Advertisement

In Vitro Control of Morphogenesis in Conifers

Chapter
Part of the Forestry Sciences book series (FOSC, volume 24-26)

Abstract

One of the important problems in forestry is the establishment of propagules of high quality for planting. Traditionally this implies the problem of selection through generations. However, due to their slow growth, long vegetative phase before the flowering phase, and their large size, breeding and selection of trees by conventional genetic methods are difficult. In breeding orchards, only female partners can be selected because open pollination relies on airborne pollen. Furthermore, delayed periods of flowering of the two parental partners strongly limit the possibilities for genetic selection. Finally, in situ controlled pollination is expensive.

Keywords

Female Gametophyte Donor Plant Female Cone Incandescent Light Thin Cell Layer 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    ABO EL-NIL M, Z WOCHOK 1977 In vitro developmental responses of wild full sib families of Douglas fir. Plant Physiol 59 (Suppl): 2Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    ARNOLD S, T ERIKSSON 1978 Induction of adventitious buds on embryos of Norway spruce grown in vitro. Physiol Plant 44: 283–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    BIONDI S, TA THORPE 1982 Growth regulator effects, metabolite changes, and respiration during shoot initiation in cultured cotyledon expiants of Pinus radiata. Bot Gaz 143: 20–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    BONGA JM 1977 Application of tissue culture in forestry. In J Reinert, YPS Bajaj, eds, Plant Cell Tissue and Organ Culture. Springer Verlag, Berlin, pp 93–108Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    BONGA JM 1982 Vegetative propagation of mature trees by tissue culture, In AM Rao, ed, Tissue Culture of Economically Important Plants. COSTED and ANBS, Singapore, pp 191–196Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    BORNMAN CH, E JANSSON 1981 Regeneration of plants from the conifer leaf: Limitations imposed by needle morphology. In Proc IUFRO Sect S2 01 5. Int Workshop “In Vitro” Cultivation For Tree Species. Fontainebleau, France, pp 41–53Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    BORNMAN CH, E JANSSON 1980 Organogenesis in cultured Pinus sylvestris tissue. Z Pflanzenphysiol 96: 1–6Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    BOULAY M 1977 Multiplication rapide du Sequoia sempervirens en culture in vitro. Ann AFOCEL, 37–67Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    CAMPBELL RA, DJ DURZAN 1975 Induction of multiple buds and needles in tissue cultures of Picea glauca. Can J Bot 53: 1652–1657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    CHAPULA V 1977 Development of isolated Norway spruce and Douglas fir buds in vitro. Commun Inst For Cech 10: 71–78Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    CHENG TY 1975 Adventitious bud formation in cultures of Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco). Plant Sci Lett 5: 97–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    CHENG TY 1976 Vegetative propagation of western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) through tissue culture. Plant Cell Physiol 17: 1347–1350Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    CHENG TY 1977 Factors affecting adventitious bud formation of cotyledon culture of Douglas fir. Plant Sci Lett 9: 179–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    DAVID H, K ISEMUKALI, A DAVID 1978 Obtention de plants de Pin maritime (Pinus pinaster Sol.) à partir de brachyblastes ou d’apex caulinaireü de très jeunes sujets cultivés in vitro. CR Acad Sci 287: 245–248Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    DE LA GOUBLAYE DE NANTOIS T 1980 Rajeunissement chez le Douglas en vue de la multiplication végétative. Etudes sur la plagiotropie des parties aériennes et racinaires. DEA Physiol Veget, PARIS VIGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    GUPTA PK, DJ DURZAN 1985 Shoot multiplication from mature trees of Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziessii) and sugar pine (Pinus lambertiana). Plant Cell Rep 4: 177–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    GAMBORG OL, RA MILLER, K OJIMA 1968 Nutrient requirements of suspension cultures of soybean root cells. Exp Cell Res 50: 148–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    KADKADE PG, HJ OCONNOR 1977 Influence of light quality on organogenesis in Douglas fir tissue cultures. In Proc For Biol Wood Chem Conf. TAPPI, Atlanta, pp 71–75Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    MURASHIGE T, F SKOOG 1962 Revised medium for rapid growth and bioassays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol Plant 15: 493–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    PATEL KR, TA THORPE 1984 In vitro differentiation of plantlets from embryogenie explants of lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Dougl. ex Loud.). Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 3: 131–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    REILLY K, CL BROWN 1976 In vitro studies of bud and shoot formation in Pinus radiata and Pseudotsuga menziesii. Ga For Res Pap 86: 1–9Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    SOMMER HE, CL BROWN, PP KORMANIK 1975 Differentiation of plantlets in long leaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) tissue cultured in vitro. Bot Gaz 136: 196–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    TRAN THANH VAN K 1965 La vernalisation du Geum urbanum L. Étude expérimentale de la mise à fleur chez une plante vivace en rosette exigeant le froid vernalisant pour fleurir. Ann Sei Nat Bot 12, ser VI: 373–594Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    TRAN THANH VAN K 1973 Direct flower neoformation from superficial tissues of small expiant of Nicotiana tabacum L. Planta 115: 87–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    TRAN THANH VAN K 1974 Growth and flowering of Cymbidium buds normally inhibited by apical dominance. J Am Soc Hortic Sei 99: 450–453Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    TRAN THANH VAN K 1977 Regulation of morphogenesis. In W Barz, E Reinhard, MH Zenk, eds, Plant Tissue Culture and its Biotechnical Application. Springer Verlag, Berlin, pp 367–385Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    TRAN THANH VAN K, H TRINH 1978 Plant propagation: Non-identical and identical copies, Tn KW Hughes, R Henke, M Constatin, eds, Propagation of Higher plants through Tissue Culture. Univ Tennessee Symp Proc, pp 134–158Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    TRAN THANH VAN K 1981 Control of morphogenesis in tn vitro cultures. Annu Rev Plant Physiol 32: 291–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    TRAN THANH VAN K 1985 Geum urbanum. In H Halevy, ed. Handbook of Flowering, Vol 3. CRC Press, pp 53–62Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    TRAN THANH VAN K, H TRINH 1980 Capacité embryogénétique des anthères des fleurs néoforraees à partir de couches cellulaires minces et celle des anthères des fleurs prélevées sur la plante mère chez le Nicotiana tabacum L. et le Nicotiana plumbaginifolia Viv. Z Pflanzenphysiol 100: 379–380Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    VERONE P, TH TRINH, K TRAN THANH VAN, C DUMAS 1985 The control of ovule receptivity in the process of in vitro pollination. In DL Mulcahy and E Ottaviano, eds, Biotechnology and Ecology of Pollen. Springer Verlag, New York, in pressGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    WINTON LL 1972 Callus and cell cultures of Douglas fir. For Sci 18: 151–154Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    WINTON LL, SA VERHAGEN 1977 Shoots from Douglas fir culture. Can J Bot 55: 1246–1250CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht 1987

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations