Advertisement

Biologia

pp 1–6 | Cite as

Genetic stability assessment of Taraxacum pieninicum plantlets after long-term slow growth storage using ISSR and SCoT markers

  • Monika Kamińska
  • Andrzej Tretyn
  • Alina TrejgellEmail author
Original Article
  • 8 Downloads

Abstract

Genetic stability is highly important in terms of endangered species gene banks. Culture and cold stresses under in vitro conditions may lead to genetic variability. Many methods and possibilities to design appropriate starters for DNA-fingerprinting purposes increase cost and time consumption. Furthermore, multiplicity of possible primers makes it difficult to standardize plant research. The aim of this study was to verify effectiveness of various methods in assessing the clonal homogeneity of Taraxacum pieninicum plantlets regenerated after long-term in vitro cold-storage and to simplify the selection of the genetic stability analysis for Asteraceae family. Inter Simple Sequence Repeats (ISSR) and Start Codon Targeted (SCoT) polymorphism assays were performed to detect DNA sequence variation. No differences were observed using 16 ISSR markers and 12 SCoT markers between regrown plantlets after storage and plants cultivated from seeds in a soil. Furthermore, SCoT markers were most effective for screening T. pieninicum genome and appeared to be highly useful for different micropropagated and endangered species of Asteraceae family.

Keywords

Asteraceae Cold storage Endangered species Micropropagation Molecular markers 

Abbreviations

AAD

Arbitrarily Amplified Dominant

AFLP

Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphism

IRAP

Inter-Retrotransposon Amplified Polymorphism

ISSR

Inter Simple Sequence Repeats

MSAP

Methylation Sensitive Amplified Polymorphism

QTL

Qualitative Trait Loci

RAPD

Random Amplified Polymorphic DNA

REMAP

Retrotransposon-Microsatellite Amplified Polymorphism

RFLP

Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism

ScoT

Start Codon Targeted

S-SAP

Sequence-Specific Amplified Polymorphism

Notes

Acknowledgments

This project was supported by funds from Ministry of Science and Higher Education (PL) for young scientists from Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń (2827-B).

Author contributions

Monika Kamińska designed and carried out all the experiments, analyzed the data and wrote the manuscript, Alina Trejgell helped in analysis of the data and in writing the manuscript, and Andrzej Tretyn helped in preparing the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Agarwal T, Gupta AK, Patel AK, Shekhawat NS (2015) Micropropagation and validation of genetic homogeneity of Alhagi maurorum using SCoT, ISSR and RAPD markers. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 120:313–323.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11240-014-0608-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arif IA, Bakir MA, Khan HA, Al Farhan AH, Al Homaidan AA, Bahkali AH, Al Sadoon M, Shobrak M (2010) A brief review of molecular techniques to assess plant diversity. Int J Mol Sci 11:2079–2096.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms11052079 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Bublyk OM, Andreev IO, Kalendar RN, Spiridonova KV, Kunakh VA (2013) Efficiency of different PCR-based marker systems for assessment of Iris pumila genetic diversity. Biologia 68:613–620.  https://doi.org/10.2478/s11756-013-0192-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Butiuc-Keul A, Farkas A, Cristea V (2016) Genetic stability assessment of in vitro plants by molecular markers. Studia Universitatis Babeş-Bolyai Biologia 61:107–114Google Scholar
  5. Cao Z, Sui S, Cai X, Yang Q, Deng Z (2016) Somaclonal variation in ‘Red Flash’ caladium: morphological, cytological and molecular characterization. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 126:269–279.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11240-016-0996-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 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 Tiss Organ Cult 64:145–157.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010692104861 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chittora M (2018) Assessment of genetic fidelity of long term micropropagated shoot cultures of Achras sapota L. var. ‘Cricket Ball’ as assessed by RAPD and ISSR markers. Indian J Biotechnol 17:492–495Google Scholar
  8. Collard BCY, Mackill DJ (2009) Start codon targeted (SCoT) polymorphism: a simple novel DNA marker technique for generating gene-targeted markers in plants. Plant Mol Biol Rep 27:86–93.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11105-008-0060-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Devi SP, Kumania S, Rao SR, Tandon P (2014) Single primer amplification reaction (SPAR) methods reveal subsequent increase in genetic variations in micropropagated plants of Nepenthes khasiana Hook. f. maintained for three consecutive regenerations. Gene 538:23–29.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gene.2014.01.028 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Doyle JJ, Doyle JL (1987) A rapid DNA isolation procedure for small quantities of fresh leaf tissue. Phytochem Bull 19:11–15Google Scholar
  11. Feng SG, He RF, Jiang MY, Lu JJ, Shen XX, Liu JJ, Wang ZA, Wang HZ (2016) Genetic diversity and relationship of medicinal Chrysanthemum morifolium revealed by start codon targeted (SCoT) markers. Sci Hort 201:118–123.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2016.01.042 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gorji AM, Poczai P, Polgar Z, Taller J (2011) Efficiency of arbitrarily amplified dominant markers (SCOT, ISSR and RAPD) for diagnostic fingerprinting in tetraploid potato. Am J Potato Res 88:226–237.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12230-011-9187-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Guo WL, Wu R, Zhang YF, Liu XM, Wang HY, Gong L, Zhang ZH, Liu B (2007) Tissue culture-induced locus-specific alteration in DNA methylation and its correlation with genetic variation in Codonopsis lanceolata Benth. et hook. f. Plant Cell Rep 26:1297–1307.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00299-007-0320-0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Kaçar YA, Byrne PF, Teixeira da Silva JA (2006) Molecular markers in plant tissue culture. In: Teixeira da Silva JA (ed) Floriculture, Ornamental and plant biotechnology: advances and topical issues, Vol II. Global Science Books, United Kingdom, Isleworth, pp 444–449Google Scholar
  15. Kaeppler SM, Phillips RL (1993) DNA methylation and tissue culture-induced variation in plants. In vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 29:125–130.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02632283 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kaeppler SM, Kaeppler HF, Rhee Y (2000) Epigenetic aspects of somaclonal variation in plants. Plant Mol Biol 43:179–188.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006423110134 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Kamińska M, Skrzypek E, Wilmowicz E, Tretyn A, Trejgell A (2016) Effect of light conditions and ABA on cold storage and post-storage propagation of Taraxacum pieninicum. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 127:25–34.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11240-016-1026-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kamińska M, Gołębiewski M, Tretyn A, Trejgell A (2018) Efficient long-term conservation of Taraxacum pieninicum synthetic seeds in slow growth conditions. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 132:469–478.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11240-017-1343-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Koç İ, Akdemir H, Onay A, Çiftçi YÖ (2014) Cold-induced genetic instability in micropropagated Pistacia lentiscus L. plantlets. Acta Physiol Plant 36:2373–2384.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-014-1610-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Leva AR, Petruccelli R, Rinaldi LMR (2012) Somaclonal variation in tissue culture: a case study with olive. In: Leva A, Rinaldi LMR (eds) Recent advances in plant in vitro culture. InTech Pub, pp 123–150.  https://doi.org/10.5772/50367 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lorz H, Scowcroft WR (1983) Variability among plants and their progeny regenerated from protoplasts of Su/su heterozygotes of Nicotiana tabacum. Theor Appl Genet 66:67–75.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00281851 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Machczyńska J, Zimny J, Bednarek PT (2015) Tissue culture-induced genetic and epigenetic variation in triticale (x Triticosecale spp. Wittmack ex A. Camus 1927) regenerants. Plant Mol Biol 89:279–292.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11103-015-0368-0 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Murashige T, Skoog F (1962) A revised medium for rapid growth and bio assays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol Plant 15:473–497.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.1962.tb08052.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ramírez-Mosqueda MA, Iglesias-Andreu LG (2015) Indirect organogenesis and assessment of somaclonal variation in plantlets of Vanilla planifolia jacks. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 123:657–664.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11240-015-0868-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ryu J, Bae CH (2012) Genetic diversity and relationship analysis of genus Taraxacum accessions collected in Korea. Korean J Plant Res 25:329–338.  https://doi.org/10.7732/kjpr.2012.25.3.329 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Smýkal P, Valledor L, Rodríguez R, Griga M (2007) Assessment of genetic and epigenetic stability in long-term in vitro shoot culture of pea (Pisum sativum L.). Plant Cell Rep 26:1985–1998.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00299-007-0413-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Teixeira da Silva JA, Bolibok H, Rakoczy-Trojanowska M (2007) Molecular markers in micropropagation, tissue culture and in vitro plant research. Genes Genom Genom 1:66–72Google Scholar
  28. Trejgell A, Chernetskyy M, Podlasiak J, Tretyn A (2013) An efficient system for regenerating Taraxacum pieninicum Pawł. from seedling explants. Acta Biol Cracov Ser Bot 55:73–79.  https://doi.org/10.2478/abcsb-2013-00013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Upadhyay R, Kashyap P, Singh C, Tiwari KN, Singh K, Singh M (2014) Assessment of factors on shoot proliferation potential of nodal explants of Phyllanthus fraternus and assessment of genetic fidelity of micropropagated plants using RAPD marker. Biologia 69:1685–1692.  https://doi.org/10.2478/s11756-014-0484-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Xiong FQ, Zhong RC, Han ZQ, Jiang J, He LQ, Zhuang WJ, Tang RH (2011) Start codon targeted polymorphism for evaluation of functional genetic variation and relationship in cultivated peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) genotypes. Mol Biol Rep 38:3487–3494.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11033-010-0459-6 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Zarzycki K, Szeląg Z (2006) Red list of the vascular plants in Poland. In: Mirek Z (ed) Red list of plants and fungi in Poland. W. Szafer Institute of Botany, Polish Academy of Sciences, Cracow, pp 9–20Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Molecular Biology, Slovak Academy of Sciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Monika Kamińska
    • 1
  • Andrzej Tretyn
    • 1
  • Alina Trejgell
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Plant Physiology and BiotechnologyNicolaus Copernicus UniversityToruńPoland

Personalised recommendations