvoize from callus tissue cultured on semi-solid media significantly declined after 4 mo of culture, which presents problems with germplasm conservation and use as an alternative propagation system. Due to the species’ lignocellulosic nature, it was hypothesized that the accumulation of phenolic compounds in the callus may be responsible for inhibiting regeneration. The current study aimed to optimize regeneration of M. × giganteus callus by culturing the callus tissue in the presence of 2-aminoindan-2-phosphonic acid (AIP), a competitive inhibitor of phenylalanine ammonia lyase (PAL), to reduce the biosynthesis of phenolics. Embryogenic callus was cultured on media supplemented with 9.0- or 11.3-μM 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) and 0-, 1-, 10-, 100-, or 1000-μM AIP. Every 28 d for 7 mo, the callus tissue was visually classified based on morphology and regeneration rate. Over the duration of the study, regeneration of shoots was consistently highest in callus cultured on 11.3-μM 2,4-D supplemented with 10- and 100-μM AIP (13–58.3%), and in vitro plantlet development from callus cultured on all concentrations of AIP demonstrated tillering and rooting. Total soluble phenolic content of the callus decreased in a dose-dependent manner from 2242.34-μg g−1 dry weight in the control to 1569.71-μg g−1 dry weight in AIP-treated callus. These data indicate that inhibiting PAL in M. × giganteus cultures increased the percentage of calluses exhibiting regeneration over time.

Keywords

Miscanthus × giganteus Phenylpropanoid biosynthetic pathway 2-Aminoindan-2-phosphonic acid 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid Micropropagation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Abhishek Chattopadhyay for training and assistance with determining the soluble phenolic content of the samples, All Weather Farming Inc. for supplying explant material, and Dr. Michelle Edwards for aiding with statistical analyses.

Funding information

The authors are also grateful for the funding partner BioFuelNet for financially supporting this research. The funders had no role in the design of the study, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  1. Březinová A, Holík J, Zažímalová E, Vlasáková V, Malá J (1996) Somatic embryogenesis in oak (Quercus robur L.). Plant Physiol Biochem (spec.issue) Proc.10th FESPP Congress, Florence, Italy, Abstract No. S03-18, p 31Google Scholar
  2. Cvikrová M, Binarová P, Eder J, Vágner M, Hrubcová M, Zoń J, Macháčková I (1999) Effect of inhibition of phenylalanine ammonia-lyase activity on growth of alfalfa cell suspension culture: alterations in mitotic index, ethylene production, and contents of phenolics, cytokinins and polyamines. Physiol Plant 107:329–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cvikrová M, Malá J, Eder J, Hrubcová M, Vágner M (1998) Abscisic acid, polyamines and phenolic acids in sessile oak somatic embryos in relation to their conversion potential. Plant Physiol Biochem 36:247–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cvikrová M, Malá J, Hrubcová M, Eder J, Zoń J, Macháčková I (2003) Effect of inhibition of biosynthesis of phenylpropanoids on sessile oak somatic embryogenesis. Plant Physiol Biochem 41:251–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Engbers H, Deen B (2013) Field-scale agricultural biomass research and development project final report. Agriculture and Agri-Food, Canada https://www.ontariosoilcrop.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/biomass_final_report-january2014-h.engbers__b.deen.pdf. Accessed 3 Feb 2018
  6. Fitch MMM, Moore PH (1990) Comparison of 2,4-D and picloram for selection of long-term totipotent green callus cultures of sugarcane. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 20:157–163Google Scholar
  7. Folin O, Ciocalteu V (1927) On tyrosine and tryptophane determinations in proteins. J Biol Chem 73:627–650Google Scholar
  8. Gairi A, Rashid A (2004) TDZ-induced somatic embryogenesis in non-responsive caryopses of rice using a short treatment with 2,4-D. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 76:29–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Głowacka K, Balachandran SM, Kaczmarek Z (2010a) Impact of colchicine application during callus induction and shoot regeneration on micropropagation and polyploidisation rates in two Miscanthus species. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol-Plant 46:161–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Głowacka K, Jezowski S, Kaczmarek Z (2010b) The effects of genotype, inflorescence developmental stage and induction medium on callus induction and plant regeneration in two Miscanthus species. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 102:79–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gubišová M, Gubiš J, Žofajová A, Mihálik D, Kraic J (2013) Enhanced in vitro propagation of Miscanthus × giganteus. Ind Crop Prod 41:279–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Heaton EA, Dohleman FG, Long SP (2008) Meeting US biofuel goals with less land: the potential of Miscanthus. Glob Chang Biol 14:2000–2014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Heaton EA, Long SP, Voigt TB, Jones MB, Clifton-Brown J (2004) Miscanthus for renewable energy generation: European Union experience and projections for Illinois. Mitig Adapt Start Gl 9:433–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hodkinson TR, Chase MW, Renvoize SA (2002) Characterization of a genetic resource collection for Miscanthus (Saccharinae, Andropogoneae, Poaceae) using AFLP and ISSR PCR. Ann Bot 89:627–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hrubcová M, Cvikrová M, Eder J, Zoń J, Macháčková I (2000) Effect of inhibition of phenylpropanoid biosynthesis on peroxidase and IAA-oxidase activities and auxin content in alfalfa suspension cultures. Plant Physiol Biochem 38:949–956CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jones AMP, Chattopadhyay A, Shukla M, Zoń J, Saxena PK (2012) Inhibition of phenylpropanoid biosynthesis increases cell wall digestibility, protoplast isolation, and facilitates sustained cell division in American elm (Ulmus americana). BMC Plant Biol 12:75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jones AMP, Saxena PK (2013) Inhibition of phenylpropanoid biosynthesis in Artemisia annua L.: a novel approach to reduce oxidative browning in plant tissue culture. PLoS One 8:e76802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kim HS, Zhang G, Juvik JA, Widholm JM (2010) Miscanthus × giganteus plant regeneration: effect of callus types, ages and culture methods on regeneration competence. Glob Change Biol Bioenergy 2:192–200Google Scholar
  19. Kim S, Da K, Mei C (2012) An efficient system for high-quality large-scale micropropagation of Miscanthus × giganteus plants. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol-Plant 48:613–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Le Ngoc Huyen T, Rémond C, Dheilly RM, Chabbert B (2010) Effect of harvesting date on the composition and saccharification of Miscanthus × giganteus. Bioresour Technol 101:8224–8231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lewandowski I (1997) Micropropagation of Miscanthus × giganteus. In: Bajaj YPS (ed) Biotechnology in agriculture and forestry, vol 39, High-tech and micropropagation Springer, New York, pp 239–255Google Scholar
  22. Lewandowski I (1998) Propagation method as an important factor in the growth and development of Miscanthus × giganteus. Ind Crop Prod 8:229–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Liu G, Gilding EK, Godwin ID (2015) A robust tissue culture system for sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench]. S Afr J Bot 98:157–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lozovaya V, Gorshkova T, Yablokova E, Zabotina O, Ageeva M, Rumyantseva N, Kolesnichenko E, Waranyuwat A, Widholm J (1996) Callus cell wall phenolics and plant regeneration ability. J Plant Physiol 148:711–717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. MacDonald MJ, D’Cunha GBD (2007) A modern view of phenylalanine ammonia lyase. Biochem Cell Biol 85:273–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Malá J, Cvikrová H, Březinová A, Hrubcová M, Eder J, Vágner M, Cvikrová M (2000) Endogenous contents of phytohormones and phenylpropanoids in sessile oak somatic embryos in relation to their conversion potential. J Forest Sci 46:197–204Google Scholar
  27. Mehrotra S, Goel MK, Kukreja AK, Mishra BN (2007) Efficiency of liquid culture systems over conventional micropropagation: a progress towards commercialization. Afr J Biotechnol 6:1484–1492Google Scholar
  28. Morrish F, Vasil V, Vasil IK (1987) Developmental morphogenesis and genetic manipulation in tissue and cell cultures of the Gramineae. Adv Genet 24:431–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Murashige T, Skoog F (1962) A revised medium for rapid growth and bio assays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol Plant 15:473–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Owaga Y (2015) Long-term maintenance of high regeneration ability of switchgrass embryogenic callus. Plant Biotech 32:1–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Perera D, Barnes DJ, Baldwin BS, Reichert NA (2015) Mutagenesis of in vitro cultures of Miscanthus × giganteus cultivar freedom and detecting polymorphisms of regenerated plants using ISSR markers. Ind Crop Prod 65:110–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Petersen KK (1997) Callus induction and plant regeneration in Miscanthus × ogiformis Honda ‘Giganteus’ as influenced by benzyladenine. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 49:137–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rambaud C, Arnoult S, Bluteau A, Mansard MC, Blassiau C, Brancourt-Hulmel M (2013) Shoot organogenesis in three Miscanthus species and evaluation for genetic uniformity using AFLP analysis. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 113:437–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Reuber S, Leitsch J, Krause GH, Weissenböck G (1993) Metabolic reduction of phenylpropanoid compounds in primary leaves of rye (Secale cereale L.) leads to increased UV-B sensitivity of photosynthesis. Z Naturforsch 48:749–756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Singleton VL, Orthofer R, Lamuela-Raventós RM (1999) Analysis of total phenols and other oxidation substrates and antioxidants by means of Folin-Ciocalteu reagent. Methods Enzymol 299:152–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Singleton VL, Rossi JA (1965) Colorimetry of total phenolics with phosphomolybdic-phosphotungstic acid reagents. Am J Enol Vitic 16:144–158Google Scholar
  37. Ślusarkiewicz-Jarzina A, Ponitka A, Cerazy-Waliszewska J, Wojciechowicz MK, Sobańska K, Jeżowski S, Pniewski T (2017) Effective and simple in vitro regeneration system of Miscanthus sinensis, M. × giganteus and M. sacchariflorus for planting and biotechnology purposes. Biomass Bioenergy 107:219–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Taşkın H, Baktemur G, Kurul M, Büyükalaca S (2013) Use of tissue culture techniques for producing virus-free plant in garlic and their identification through real-time PCR. Sci World J 2013:1–5Google Scholar
  39. Tejera MD, Heaton EA (2017) Description and codification of Miscanthus × giganteus growth stages for phenological assessment. Front Plant Sci 8:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Vasil IK, Vasil V (1994) In vitro culture of cereals and grasses. In: Vasil IK, Thrope TA (eds) Plant cell and tissue culture. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands, pp 293–312Google Scholar
  41. Viana AM, Mantell SH (1998) Comparative uptake and metabolism of 2-[14C]-2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid in callus cultures of monocot (Dioscorea spp.) and dicot (Nicotiana tabacum L.) plants. Braz J Bot 21:89–99Google Scholar
  42. Vreugdenhil D, Boogaard Y, Visser RGF, de Bruijn SM (1998) Comparison of tuber and shoot formation from in vitro cultured potato explants. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 53:197–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Withers KK (2015) Morphological adaptations and membrane stabilizing mechanisms of overwintering Miscanthus (Poaceae). Unpublished thesis. University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada http://atrium.lib.uoguelph.ca/xmlui/handle/10214/8708. Accessed 4 Oct 2017
  44. Xue S, Kalinina O, Lewandowski I (2015) Present and future options for Miscanthus propagation and establishment. Renew Sust Energ Rev 49:1233–1246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Zaid A (1987) In vitro browning of tissues and media with special emphasis to date palm cultures—a review. Acta Hortic 212:561–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zawadzki M, Ragauskas A (1999) Quantitative determination of quinone chromophores in isolated lignins. IPST Technical Paper Series Number 815:1–28Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for In Vitro Biology 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Gosling Research Institute for Plant Preservation, Department of Plant Agriculture, 50 Stone Road EastUniversity of GuelphGuelphCanada
  2. 2.Department of Thermodynamics, Theory of Machine and Thermal Systems, Faculty of Mechanical and Power EngineeringWrocław University of Science and TechnologyWrocławPoland

Personalised recommendations