Plant Growth Regulation

, Volume 33, Issue 3, pp 237–243 | Cite as

Mineral nutrition in carnation tissue cultures under different ventilation conditions

  • A.K. Dantas
  • J.P. Majada
  • B. Fernández
  • M.J. Cañal


Growth and propagation rates, hyperhydricity percentages, macronutrientabsorption and pH evolution were evaluated in Dianthuscaryophyllus CV Nelken cultured in vitro under different ventilationconditions. Culture in well ventilated conditions (HVC) i.e. low relativehumidity, generated lower percentages of hyperhydric explants, with highermicropropagation coefficients and dry weight increments, than in less ventilatedcultures (LVC). Macronutrient absorption was similar in both types of cultures,except for ammonium, nitrate, chloride and phosphate. In LVC, after 15 days ofculture, carnation explants absorbed more nitrate than ammonium and chlorideuptake was 5 times greater than in HVC. Phosphate uptake was more pronounced inLVC after 15 days of culture, reaching similar values in both types of culturevessels at the end of the experiment, and led to growth limiting conditions formore prolonged cultures. Medium pH decreased to acid values after 15 days ofculture and even more at the end of the experiment; however, these acidconditions seem not be an obstacle for nutrient absorption.

Carnation Dianthus caryophyllus Hyperhydricity In vitro environment Micropropagation Nutrient uptake pH 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Barbas E., Chaillou S., Cornu D., Doumas P., Jay-Allemand C. and Lamaze T. 1993. Ortophosphate nutrition of in vitro propagated hybrid walnut (Juglans nigra × Juglans regia) trees: Pi (32Pi) uptake and transport in relation to callus and shoot development. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 31: 41–49.Google Scholar
  2. Cuello J.L., Walker P.N. and Heuser C.V. 1992. Controlled in vitro environment for stage II micropropagation of Chrysanthemum. Trans. Am. Soc. Agri. Eng. 35: 1079–1083.Google Scholar
  3. Daguin F. and Letouze R. 1986. Ammonium-induced vitrification in cultured tissues. Physiol. Plant. 66: 94–98.Google Scholar
  4. Dantas A.K., Cañal M.J., Centeno M.L., Feito I. and Fernández B. 1997. Endogenous plant growth regulators in carnation tissue cultures under different conditions of ventilation. Plant Growth Regul. 22: 169–174.Google Scholar
  5. Debergh P., Aitken-Christie J., Cohen D., Grout B., Von Arnol S., Zimmerma R. et al. 1992. Reconsideration of the term vitrification as used in micropropagation. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 30: 135–140.Google Scholar
  6. Desamero N.V., Adelberg J.W., Hale A., Young R.E. and Rhodes B.B. 1993. Nutrient utilisation in liquid/membrane system for watermelon micropropagation. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 33: 265–271.Google Scholar
  7. Dillen W. and Buysen S. 1989. A simple technique to overcome vitrification in Gypsophila paniculata L. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 19: 181–188.Google Scholar
  8. Dussert S., Verdeil J.L., Rival A., Noirot M. and Buffard-Morel J. 1995. Nutrient uptake and growth of in vitro coconut (Cocos nucifera L) calluses. Plant Sci. 106: 185–193.Google Scholar
  9. Gaspar T., Kevers C., Debergh P., Maene L., Paques M. and Boxus P. 1987. Vitrification: morphological, physiological and ecological aspects. In: Bonga J.M. and Durzan D.J. (eds), Cell and Tissue Culture in Forestry. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 152–166.Google Scholar
  10. Kataeva N.V., Alexandrova I.G., Butenbo R.G. and Dragavteeva E.V. 1991. Effect of applied and internal hormones on vitrification and apical necrosis of different plants cultured in vitro. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 27: 149–154.Google Scholar
  11. Kevers C. and Gaspar T. 1986. Vitrification of carnation in vitro-:changes in water content, extracellular air space volume and ion levels. Physiol. Vég. 24: 647–653.Google Scholar
  12. Kozai T., Fujiwara K. and Watanabe I. 1986. Fundamental studies on environments in plant tissue culture vessels: effects of stoppers and vessels on gas exchange rates between inside and outside of vessels closed with stoppers. J. Agric. Meteorol. 42: 119–127.Google Scholar
  13. Leifert C., Murphy K.P. and Lumsden P.J. 1995. Mineral and carbohydrate nutrition of plant cell and tissue cultures. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 14: 83–109.Google Scholar
  14. Leshem B., Werker E. and Shalv P.D. 1988. The effect of cytokinins on vitrification in melon and carnation. Ann. Bot. 62: 271–276.Google Scholar
  15. Majada J.P., Fal M.A. and Sánchez-Tamés R. 1997. The effect of ventilation on proliferation and hyperhydricity of Dianthus caryophyllus L. Vitro. Cell Dev. Biol. 33: 62–69.Google Scholar
  16. Mezzetti B., Rosati P. and Giovanni C. 1991. Actinidia deliciosa CF Liang in vitro. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 25: 91–98.Google Scholar
  17. Miflin B.J. and Lea P.J. 1976. The pathway of nitrogen assimilation in plants. Phytochemistry. 15: 873–885.Google Scholar
  18. Moncalean P., Cañal M.J., Feito I., Rodriguez A. and Fernandez B. 1999. Cytokinins and mineral nutrition in Actinidia deliciosa (Kiwi) shoots cultured in vitro. J. Plant Physiol. 155: 606–612.Google Scholar
  19. Murashige T. and Skoog F. 1962. A revised medium for rapid growth and bioassays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol. Plant. 15: 473–497.Google Scholar
  20. Nour K.A. and Thorpe T.A. 1994. The effect of the gaseous state on bud induction and shoot multiplication in vitro in eastern white cedar. Physiol. Plant. 90: 163–172.Google Scholar
  21. Owen H.R., Wengerd D. and Miller A.R. 1991. Culture medium pH is influenced by basal medium, carbohydrate source, gelling agent, activated charcoal and medium storage method. Plant Cell Rep. 10: 583–586.Google Scholar
  22. Quorin M. and Lepoivr P. 1997. Étude de milieux adapté aux cultures in vitre de Prunus. Acta Hort. 78: 437–442.Google Scholar
  23. Salsac L., Chaillou S., Morot-Gaudry J.F., Lesaint C. and Jolivet E. 1987. Nitrate and ammonium nutrition in plants. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 25: 805–812.Google Scholar
  24. Sallanon H. and Maziere Y. 1992. Influence of growth room and vessel humidity on the in vitro development of rose plants. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 30: 121–125.Google Scholar
  25. Singha S., Oberly G.H. and Towsend E.C. 1987. Changes in nutrient composition and pH of the culture medium during in vitro shoot proliferation of crab apple and pear. Plant Cell. Tiss. Org. Cult. 11: 209–220.Google Scholar
  26. Skirvin R.M., Chu M.C., Mann M.L., Young H., Sullivan J. and Fermanian T. 1986. Stability of tissue culture medium as a function of autoclaving time and cultured plant material. Plant Cell. Rep. 5: 292–294.Google Scholar
  27. Williams R.R. 1993. Mineral nutrition in vitro-a mechanistic approach. Aust. J. Bot. 41: 237–251.Google Scholar
  28. Williams R.R., Taji A.M. and Winney K.A. 1990. The effect of Ptilotus plant tissue on pH of in vitro media. Plant Cell. Tiss. Org. Cult. 22: 153–158.Google Scholar
  29. Ziv M. 1991. Vitrification: morphological and physiological disorders of in vitro plants. In: Debergh P.C. and Zimmerman R.H. (eds), Micropropagation. Technology and Application. Kluwer Academic Publ, Dordrecht, pp. 45–69.Google Scholar
  30. Ziv M. and Ariel T. 1988. The relationship between cell wall deformity and stomatal malfunction in the leaves of carnation in vitro. In:, Proc. Intl. Soc. Plant Mol. Biol. Congress., Jerusalem, p. 425. 243Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • A.K. Dantas
    • 1
  • J.P. Majada
    • 1
  • B. Fernández
    • 1
  • M.J. Cañal
    • 1
  1. 1.Dpto B.O.S., Fac. BiologíaUniv. Oviedo, Lab. Fisiología VegetalOviedoSpain

Personalised recommendations