Advertisement

Potato Research

, Volume 49, Issue 3, pp 167–176 | Cite as

Application of Soluble Chitosan in vitro and in the Greenhouse to Increase Yield and Seed Quality of Potato Minitubers

  • Britta KowalskiEmail author
  • Felipe Jimenez Terry
  • Lidcay Herrera
  • Daniel Agramonte Peñalver
Article

Abstract

The aim of this work was to investigate whether the application of soluble chitosan in potato micropropagation can improve microplant quality in vitro, help acclimatisation ex vitro, and increase yield and seed quality of minitubers. Potato cv. Désirée microplants were treated in vitro with soluble chitosan added to the semisolid tissue culture medium in different concentrations. Microplants were subsequently transferred to the greenhouse and sprayed with chitosan solutions or remained unsprayed. Untreated microplants were also established ex vitro and sprayed with chitosan, or left unsprayed as a control. Morphological and physiological parameters of plant growth were assessed in vitro and ex vitro. Plantlet quality was evaluated using a ranking system. Minitubers derived from greenhouse plantlets were planted in the field in subtropical conditions, and growth and yield parameters evaluated. The chitosan concentration most beneficial to the in vitro growth of microplants varied between years. In treatments with the best in vitro growth, minituber number and yield in the greenhouse was also increased. Foliar chitosan application at the acclimatisation phase stabilised the effect of in vitro treatment on yield parameters. The seed quality of minitubers derived from chitosan treatments in vitro alone and in combination with foliar treatment at acclimatisation was improved, giving rise to field plants with increased tuber numbers and yields. The combination of chitosan in vitro and foliar application during the acclimatisation phase ex vitro had a greater effect on minituber seed quality than the concentration applied in vitro.

Keywords

micropropagation Solanum tuberosum L. 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Benhamou N, Lafontaine P, Nicole M (1994) Induction of systemic resistance to fusarium crown and root rot in tomato plants by seed treatment with chitosan. Phytopathology 84:1432–1444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bittelli M, Flury M, Campbell GS, Nichols EJ (2001) Reduction of transpiration through foliar application of Chitosan. Agric Meteorol 107:167–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cassells AC, Curry RF (2001) Oxidative stress and physiological, epigenetic and genetic variability in plant tissue culture: implications for micropropagators and genetic engineers. Plant Cell, Tissue Organ Cult 64:145–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cassells AC, Walsh C (1994) The influence of the gas permeability of culture lid on calcium uptake and stomatal function in Dianthus plantlets. Plant Cell, Tissue Organ Cult 37:171–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cassells AC, Kowalski B, Fitzgerald DM, Murphy GA (1999) The use of image analysis to study developmental variation in micropropagated potatoes (Solanum tuberosum L.) Potato Res 4:541–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dörnenburg H, Knoor D (1994) Elicitation of chitinases and antraquinones in Morinda citrifolia cell cultures. Food Biotechnol 8:57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. El Ghaouth A (1994) Effect of chitosan on cucumber plants: suppression of Pythium aphanidermatum and induction of defense reactions. Phytopathology 84:313–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gaspar T, Franck T, Bisbis B, Kevers C, Jouve L, Hausman JF, Dommes J (2002) Concepts in plant stress physiology. Application to plant tissue cultures. Plant Growth Regul 37:263–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Joyce SM, Cassells AC, Jain SM (2003) Stress and aberrant phenotypes in in vitro culture. Plant Cell, Tissue Organ Cult 74:103–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kowalski B, Jäger AK, van Staden J (1999a) The effect of a seaweed concentrate on the in vitro growth and acclimatization of potato plantlets. Potato Res 42:131–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kowalski B, Jäger AK, van Staden J (1999b) Influence of cultivar, season, explant type and seaweed concentrate on potato plantlet quality. Potato Res 42:181–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kowalski B, Jimenez Terry F, Jomarrón Rodiles I, Agramonte Peñalver D, Coll Manchado F (2003) Efecto de tres análogos de brassinoesteroides sobre caracteres morfológicos y fisiológicos de vitroplantas de papa cv. Désirée, in vitro y en invernadero. Biotecnol Veg 3:115–117Google Scholar
  13. Kowalski B, Jimenez Terry F, Agramonte Peñalver D, Unger C, Köppen D (2005) Untersuchungen zur Wirkung von Pflanzenstärkungsmitteln und Elicitoren auf Ertrag und Pflanzengesundheit bei Kartoffeln. Mitt Ges Pflanzenbauwiss 17:351–352Google Scholar
  14. Kowalski B, Köppen D, Jimenez Terry F, Agramonte Peñalver (2006) Wirkung verschiedener Pflanzenstärkungsmittel auf Ertrag und Pflanzengesundheit bei Kartoffeln im ökologischen und integrierten Anbau. Mitt Ges Pflanzenbauwiss 18:260–261Google Scholar
  15. Murashige T, Skoog F (1962) A revised medium for rapid growth for rapid growth and bio-assays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol Plant 15:473–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. O’Herlihy EA, Duffy EM, Cassells AC (2003) The effects of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and chitosan sprays on yield and late blight resitance in potato crops from plantlets. Folia Geobot 38:201–207Google Scholar
  17. Roby D, Gadelle A, Toppan A (1987) Chitin oligosaccharides as elicitors of chitinase activity in Melon Plants. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 143:885–892PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Tiuterev S (1996) Chitosan. Mechanism of action and ways of using chitosan as ecologically safe means in enhancement of plant disease resistance. Arch Phytopathol Plant Prot 30:323–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Tumová L, Backovská M (1999) Chitosan and the flavonoid production. Herba Pol 45:114–115Google Scholar
  20. Vander P (1998) Comparison of the ability of partially N-acetylated chitosans and chitooligosaccharides to elicit resistance reactions in wheat leaves. Plant Physiol 118:1353–1359PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Walker–Simmons M, Hadwiger L, Ryan CA (1983) Chitosans and pectic polysaccharides both induce the accumulation of the antifungal phytoalexin Pisatin in pea pods and antinutrient proteinase inhibitors in tomato leaves. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 110:194–199PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Yu LJ, Lan WZ, Qin WM, Jin WW, Xu HB (2002) Oxidative stress and taxol production induced by fungal elicitor in cell suspension cultures of Taxus chinensis-Brief communication. Biol Plant 45:459–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© EAPR 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Britta Kowalski
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Felipe Jimenez Terry
    • 1
    • 2
  • Lidcay Herrera
    • 1
    • 2
  • Daniel Agramonte Peñalver
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute for Land UseUniversity of RostockRostockGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Plant BiotechnologyUniversity of Santa ClaraVilla ClaraCuba

Personalised recommendations