Conclusion
Micropropagation as a tool for production of nuclear potato seed stocks has clearly made giant steps in the past decade. Almost all seed producing areas of North America and Europe have either built or modified existing structures to accommodate this type of propagation. Micropropagation has all the advantages of stem cuttings, namely, rapid increase of pathogen-free plants and breaking the cycle of tuber-borne soil organisms. This is combined with the additional advantages of higher yield per plant, less labor, a faster rate of multiplication, reduced testing and increased flexibility of scheduling with less dependence on mother tuber physiology.
At the present time we are seeing many different applications and modifications of micropropagation. However, as ideas are exchanged and people have time and the opportunity to evaluate alternate ideas, types of application and methods will probably narrow down, at least in areas with similar climates. Length of growing season, insect populations and irrigation certainly control some of the parameters of growing micropropagated plantlets in the field.
In the United States more seed growers will start small in vitro programs and, depending on their initial success, perseverance and control of costs, will expand their facilities and capabilities, particularly in states that do not have official seed farms. These procedures enable growers to develop their own “closed system” and to be able to introduce new cultivars into their programs without risk of introducing tuber-borne diseases.
Similar content being viewed by others
Literature Cited
Allan, E. and A. Kelman. 1977. Immunofluorescent stain procedures for detection and identification ofErwinia carotovora var.atroseptica. Phytopathology 67:1305–1312.
Clark, M.F. and A.N. Adams. 1977. Characteristics of the microplate method of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for the detection of plant viruses. J Gen Virol 34: 475–483.
DeBoer, S.H. and R.J. Copeman. 1980. Bacterial ring rot testing with the indirect fluo-rescent antibody staining procedure. Am Potato J 57:457–465.
Linsmaier, E.M. and F. Skoog. 1965. Organic growth factor requirements of tobacco tissue culture. Physiol Plant 18:100–127.
Mellor, F.C. and R. Stace-Smith. 1977. Virus-free potatoes by tissue culture.In: Applied and Fundamental Aspects of Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture. (J. Reinert and Y.P.S. Bajaj, Eds.). Springer-Verlag Berlin. pp. 616–646.
Murashige, T. and F. Skoog. 1962. A revised medium for rapid growth and bioassays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol Plant 15:473–497.
Palukaitus, P., S. Cotts and M. Zaitlin. 1985. Detection and identification of viroids and viral nucleic acids by ‘dot-blot’ hybridization. Acta Hortic 164:109–118.
Richardson, L.T. 1957. Quantitative determination of viability of potato ring rot bacteria following storage, heat, and gas treatments. Can J Botany 35:647–656.
Slack, S.A., A. Kelman and J.B. Perry. 1979. Comparison of three serodiagnostic assays for detection ofCorynebacterium sepedonicum. Phytopathology 69:186–189.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jones, E.D. A current assessment ofin vitro culture and other rapid multiplication methods in North America and Europe. American Potato Journal 65, 209–220 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02854453
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02854453