Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture

, Volume 69, Issue 3, pp 215–231 | Cite as

Temporary immersion systems in plant micropropagation


Temporary immersion systems for plant micropropagation have been described and grouped into 4 categories according to operation: tilting and rocker machines; complete immersion of plant material and renewal of the nutrient medium; partial immersion and a liquid nutrient renewal mechanism; complete immersion by pneumatic driven transfer of liquid medium and without nutrient medium renewal. The positive effects of temporary immersion on micropropagation are indicated for shoot proliferation and microcuttings, microtuberization and somatic embryogenesis. Immersion time, i.e. duration or frequency, is the most decisive parameter for system efficiency. Optimizing the volume of nutrient medium and the volume of the culture container also substantially improves efficacy, especially for shoot proliferation. Temporary immersion also generally improves plant material quality. It results in increased shoot vigour and in the frequency of morphologically normal somatic embryos. Hyperhydricity, which seriously affects cultures in liquid medium, can be eliminated with these culture systems or controlled by adjusting the immersion times. Plant material propagated by temporary immersion can perform better during the acclimatization phase than material obtained on semi-solid or in liquid media. Successful regeneration of plants, after direct sowing on soil of Solanum tuberosum microtubers and Coffea arabica somatic embryos produced in temporary immersion bioreactors, has been demonstrated. As could be expected when using liquid medium for micropropagation, several estimations confirm large gains in efficacy from temporary immersion. The parameters most involved in reducing production costs include: (1) the drastic reduction in work; (2) reduction in shelving area; (3) reduction in the number of containers used; (4) better biological yields. Scaling-up somatic embryogenesis and shoot proliferation procedures involving temporary immersion systems in order to commercialize this process are now taking place.


  1. Aitken-Christie J (1991) Automation. In: Debergh PC & Zimmerman RJ (eds) Micropropagation: Technology and Application. (pp 363–388). Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  2. Aitken-Christie J & Davies HE (1988) Development of a semi-automated micropropagation system. Acta Hortic. 230: 81–87Google Scholar
  3. Aitken-Christie J, Jones C & Bond S (1985) Wet and waxy shoots in radiata pine micropropagation. Acta Hortic. 166: 93–100Google Scholar
  4. Aitken-Christie J & Jones C (1987) Towards automation: radiata pine shoot hedges in vitro. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 8: 185–196Google Scholar
  5. Akita M & Takayama S (1994) Stimulation of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) tuberization by semicontinuous liquid medium surface level control. Plant Cell Rep. 13: 184–187Google Scholar
  6. Alvard D, Côte F & Teisson C (1993) Comparison of methods of liquid medium culture for banana micropropagation. Effects of temporary immersion of explants. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 32: 55–60Google Scholar
  7. Berthouly M, Dufour M, Alvard D, Carasco C, Alemano L & Teisson C (1995) Coffee micropropagation in a liquid medium using the temporary immersion technique. In: ASIC Publishers (eds) 16th International Scientific Colloquium on Coffee, Kyoto, Japon (pp 514–519), VeveyGoogle Scholar
  8. Berthouly M & Etienne H (1999) Somatic embryogenesis of coffee. In: Jain SM, Gupta PK & Newton RJ (eds) Somatic Embryogenesis in Woody Plants, Vol. 5 (pp 259–288). Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  9. Cabasson C, Alvard D, Dambier D, Ollitrault P & Teisson C (1997) Improvement of Citrus somatic embryo development by temporary immersion. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 50: 33–37Google Scholar
  10. Chu I (1995) Economic analysis of automated micropropagation. In: Aitken-Christie J, Kozai T, Smith MAL (eds) Automation and Environmental Control in Plant Tissue Culture (pp 19–27). Kluwer Academic Publischers, Dordrecht, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  11. Connor AJ & Meredith CP (1984) An improved polyurethane support system for monitoring growth in plant cell cultures. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 3: 59–68Google Scholar
  12. Debergh P (1988) Improving mass propagation of in vitro plantlets. In: Kozai T(ed) Horticulture in High Technology Era (pp 45–57). International Symposium on High Technology in Protected Cultivation, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  13. Debergh P, Harbaooui Y & Lemeur R (1981) Mass propagation of globe artichoke (Cynara scolymus) / evaluation of different hypotheses to overcome vitrification with special reference to water potential. Physiol. Plant. 53: 181–187Google Scholar
  14. Escalant J-V, Teisson C & Côte F (1994) Amplified somatic embryogenesis from male flowers of triploid banana and plantain cultivars (Musa spp.). In Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. 30: 181–186Google Scholar
  15. Escalona M, Lorenzo JC, González B, Daquinta M, Fundora Z, Borroto CG, Espinosa D, Arias E & Aspiolea ME (1998) New system for in vitro propagation of pineapple (Ananas comosus L. Merr). Pineapple News 5:5–7Google Scholar
  16. Escalona M, Lorenzo JC, González B, Daquinta M, González JL, Desjardins Y & Borroto CG (1999) Pineapple (Ananas comosus L. Merr) micropropagation in temporary immersion systems. Plant Cell Rep. 18: 743–748Google Scholar
  17. Etienne H, Berger A & Carron MP (1991) Water status of callus from Hevea brasiliensis during induction of somatic embryogenesis. Physiol. Plant. 82: 213–218Google Scholar
  18. Etienne H, Bertrand B, Anthony F, Côte F & Berthouly M (1997a) L'embryogenèse somatique: un outil pour l'amélioration génétique du caféier. In: ASIC Publishers (eds) 17th International Scientific Colloquiun on Coffee, Nairobi (pp 457–465), VeveyGoogle Scholar
  19. Etienne H, Lartaud M, Michaux-Ferrière N, Carron MP, Berthouly M & Teisson C (1997b) Improvement of somatic embryogenesis in Hevea brasiliensis (Müll. Arg.) using the temporary immersion technique. In Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. 33: 81–87Google Scholar
  20. Etienne H, Montoro P, Michaux-Ferrière N & Carron MP (1993) Effects of desiccation, medium osmolarity and abscisic acid on the maturation of Hevea brasiliensis somatic embryos. J. Exp. Bot. 44: 1613–1619Google Scholar
  21. Etienne-Barry 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: 111–117Google Scholar
  22. Gawel NJ & Robacker CD (1990) Somatic embryogenesis in two Gossypium hirsutum genotypes on semi-solid versus liquid proliferation media. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 23: 201–204Google Scholar
  23. Hamilton R, Pederson H & Chin CK (1985) Plant tissue culture on membrane rafts. BioTechniques. March/April (p 96)Google Scholar
  24. Hammerschlag F (1982) Factors affecting establishment and growth of peach shoots in vitro. HortScience 17: 85–86Google Scholar
  25. Harris RE & Mason EB (1983) Two machines for in vitro propagation of plants in liquid media. Can. J. Plant Sci. 63: 311–316Google Scholar
  26. Harris RE & Stevenson JH (1982) In vitro propagation of Vitis. Vitis 21: 22–32Google Scholar
  27. Hussey G (1986) Problems and prospects in the in vitro propagation of herbaceous plants. In: Withers LA & Alderson PG (eds) Plant Tissue Culture and its Agricultural Applications (pp 69–84). Butterworths, BostonGoogle Scholar
  28. Jiménez E, Pérez J, Gil V, Herrera J, García Y & Alonso E (1995) Sistema para la propagación de la caña de azucar. In: Estrade M, Riego E, Limonta E, Tellez P & Fuente J (eds) Avances en Biotecnología Moderna, Vol 3 (pp 11–20). Elfos Scientiae, HavanaGoogle Scholar
  29. Jones AM & Petolino JF (1988) Effects of support medium on embryo and plant production from cultured anthers of soft-red winter wheat. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 12: 243–261Google Scholar
  30. Kitto SL (1997) Commercial micropropagation. HortScience. 32: 1012–1014Google Scholar
  31. Krueger S, Robacker C & Simonton W (1991) Culture of Amel-anchier × grandiflora in a programmable micropropagation apparatus. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 27: 219–226Google Scholar
  32. Liu CM, Xu Z-H & Chua N-H (1993) Auxin polar transport is essential for the establishment of bilateral symmetry during early plant embryogenesis. The Plant Cell 5: 621–630Google Scholar
  33. Lorenzo JC, Gonzalez BL, Escalona M, Teisson C, Espinosa P & Borroto C (1998) Sugarcane shoot formation in an improved temporary immersion system. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 54: 197–200Google Scholar
  34. Maene L & Debergh P (1985) Liquid medium additions to established tissue cultures to improve elongation and rooting in vivo. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 5: 23–33Google Scholar
  35. Martre P, Lacan D, Just D & Teisson C (2001) Physiological effects of temporary immersion on Hevea brasiliensis (Müll. Arg.) callus. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 67: 25–35Google Scholar
  36. Monette PL (1983) Influence of size of culture vessel on in vitro proliferation of grape in a liquid medium. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 2: 327–332Google Scholar
  37. Noriega C & Söndahl MR (1993). Arabica coffee micropropagation through somatic embryogenesis via bioreactors. In: ASIC publishers (eds) 15th International Scientific Colloquium on Coffee, Montpellier, France (pp 73–81). VeveyGoogle Scholar
  38. Reuther G (1985) Principles and application of the micropropagation of ornemental plants. In: Schäfer-Menuhr A (ed) In Vitro Techniques: Propagation and Long-Term Storage (pp 1–14). Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  39. Simonton W & Robacker C (1988) Alternative system for micropropagation. Amer. Soc. Agr. Engineers, Technical Paper No 88–1028Google Scholar
  40. Simonton W, Robacker C & Krueger S (1991) A programmable micropropagation apparatus using cycled medium. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 27: 211–218Google Scholar
  41. Sluis CJ & Walker KA (1985) Commercialization of plant tissue culture propagation. Intl. Assoc. Plant Tiss. Cult. Newsl. 47: 2–12Google Scholar
  42. Smith DR (1985) Pinus radiata. In: Bajaj YPS (ed) Trees. Biotechnology in Agriculture and Forestry, Vol 1 (pp 274–291). Springer Verlag, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  43. Smith MAL & Spomer LA (1995) Vessels, gels, liquid media and support systems. In: Aitken-Christie J, Kozai T & Smith MAL (eds) Automation and Environmental Control in Plant Tissue Culture (pp 371–405). Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  44. Söndhal MR, Nakamura T, Medina-Filho HP, Carvalho A, Fazuoli LC & Costa WM (1984) Coffee. In: Ammirato PV, Evans DA, Sharp WR & Yamada Y (eds) Handbook of Plant Cell Culture, Vol III Crop Species (pp 564–590). Mac Millan Publishing Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  45. Stevenson JH & Harris RE (1980) In vitro plantlet formation from shoot tip explants of Fuchsia hybrida cv. Swingtime. Can. J. Bot. 58: 2190–2192Google Scholar
  46. Steward FC, Caplin S & Millar FK (1952) Investigations on growth and metabolism of plant cells. I. New techniques for the investigation of metabolism, nutrition and growth in undifferentiated cells. Ann. Bot. 16: 57–77Google Scholar
  47. Teisson C & Alvard D (1995) A new concept of plant in vitro cultivation liquid medium: Temporary immersion. In: M Terzi et al. (eds) Current Issues in Plant Molecular and Cellular Biology (pp 105–110). Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  48. Teisson C & Alvard D (1999) In vitro production of potato micro-tubers in liquid medium using temporay immersion. Potato Res. 42: 499–504Google Scholar
  49. Teisson C, Alvard D, Lartaud M, Etienne H, Berthouly M, Escalona M & Lorenzo JC (1999) Temporary immersion for plant tissue culture. In: Plant Biotechnology and In vitro Biology in the 21st Century, Proceedings of the IXth International Congress of Plant Tissue and Cell Culture, Section H: Novel micropropagation methods (pp 629–632). JerusalemGoogle Scholar
  50. Tisserat B, Jones D & Galletta PD (1993) Construction and use of an inexpensive in vitro ultrasonic misting system. HortTechnology 3: 75–79Google Scholar
  51. Tisserat B & Vandercook CE (1985) Development of an automated plant culture system. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 5: 107–117Google Scholar
  52. Wardle K, Dobbs EB & Short KC (1983) In vitro acclimatization of aseptically cultured plantlets to humidity. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 108: 386–389Google Scholar
  53. Wataad A, Raghothana KG, Kochba M, Nissim A & Caba V (1997) Micropropagation of Spathiphyllum and Syngonium is facilited by use of interfacial membrane rafts. HortScience 32: 307–308Google Scholar
  54. Weathers PJ, Cheetham RD & Giles KL (1988) Dramatic increases in shoot number and lengths for Musa, Cordyline and Nephrylepsis [sic] using nutrient mists. Acta Hortic. 230: 39–44Google Scholar
  55. Weathers PJ & Giles KL (1988) Regeneration of plants using nutrient mist culture. In vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. 24: 727–732Google Scholar
  56. Zamarripa A, Ducos JP, Tessereau H, Bollon H, Eskes AB & Petiard V (1991) Développement d'un procédé de multiplication de masse en masse du caféier par embryogenèse somatique en milieu liquide. In: ASIC Publishers (eds) 14th International Scientific Colloquium on Coffee, San Francisco, US (pp 392–402). VeveyGoogle Scholar
  57. Ziv M (1995) The control of bioreactor environment for plant propagation in liquid culture. Acta Hortic. 393: 25–38Google Scholar
  58. Ziv M, Meir G & Halevy AH (1983) Factors influencing the production of hardened glaucous carnation plantlets in vitro. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 2: 55–65Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement-Cultures Pérennes (CIRAD-CP)CIRADMontpellier Cedex 5France
  2. 2.Centro de Agronomía Tropical de Investigación e Enseñanza (CATIE)CATIETurrialbaCosta Rica
  3. 3.Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement – Amis (CIRAD-AMIS), CIRADMontpellier Cedex 5France

Personalised recommendations