An Updated Overview of Advances in Somatic Embryogenesis in Forest Trees

  • S. Mohan Jain
Chapter

10.4 Conclusion

Somatic embryogenesis has the vast potential to produce plants in their millions, and has now become a routine protocol for many trees. However, the use of SE in a wide range of woody plants is yet to be utilized due to several limitations facing the process, including poor germination of somatic embryos, genotypic influences, a limited number of explants inducing SE, and somaclonal variation. These limitations have hindered the commercialization of SE in a wide range of forest trees. Further research is required at both the biochemical and molecular levels to understand the mechanism of SE, enabling the induction of SE in other recalcitrant woody species. A sharp focus is needed to increase the rate of ESM establishment, improving yield from established ESM, and increasing the germination rate of somatic embryos for commercialization, without which this technology will have very limited scope (Timmis 1998). Automation of somatic-seed production is the ultimate goal of commercial seed industries. The combination of high technology with tissue culture, including computer-aided image analysis, robotics, bioreactors (including temporary immersion systems) somatic-embryo encapsulation, development of appropriate somatic-embryo coating material, etc., require further investment for producing millions of somatic seeds in a short time and to cut down the cost of seed production. The genetic fidelity of somatic seedlings is important for all of this, which can be tested with molecular markers, such as AFLPs or microsatallites. Although several molecular markers are available, a reliable molecular diagnostic kit is still needed for the early detection of genetic variability during plant development.

Keywords

Somatic Embryo Somatic Embryogenesis Somaclonal Variation Embryogenic Culture Somatic Embryo Production 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Akula A, Becker D, Bateson M (2000) High-yielding repetitive somatic embryogenesis and plant recovery in a selected tea clone, TRI-2025, by temporary immersion. Plant Cell Rep t 19:1140–1145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Attree SM, Moore D, Sawhney VK, Fowke LC (1991) Enhanced maturation and desiccation tolerance of white spruce [Picea glauca (Moench) Voss] somatic embryos: Effects of non-plasmolysing water stress and abscisic acid. Ann Bot 68:519–525Google Scholar
  3. Attree SM, Pomeroy MK, Fowke LC (1992) Manipulation of conditions for the culture of somatic embryos of white spruce for improved triacylglycerol biosynthesis and desiccation tolerance. Planta 187:395–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barry-Etienne D, Bertrand B, Schlonvoigt A, Etienne H (2002) The morphological variability within population of coffee somatic embryos produced in a bioreactor affects the regeneration and the development of plants in the nursery. Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 68:153–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bellarosa R, Mo LH, Von Arnold S (1992) The influence of auxin and cytokinin on proliferation and morphology of somatic embryos of Picea abies (L.) Karst. Ann Bot 70:199–206Google Scholar
  6. Bonga JM, Von Aderkas P (eds) (1992) In vitro culture of trees. Kluwer, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  7. Carrier DJ, Cunningham JE, Taylor DC, Dunstan DI (1997) Sucrose requirements and lipid utilisation during germination of interior spruce (Picea glauca engelmannii complex) somatic embryos. Plant Cell Rept 16:550–554Google Scholar
  8. Cerda F, Aquea F, Gebauer M, Medina C, Arce-Johnson P (2002) Stable transformation of Pinus radiata embryogenic tissue by Agrobacterium tumefaciens. Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 70:251–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chalupa V (1995) Somatic embryogenesis in oak (Quercus spp.) In: Jain SM, Gupta PK, Newton RJ (eds) Somatic embryogenesis in woody plants, vol 2, Kluwer, Netherlands, pp 67–88Google Scholar
  10. Cheliak WM, Klimaszewska K (1991) Genetic variation in somatic embryo response in open-pollinated families of black spruce. Theor Appl Genet 82:185–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cyr DR (1999) Cryopreservation of embryogenic cultures of conifers and its application to clonal forestry. In: Jain SM, Gupta PK, Newton RJ (eds) Somatic embryogenesis in woody plants, vol 4, Kluwer, Netherlands, pp 239–262Google Scholar
  12. Cyr Dr, Lazaroff WR, Gimes SMA, Quan G, Bethume TD, Dunstan DI, Roberts DR (1994) Cryopreservation of interior spruce (Picea glauca engelmanni complex) embryogenic cultures. Plant Cell Rept 13:574–577Google Scholar
  13. Durzan DJ, Gupta PK (1987) Somatic embryogenesis and polyembryogenesis in Douglas fir cell suspension cultures. Plant Sci 52:229–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Etienne H, Berthouly M (2002) Temporary immersion system in plant micropropagation. Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 69:215–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Feuser S, Meler K, Daquinta M, Guerra MP, Nodari RO (2003). Genotypic fidelity of micropropagated pineapple (Ananas comosus) plantlets assessed by isozyme and RAPD markers. Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 72:221–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Finer JJ, Kriebel HB, Becwar MR (1989) Initiation of embryogenic callus and suspension cultures of eastern pines (Pinus strobes L.). Plant Cell Rept 8:203–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fourre JL, Berger P, Niquest L, Andre P (1997) Somatic embryogenesis and somaclonal variation in Norway spruce: morphogenetic, cytogenetic and molecular approaches. Theor Appl Genet 94:159–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gupta PK, Durzan DJ (1987) Biotechnology of somatic polyembryogenesis and plant regeneration in loblolly pine. Bio/Tech 5:147–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gupta PK, Grob J (1995) Somatic embryogenesis in conifers. In: Jain SM, Gupta PK, Newton RJ (eds) Somatic embryogenesis in woody plants, Vol 1. Kluwer, Netherlands, pp 81–98Google Scholar
  20. Gupta PK, Pullman GS (1991) Method for producing coniferous plants by somatic embryogenesis using abscisic acid and osmotic potential variation. U.S. Patent No. 5,036,007Google Scholar
  21. Ibaraki Y, Kurata K (2001) Automation of somatic embryo production. Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 65:179–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ingram B, Mavituna F (2000) Effect of bioreactor configuration on the growth and maturation of Picea sitchensis somatic embryo cultures. Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 61:87–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jain SM (2002a) Feeding the world with induced mutations and biotechnology. In: INC02 conference proceedings, Seminar 1, October 2002: Agriculture & Biosciences, MINT, Malaysia, pp 1–14Google Scholar
  24. Jain SM (2002b) A review of induction of mutations in fruits of tropical and subtropical regions. Acta Hort 575:295–302Google Scholar
  25. Jain SM, Brar DS, Ahloowalia BS (eds) (2002) Molecular techniques in crop improvement. Kluwer, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  26. Jain SM, Gupta PK, Newton RJ (eds) (1995) Somatic embryogenesis in woody plants, vol 1–3. Kluwer, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  27. Jain SM, Gupta PK, Newton RJ (eds) (1999) Somatic embryogenesis in woody plants, vol 4–5. Kluwer, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  28. Jain SM, Gupta PK, Newton RJ (eds) (2000) Somatic embryogenesis in woody plants, vol 6. Kluwer, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  29. Jain SM, Ishii K (1998) Recent advances in somatic embryogenesis in forest trees. In: Mantell SH, Burns S, Tragardh C (eds) Recent advances in biotechnology for tree conservation and management. International Foundation for Science, Stockholm, Sweden, pp 214–231Google Scholar
  30. Jain SM, Dong N, Newton RJ (1989) Somatic embryogenesis in slash pine (Pinus elliottii) from immature embryos cultured in vitro. Plant Sci 65:233–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jain SM, Newton RJ, Soltes EJ (1988) Enhancement of somatic embryogenesis in Norway spruce (Picea abies L.). Theor Appl Genet 76:501–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lu CH, Harry IS, Thompson MR, Thorpe TA (1991) Plantlet regeneration from cultured embryos and seedling parts of red spruce (Picea rubens Sarg.). Bot Gaz 152:42–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Murashige T, Skoog F (1962) A revised medium for rapid growth and bioassay with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol Plant 15:473–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Muralidharan EM, Mascarenhas AF (1995) Somatic embryogenesis in Eucalyptus. In: Jain SM, Gupta PK, Newton RJ (eds) Somatic embryogenesis in woody plants, vol 2, Kluwer, Netherlands, pp 23–40Google Scholar
  35. Norgaard JV (1997) Somatic embryo maturation and plant regeneration in Abies nordmanniana LK. Plant Sci 124:211–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Newton RJ, Bloom JC, Bivans, DH, Jain SM (2001) Stable genetic transformation of conifers. Phytomorphology Golden Jubilee Issue, 421–434Google Scholar
  37. Percy REL, Livingston NJ, Moran JA, Von Aderkas P (2001) Desiccation, cryopreservation and water relations parameters of white spruce (Picea glauca) and interior spruce (Picea glauca x engelmannii complex) somatic embryos. Tree Physiol 21:1303–1310PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Predieri S (2001) Mutation induction and tissue culture in improving fruits. Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 64:185–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Radojevic L, Alvarez C, Rodriguez A, Rodriguez R (2002) Induction of somatic embryogenesis in response to the application of cytokinins and auxins during mature embryo culture of Pinus nigra Arn. Propagation of Orna Plants 2:24–29Google Scholar
  40. Roberts DR, Webster EB, Flinn BS, Lazaroff WR, Cyr DR (1993) Somatic embryogenesis in spruce. In: Redenbaugh K (ed) SynSeeds Application of synthetic seeds to crop improvement. CRC, Boca Raton, pp 427–452Google Scholar
  41. Rohr R, Piola F, Pasquier P (1997) Somatic embryogenesis in Cephalotaxus harringtonia embryo-megagametophyte co-culture. J For Res 2:69–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ruaud JN, Bercetche, Paques M (1992) First evidence of somatic embryogenesis from needle less than one year old Picea abies. Plant Cell Rept 11:563–566Google Scholar
  43. Thakur RC, Goto S, Ishii K, Jain SM (1999) Monitoring genetic stability in Quercus serrata Thunb. somatic embryogenesis using RAPD markers. J For Res 4:157–160Google Scholar
  44. Timmis R (1998) Bioprocessing for tree production in the forest industry: conifer somatic embryogenesis. Biotechnol Prog 14:156–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tran Thanh Van K, Le BV (2000) Current status of thin cell layer method for the induction of organogenesis or somatic embryogenesis. In: Jain SM, Gupta PK, Newton RJ (eds) Somatic embryogenesis in woody plants, vol 6. Kluwer, Netherlands, pp 51–92Google Scholar
  46. Vendrame WA, Holliday CP, Merkle SA (2001) Clonal propagation of hybrid sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua x L. formosana) by somatic embryogenesis. Plant Cell Rept 20:691–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Von Arnold S, Egersdotter U, Ekberg I, Gupta P, Mo H, Norgaard J (1995) Somatic embryogenesis in Norway spruce (Picea abies). In: Jain SM, Gupta PK, Newton RJ (eds) Somatic embryogenesis in woody plants, vol 3. Kluwer, Netherlands, pp 17–36Google Scholar
  48. Von Arnold S, Sabala I, Bozhkov P, Dyachok J, Filonova L (2002) Developmental pathways of somatic embryosis. Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 69:233–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Watt MP, Blakeway FC, Termignoni R, Jain SM (1999) Somatic embryogensis in Eucalyptus grandis and E. dunnii. In: Jain SM, Gupta PK, Newton RJ (eds) Somatic embryogenesis in woody plants, vol 5. Kluwer, Netherlands, pp 63–78Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Tokyo 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Mohan Jain
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Applied Biology, Horticulture Section, PL-27Helsinki UniversityFinland

Personalised recommendations