~

World Journal of Microbiology &Biotechnology 11, 409-415

.

..

..

.. Crop improvement through tissue culture

~

D.C.W. Brown and T.A. Thorpe*

Plant tissue culture comprises a set of in vitro techniques, methods and strategies that are part of the group of
technologies called plant biotechnology. Tissue culture has been exploited to create genetic variability from which
crop plants can be improved, to improve the state of health of the planted material and to increase the number of
desirable germplasms available to the plant breeder. Tissue-culture protocols are available for most crop species,
although continued optimization is still required for many crops, especially cereals and woody plants. Tissue-
culture techniques, in combination with molecular techniques, have been successfully used to incorporate specific
traits through gene transfer. In vitro techniques for the culture of protoplasts, anthers, microspores, ovules and
embryos have been used to create new genetic variation in the breeding lines, often via haploid production. Cell
culture has also produced somaclonal and gametoclonal variants with crop-improvement potential. The culture of
single cells and meristems can be effectively used to eradicate pathogens from planting material and thereby
dramatically improve the yield of established cultivars. Large-scale micropropagation laboratories are providing
millions of plants for the commercial ornamental market and the agricultural, clonally-propagated crop market.
With selected laboratory material typically taking one or two decades to reach the commercial market through
plant breeding, this technology can be expected to have an ever increasing impact on crop improvement as we
approach the new millenium.

Key words: Breeding, embryo cultu~e, haploids, micropropagation, protoplasts, synthetic seed, transformation, wide
hybridization.

Tissue-culture techniques are part of a large group of what has changed in the last two decades is the available
strategies and technologies, ranging through molecular technology (Davis & Reznikoff 1992). We no longer have
genetics, recombinant DNA studies, genome characteriz- to rely on pollination and cross-fertilization as the only
ation, gene-transfer techniques, aseptic growth of cells, ways to genetically modify plants. That the newer molecu-
tissues, organs, and in vitro regeneration of plants, that are lar and cellular technologies have yet to make a broad-
considered to be plant biotechnologies. The use of the term based significant impact on crop production is not surpris-
biotechnology has become widespread recently but, in its ing since a plant-breeding process of 10 to 20 years
most restricted sense, it refers to the molecular techniques duration is still required to refine a selected plant to the
used to modify the genetic composition of a host plant, i.e. stage of cultivar release (Plucknett & Smith 1986; Kuckuck
genetic engineering. In its broadest sense, biotechnology et al. 1991).
can be described as the use of living organisms or biological The applications of various tissue-culture approaches to
processes to produce substances or processes useful to crop improvement, through breeding, wide hybridization,
mankind and, in this sense, it is far from new. The products haploidy, somaclonal variation and micropropagation, are
of plant breeding and the fermentation industries (e.g. the subjects of this review.
cheese, wine and beer), for example, have been exploited
for many centuries (Zhong et al. 1995). What is new and Plant Breeding and Biotechnology

D.CW. Brown is with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Central Experi-

Plant breeding can be conveniently separated into two
mental Farm, Plant Research Centre, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A OCB, Canada. activities (Kleese & Duvick 1980): manipulating genetic
T.A. Thorpe is with the Plant Physiology Research Group, Department of
Bio[ogical Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1N4,
variability and plant evaluation. Historically, selection of
plants was made by simply harvesting the seeds from those
:1 Canada; fax: (403) 2899311. 'Corresponding author.
@ 1995 Rapid Communications of Oxford LId

World Journal of Microbiology & Biotechnology, Vol II, 1995 409

 D.C W. Brown and TA. Thorpe

plants that performed best in the field. Controlled pollination Pre-zygotic barriers to hybridization (those occurring prior
of plants led to the realization that specific crosses could
result in a new generation that performed better in the field
to fertilization), such as the failure of pollen to germinate or
poor pollen-tube growth, may be overcome using in vitro
~
than either of the parents or the progeny of subsequent fertilization (IVF; Yeung et al. 1981). Post-zygotic barriers
generations, i.e. the expression of heterosis through hybrid (occurring after fertilization), such as lack of endosperm
vigour was observed. Because one of the two major activi- development, may be overcome by embryo, ovule or pod
ties in plant breeding is manipulating genetic variability, a culture. Where fertilization cannot be induced by in vitro
key prerequisite to successful plant breeding is the availa- treatments, protoplast fusion has been successful in produc-
bility of genetic diversity (Kuckuck et al. 1991; Villalobos & ing the desired hybrids (see below).
Engelmann 1995). It is in this area, creating genetic diver-
sity and manipulating genetic variability, that biotech- In vitro Fertilization
nology (including tissue-culture techniques) is having its IVF has been used to facilitate both interspecific and inter-
most significant impact. In spite of the general lack of generic crosses, to overcome physiological-based self incom-
integration of most plant-biotechnology and plant-breeding patibility and to produce hybrids. A wide range of plant
programmes, field trials of transgenic plants have recently species has been recovered through IVF via pollination of
become much more common. There are therefore reasons pistils and self- and cross-pollination of ovules (Yeung et al.
to believe that we are on the verge of the revolution, 1981; Zenkteler 1990; Raghavan 1994). This range includes
in terms of the types and genetic make up of our crops, agricultural crops, such as tobacco, clover, com, rice, cole,
that has been predicted for more than a decade (Bodde canola, poppy and cotton. The use of delayed pollination,
1982). distant hydridization, pollination with abortive or irradi-
More than 50 different plant species have already been ated pollen, and physical and chemical treatment of the
genetically modified, either by vector-dependent (e.g. Agro- host ovary have been used to induce haploidy (Maheshwari
bacterium)or vector-independent (e.g. biolistic, micro-injec- & Rangaswamy 1965; Zenkteler 1984).
tion and liposome) methods (Sasson 1993; Anon. 1994). In
almost all cases, some type of tissue-culture technology has EmbryoCulture
been used to recover the modified cells or tissues. In fact, The most common reason for post-zygotic failure of wide
tissue-culture techniques have played a majpr role in the hybridization is embryo abortion due to poor endosperm
development of plant genetic engineering. For example, development. Embryo culture has been successful in over-
four of the seven papers listed by Davis & Reznikov (1992) coming this major barrier as well as solving the problems
as classic milestones in plant biotechnology used a range of of low seed set, seed dormancy, slow seed germination,
protoplast, microspore, tissue and organ culture protocols. inducing embryo growth in the absence of a symbiotic
Tissue culture will continue to playa key role in the partner, and the production of monoploids of barley (Ragha-
genetic-engineering process for the foreseeable future, van 1980, 1994; Yeung et al. 1981; Collins & Grosser 1984;
especially in efficient gene transfer and transgenic plant Zenkteler 1990). The breeding cycle of Iris was shortened
recovery (Hinchee et al. 1994). from 2 to 3 years to a few months by employing embryo-
rescue technology (Randolph 1945). A similar approach has
Wide Hybridization worked with orchids and roses and is being applied to
banana and Colocasia(Yeung et al. 1981). Interspecific and
A critical requirement for crop improvement is the introduc- intergeneric hybrids of a number of agriculturally important
tion of new genetic material into the cultivated lines of crops have been successfully produced, including cotton,
interest, whether via single genes, through genetic engineer- barley, tomato, rice, j.ute, Hordeum X Secale,Triticum x
ing, or multiple genes, through conventional hybridization Secale,Tripsacumx lea and some Brassicas (Collins &
or tissue-culture techniques. During fertilization in an- Grosser 1984; Palmer & Keller 1994; Zapata-Arias et al.
giosperms, pollen grains must reach the stigma of the host 1995). At least seven Canadian barley cultivars (Mingo,
plant, germinate and produce a pollen tube. The pollen Rodeo, Craig, Winthrop, Lester and TB891-6) have been
tube must penetrate the stigma and style and reach the produced out of material selected from doubled haploids
ovule. The discharge of sperm within the female gameto- originating through the widely-used bulbosum method of
phyte triggers syngamy and the two sperm nuclei must cross-pol1ination and embryo rescue (Kasha & Kao 1970;
then fuse with their respective partners. The egg nucleus Choo et al. 1992). Mingo, in particular, was a breakthrough,
and fusion nucleus then form a developing embryo and the as it was the first barley culti1tar produced by this technique
nutritional endosperm, respectively (Tilton & Russel 1984; to be licensed, in 1980. Briefly, Hordeum vulgare (2n = 14)
Zenkteler 1990). This process can be blocked at any number is pollinated with pollen from H. bulbosum (2n = 14).
of stages, resulting in a functional barrier to hybridization Normal1y, the seeds develop for about 10 days and then
and the blockage of gene transfer between the two plants. abort but, if the immature embryos are rescued and cultured

410 W",/d Jmlnw/ of Microbiology C"Biotechnology. Vol]]. ]995

 Tissue culfilre and crop Improvement

Table 1. Canadian tobacco crops and the estimated value of

showed a wide range of leaf alkaloid content but had a
Delgold, a protoplast-fusion-derived tobacco cultivar, since Del- high level of sterility. However, after three backcross genera-
gold's introduction in 1990.' tions to the cultivated N. tabacum parent, plant fertility was
restored in the hybrid lines, although their alkaloid content
Year Total tobacco crop Delgold and resistance to blue mould and black root rot were
highly variable. Interestingly, neither parent was known to
Production Value . Proportion of Value
possess significant resistance to blue mould. Two commer-
(tonnes) (USS) total crop (%) (USS)
cial varieties, Delgold (Pandeya & White 1994) and AC
1990 56,000 175,000,000 1 1.750,000
Chang, have been released from the progeny of these
1991 70,000 212,000,000 23 48,760,000 protoplast fusion products (R. Pandeya, unpublished work)
1992 59,000 190,000,000 33 62,700,000 and are presently grown on approximately 42% of the flue-
1993 71,000 224,000,000 35 78,400,000 cured tobacco acreage in Ontario, Canada. This represents
1994t 59,000 197,000,.()00 41 80,770,000 a value of approx. US$199,000,000 (Table 1).
. Values are courtesy of R. Pandeya, the Ontario Flue-cured
Where mutant cell lines of donor plants are not available
Tobacco Growers Marketing Board, and the Crop Insurance for use in a genetic complementation selection system, it
Commission of Ontario. has been demonstrated that mesophyll protoplasts from
t A second, protoplast-derived cultivar, A.C. Chang, introduced donor parents carrying transgenic antibiotic resistance can
in 1994, occupied about 1% of the crop acreage, with an esti- be used to produce fertile somatic hybrids selected by dual-
mated value of US$1,970,000.
antibiotic resistance (Sproule ef al. 1991). The fusion of
protoplasts from 6-azauracil-resistantcell lines of Solanum
on basal growth medium, plants can be recovered. The melongena (aubergine)with protoplasts from the wild species
plants resulting from this cross-pollination/embryo rescue 5. sisymbrilfo/ium yielded hybrid, purple-pigmented cell colo-
are haploids rather than hybrids and are the result of the nies that underwent regeneration via organogenesis (Gled-
systematic elimination of the H. bulbosum chromosomes die ef al. 1986). As protoplasts from the parental cell
(Kasha & Kao 1970; Ho & Kasha 1975). Haploid wheat has suspension cultures could not be regenerated, hybrids could
also been produced by this technique (Bajaj 1990). be screened by their 6-azauracil resistance, capacity to
synthesize anthocyanins (purple pigment) and ability to
Protoplast Fusion undergo shoot organogenesis. The restoration of regenera-
Protoplast fusion has often been suggested as a means of tion ability through complementation has also been ob-
developing unique hybrid plants which cannot be produced served in Nicofiana cell-fusion products (Douglas et al.
by conventional sexual hybridization. Protoplasts can be 1981a; Gleddie ef al. 1983). The hybrids resulting from this
produced from many plants, including most crop species study were found to be resistant to root knot nematodes
(Gamborg et al. 1981; Evans & Bravo 1983; Lal & Lal 1990; and spider mites, important agricultural traits. However, they
Feher & Dudits 1994). However, while any two plant were also completely sterile and could not be incorporated
protoplasts can be fused by chemical or physical means, into an aubergine-breeding programme. Two possible ways
production of unique somatic hybrid plants is limited by of solving this sterility problem, 'back' fusions of somatic
the ability to regenerate the fused product and sterility in hybrids with the cultivated parents and initiation of suspen-
the interspecific hybrids (Evans ef al. 1984; Gleddie et al. sion cultures of the hybrid cells so that more of the wild-
1986; Pandeya ef al. 1986; Schieder & Kohn 1986; Evans & species chromosomes can be eliminated, have so far been
Bravo 1988) rather than the production of protoplasts. unsuccessful with these hybrids (S. Gleddie, unpublished
Perhaps the best example of the use of protoplasts to work). Selection of hybrids and use of protoplast fusion for
improve crop production is that of Nicofiana, where the hybridization in crop plants has been reported in Brassicas,
somatic hybrid products of a chemical fusion of protoplasts citrus, rice, carrot, canola, tomato, and the forage legumes
have been used to modify the alkaloid and disease-resistant alfalfa and clover (Akagi et al. 1989; Bajaj 1989; Tanno-
traits of commercial tobacco cultivars (Pandeya ef al. 1986). Suenaga ef al. 1988; Vardi ef al. 1989; Kao ef al. 1991).
Somatic hybrids were produced by fusing protoplasts, using Evans & Bravo (1988) have recommended that produc-
a calcium-polyethylene glycol treatment, from a cell suspen- tion of novel hybrids through protoplast fusion should
sion of chlorophyll-deficient N. rusfica with an albino focus on four areas: (1) agriculturally important traits; (2)
mutant of N. tabacum (Douglas ef al. 1981a, b). The wild N. achieving combinations that can only be accomplished by
rusficaparent possessed the desirable traits of high alkaloid protoplast fusion; (3) somatic hybrids integrated into a
levels and resistance to black root rot. Fusion products conventional breeding programme; and (4) the extension of
were selected as bright green cell colonies, the colour being protoplast regeneration to a wider range of crop species. In
due to the genetic complemention for chlorophyll synthesis the case of the above-mentioned example of Nicotiana,all
r the hybrid cells. Plants recovered by shoot organogenesis of these criteriawere met although this took 12 years from

World Journal of Microbiology & Biotechnology, Vol II, 1995 411

 .-

D.C W. Brown and TA. Thorpe

the isolation of the fusion product in 1978 to the release of through several types of nuclear chromosomal re-arrange-
the first variety in 1990; this underlines the often over- ments and losses, gene amplification or de-amplificationj:
looked fact that it takes 10 to 20 years to take initial n'on-reciprocal mitotic recombination events, transposabll
research results to the stage of a recognized cultivar (Pluck- element activation, apparent point mutations, or re-activa-
nett & Smith 1986;Kuckucketal. 1991). tion of silent genes in multigene families, as well as altera-
tions in maternally inherited characteristics (Larkin et al.
Haploids 1985; Scowcroft et al. 1987; Karp 1994).
Many of the changes observed in plants regenerated in-
Haploid plants have the gametophytic (one-half of the nor- vitro have potential agricultural and horticultural signifi-
mal) number of chromosomes (Atanassov et al. 1995; Zapata- cance. These include alterations in plant pigmentation, seed
Arias et al. 1995). They are of interest to plant breeders yield, plant vigour and size, leaf and flower morphology,
because they allow the expression of simple recessive essential oils, fruit solids, and disease tolerance or resistance.
genetic traits or mutated recessive genes and because Such variations have been observed in many crops, includ-
doubled haploids can be used immediately as homozygous ing wheat, triticale, rice, oats, maize, sugar cane, alfalfa,
breeding lines. The efficiency in producing homozygous tobacco, tomato, potato, oilseed rape and celery (Thorpe
breeding lines via doubled in vitro-produced haploids repre- 1990; Karp 1994). The same types of variation obtained
sents significant savings in both time and cost compared from somatic cells and protoplasts can also be obtained
with other methods. Three in vitro methods have been used from gametic tissue (Evans et al. 1984; Morrison & Evans
to generate haploids (Bajaj 1990): (1) culture of excised 1988).
ovaries and ovules; (2) the bulbosumtechnique of embryo One of the major potential benefits of somaclonal varia-
culture; and (3) culture of excised anthers and pollen. At tion is the creation of additional genetic variability in co-
least 171 plant species have been used to produce haploid adapted, agronomically useful cultivars, without the need
plants by pollen, microspore and anther culture (Evans et al. to resort to hybridization (Scowcroft et al. 1987). This
1984; Hu & Zeng 1984; Bajaj 1990). These include cereals method could be valuableif selectionis possible in vitro, or
(barley, maize, rice, rye, triticale and wheat), forage crops if rapid plant-screening methods are available. It is believed
(alfalfa and clover), fruits (grape and strawberry), medicinal that somaclonalvariants can be enhanced for some charac-
plants (Digitalis and Hyoscyamus), ornamentals (Gerberaand ters during culture in vitro, including resistance to disease
sunflower), oil seeds (canola and rape), tr~es (apple, litchi, pathotoxins and herbicides and tolerance to environmental
poplar and rubber), plantation crops (cotton, sugar cane and or chemical stress. However, at present few cultivars of any
tobacco), and vegetable crops (asparagus, brussels sprouts, agronomically important crop have been produced through
cabbage, carrot, pepper, potato, sugar beet, sweet potato, the exploitation of somaclonal variation (Karp 1994).
tomato and wing bean). Haploid wheat cultivars, derived
from anther culture, have been released in France and Micropropagation
China (Bajaj 1990). Five to 7 years were saved producing
inbred lines in a Chinese maize-breeding programme by Propagationof Plants
using anther culture-derived haploids. A similar saving has During the last 30 years it has become possible to regener-
been reported for triticaleand the horticulturalcrop Freesia. ate plantlets from explants and/or callus from all types of
In asparagus (Dore 1990), anther-derived haploids have plants. As a result, laboratory-scale micropropagation proto-
been used to produce an all-male F, hybrid variety in cols are available for a wide range of species (Debergh &
France. Zimmerman 1991) and at present micropropagation is the
widest use of plant tissue-culture technology. Murashige
Somaclonal Variation (1990) reported that there were over 300 commercial opera-
tors World-wide in 1990. In Europe, there were 172 micro-
In addition to the variants/mutants (cell lines and plants) propagation firms and about 1800 different tissue lines
obtained as a result of the application of a selective agent (species and varieties) in culture amongst the 501 plant
in the presence or absence of a mutagen, many variants tissue-culture laboratories identified in 1993 (O'Riordain
have been obtained through the tissue-culture cycle itself. 1994). For example, of the 88 European laboratories using
These soma clonal variants, which are dependent on the potato in tissue culture, 58 were listed as using in-vitro
natural variation in a population of cells, may be genetic or multiplication, 49 were involved in the elimination of
epigenetic, and are usually observed in the regenerated pathogens, 45 were using tissue-culture simply to store
plantlets (Larkin & Scowcroft 1981). Somaclonal variation germ plasm, 44 were involved in genetic modification and
itself does not appear to be a simple phenomenon, and may 26 had plant-breeding programmes. The role of micropropa-
reflect pre-existing cellular genetic differences or tissue- gation in crop improvement has been recently reviewed in
culture-induced variability. The variation may be generated considerable detail (Bajaj 1991a, 1992a, b, c). Along with

412 World JOIin,"1of Microbiology & Biolech/1%gy, Vo/1J. 1995

I
~

. Tissue culture and crop improvement

. the impressive successes there are several limiting factors a cost saving, as the labour intensive step of transferring
to its use (Wang & Charles 1991). The cost of the labour plants from in vitro to soil/field conditions may be over-
..
needed to transfer tissue repeatedly between vessels and come. Other applications include the maintenance of male
the need for asepsis can account for up to 70% of the sterile lines, the maintenance of parental lines for hybrid-
production costs of micropropagation. Problems of vitrifica- crop production, and the preservation and multiplication of
tion, acclimatization and contamination can cause great losses elite genotypes of woody plants that have long juvenile
. in a tissue-culture laboratory. Genetic variations in cultured developmental phases (Villalobos & Engelmann 1995). How-
lines, such as polyploidy, aneuploidy and mutations, have ever, before the widespread application of this technology,
~
been reported in several systems and resulted in the loss of somaclonal variation will have to be minimized, large-scale
desirable economic traits in the tissue-cultured products. production of high quality embryos must be perfected in
. There are three methods used for micropropagation: (1) the species of interest, and the protocols will have to be
enhancing axillary-bud breaking; (2)' production of adventi- made cost-effective compared with existing seed or micro-
tious buds; and (3) somatic embryogenesis. In the latter propagation technologies.
two methods, organized structures arise directly on the
explant or indirectly from callus. Axillary-bud breaking Pathogen Eradication
produces the least number of plantlets, as the number of Crop plants, especially vegetatively propagated varieties,
shoots produced is controlled by the number of axillary are generally infected with pathogens. Strawberry plants,
buds cultured, but remains the most widely used method in for example, are susceptible to over 60 viruses and myco-
commercial micropropagation and produces the most true- plasms and this often necessitates the yearly replacement of
to-type plantlets. Adventitious budding has a greater poten- mother plants (Boxus 1976). In many cases, although the
tial for producing plantlets, as bud primordia may be presence of viruses or other pathogens may not be obvious,
formed on any part of the inoculum. Unfortunately, somatic yield or quality may be substantially reduced as a result of
embryogenesis, which has the potential of producing the the infection (Bhojwani & Razdan 1983). In China, for
largest number of plantlets, can only presently be induced example, virus-free potatoes, produced by culture in vitro,
in a few species (Thorpe 1990). Nevertheless, the produc- gave higher yields than the normal field plants, with
tion of somatic embryos from cell cultures presents opportu- increases up to 150% (Singh 1992). As only about 10% of
nities not available to plantlets regenerated by the organo- viruses are transmitted through seeds (Kartha 1981), careful
genic routes, such as mechanization (Ammirato 1983). One propagation from seed can eliminate most viruses from
approach envisages the use of bioreactors for large-scale plant material. Fortunately, the distribution of viruses in a
production of somatic embryos and their delivery in the plant is not uniform and the apical meristems either have a
form of seed tapes or artificialseeds (see below). No commer- very low incidence of virus or are virus-free (Wang &
cial operation based on somatic embryogenesis exists Charles 1991). The excision and culture of apical meristems
(Thorpe 1990) but such embryogenesis is playing an impor- (the meristem with one to three of the subjacent leaf
tant role in improving herbaceous dicots (Brown et al. primordia), coupled with thermo- or chemo-therapy, have
1995), herbaceous monocots (KrishnaRaj & Vasil 1995) and been successfully employed to produce virus-free and gener-
woody plants (Dunstan et al. 1995). ally pathogen-free material for micropropagation (Kartha
1981; Bhojwani & Razdan 1983; Wang & Charles 1991;
SyntheticSeed Singh 1992).
A synthetic or artificial seed has been defined as a somatic
embryo encapsulated inside a coating and is considered to Germplasm Preservation
be analogous to a zygotic seed (Redenbaugh 1993). There One way of conserving germplasm, an alternative to seed
are several different types of synthetic seed: somatic em- banks and especially to field collections of clonally propa-
bryos encapsulated in a water gel; dried and coated somatic gated crops, is in vitro storage under slow-growth condi-
embryos; dried and uncoated somatic embryos; somatic tions (at low temperature and/or with growth-retarding
embryos suspended in a fluid carrier; and shoot buds compounds in the medium) or cryopreservation or as desic-
encapsulated in a water gel. No large-scale system for cated synthetic seed (Harry & Thorpe 1991; Villalobos &
producing such seeds has yet been developed, although Engelmann 1995). The technologies are all directed towards
pilot studies of moderate size, using somatic embryos reducing or stopping growth and metabolic activity. Tech-
encapsulated in a water gel. have been conducted in Japan niques have been developed for a wide range of plants
with F, hybrids of celery and lettuce (Sanada et al. 1993). (Bajaj 1991b). The most serious limitations are a lack of a
Several applications for synthetic seeds have been reviewed common method suitable for all species and genotypes, the
(Deunff 1993). The use of synthetic seeds as an improve- high costs and the possibility of somaclonal variation and
ment on more traditional micropropagation protocols in non-intentional cell-type selection in the stored material
(e.g. aneuploidy due to cell division at low temperatures or
fgetatively propagated crops may, in the long term, have

World Journal of Microbiology & Biotechnology. Vol ". 1995 413

D.C W. Brown and TA. Thorpe

sum method in barley Hordeum vulgare L. Sabrao Journal 24,

non-optimal conditions giVIng one cell type a selective
87-92.
growth advantage).
Collins, G.B. & Grosser. j.W. 1984 Culture of Embryos. In ~ll
Culture a/1d Somatic Cell Gmetics of Pla/1ts, Vol. 1. ed Vasil. I:K.
Concluding Thoughts pp. 241-257. New York: Academic Press.
Plant tissue-culture technology is playing an increasingly Davis, j. & Reznikoff, W.5. 1992 Milesto/1e~i/1Biotech/1ology:Classic
Boston:Butterworth-Heinemann.
Papers0/1Gmetic E/1gi/1eeri/1g.
important role in basic and applied studies, including crop Debergh, P.C & Zimmerman, R.H. (eds) 1991 Micropropagatio/1.
improvement (Thompson & Thorpe 1990; Thorpe 1990; Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Vasil & Thorpe 1994). In modern agriculture, only about Deunff. YL. 1993 Conclusions and future. In SYllseeds:Applicatio/1s
150 plant species are extensively cultivated. Many of these of SY/1thetic Seeds to Crop Improvemml, ed Redenbaugh, K.
pp. 453-:561. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
are reaching the limits of their improvement by traditional
Dore, C 1990 Asparagus anther culture and field trials of dihaploids
methods. The application of tissue-culture technology, as a and fl hybrids. In Biotech/1ology
i/1 Agriculture and Forestry, Vol.
central tool or as an adjunct to other methods, including 12, ed Bajaj, yp.s. pp. 322-345. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
recombinant DNA techniques, is at the vanguard in plant Douglas, G.C, Keller, W.A & Setterfield, G. 1981a Somatic
modification and improvement for agriculture, horticulture hybridization between Nicotiana ruslica and N. labacum. L Isola-
tion and culture of protoplasts and regeneration of plants from
and forestry.
cell cultures of wild-type and chlorophyll-deficient strains.
Ca/1adianJournal of Botany 59, 208--219.
References
Douglas, G.C, Keller, W.A. & Setterfield, G. 1981b Somatic
Akagi, H., Sakamoto, M., Negishi, T & Fujimura, T 1989 Construc- hybridization between Nicotiana rustica and N. tabacum. II.
tion of rice cybrid plants. Molecular Gmeral Genetics 215, 501- Protoplast fusion and selection and regeneration of hybrid
506. plants. Canadian Journal of Botany 59, 220-227.
Ammirato, P.Y. 1983 Embryogenesis. In Handbook of Plant Cell Dunstan, 0.1., Tautorus, TE. & Thorpe, TA 1995 Somatic embryo-
Culture, Vol. 1, eds Evans, D.A, Sharp, W.R., Ammirato, p.y. & genesis in woody plants. In In Vitro Embryogenesisin Plants, ed
Yamada, Y pp. 82-123. New York: Macmillan. Thorpe, TA pp. 473-539. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Anon. 1994 General Questions and Answers on Biotechnology. Evans, D.A & Bravo, j.E. 1983 Protoplast fusion. In Handbook of
Ottawa: Food Protection and Inspection Branch, Agriculture Plant Cell Cul/ure, Vol. 1, eds Evans, D.A, Sharp, W.R., Ammi-
and Agri-Food Canada. rato, P.Y. & Yamada, Y pp. 291-321. New York: Macmillan.
Atanassov, A, Zagorska, N., Boyadjiev, P. & Djilianov, D. 1995 Evans, D.A & Bravo, j.E. 1988 Agricultural applications of proto-
In vitro production of haploid plants. World Journal of Micro- plast fusion. In Pla/1t Biotechnology, ed Marby, T.j. pp. 51-91.
biology and Biotechnology11, 400-408. Austin: Ie' Institute, University of Texas.
Bajaj, yp.s. (ed) 1989 Biotechnology in Agriculture and Forestry, Vois Evans, D.A, Sharpe, W.R. & Bravo, j.E. 1984 Cell culture methods
8 and 9: Plant Protoplasts and Genetic Engineering. Berlin: Springer for crop improvement. In Handbook of Pla/11Cell Cul/ure, Vol. 2,
Verlag. eds Sharp, W.R., Evans, D.A, Ammirato, p.y. & Yamada, Y
Bajaj,yp.s. 1990 In vitro production of haploids and their use in cell pp. 393-441. New York: Macmillan.
genetics and plant breeding. In Biotechnology in Agriculture and Feher, A & Dudits, D. 1994 Plant protoplasts and cell fusion and
Forestry, Vol. 12, ed Bajaj,yp.s. pp. 3-44. Berlin: Springer Verlag. direct DNA uptake: culture and regeneration systems. In Plant
Bajaj,YP.S. (ed) 1991a Biotechnology i/1 Agriculture a/1d Forestry, Cell and Tissue Culture, eds Vasil. I.K. & Thorpe, TA pp. 71-
Vol. 17: High- Techa/1dMicropropagatio/1 1. Berlin: Springer Verlag. 118. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Bajaj, yp.s. 1991b Storage and cryopreservation of i/1 vitro Gamborg, O.L., Shylak, j.P. & Shahin, E.A 1981 Isolation, fusion,
cultures In Biotech/1ologyi/1 Agriculture a/1d Forestry, Vo/. 1: High- and culture of plant protoplasts. In Plant Tissue Culture: Methods
Tech a/1d Micropropagatio/1I, ed Bajaj, Y.P.s. pp. 361-381. Berlin: and Applications in Agriculture, ed Thorpe. T.A pp. 115-153.
Springer Verlag. New York: Academic Press.
Bajaj, yp.s. 1992a Biotech/1ologyin Agriculture and Forestry,
(ed) Gleddie, S., Keller, W.A. & Setterfield, G. 1983 Somatic hybridiza-
Vol. 18: High- Tech a/1d Micropropagalio/1 II. Berlin: Springer tion between Nicotiana rustica and N. sylvestris. Pla/1t Cell. Tissue
Verlag. and Orga/1 Culture 2, 269-283.
Bajaj, yp.s. (ed) 1992b Biolech/1ology i/1 Agriculture a/1d Forestry, Gleddie, S., Keller, W.A & Setterfield, G. 1986 Production and char-
Vol. 19:High- Techa/1dMicropropagatio/1 III. Berlin: Springer Verlag. acterization of somatic hybrids between Sola/1um melo/1gena and S.
Bajaj,Y.P.s. (ed) 1992c Biolech/1ologyin Agricullure a/1d Forestry, Vol. sisymbriifo/ium Lam. Theoreticala/1dApplied Gflletics 71, 613-621.
20: High- Tech and Micropropagatio/1 IV Berlin: Springer Verlag. Harry, I.s. & Thorpe, TA 1991 Tissue cultures: in vitro biosphere
Bodde, T 1982 Genetic engineering in agriculture: another green reserves. Nature and Resources27,18-22.
revolution. BioScimce 32, 572-575. Hinchee, M.AW., Corbin, D.K, Armstrong, CL., Fry, j.E., Sato,
Bhojwani, S.s. & Razdan, M.K. 1983 Pla/11Tissue Culture: Theory S.s., Deboer, D.L., Petersen, W.L.. Armstrong, TA, Connor-
a/1dPraclice. Developments in Crop Science, Vol. 5. Amsterdam: Wand, D.Y., Layton, j.G. & Horsch, R.B. 1994 Plant transforma-
Elsevier. tion. In Pla/11Cell a/1d Tissue Culture, eds Vasil. LK. & Thorpe,
Boxus, P. 1976 Rapid production of virus free strawberry by i/1 TA pp. 231-270. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
vitro culture.Acla Horticulturae66, 35-38. Ho, K.M. & Kasha, K.j. 1975 Genetic control of chromosome
Brown, D.CW., Finstad, K.L & Watson, E.M. 1995 Somatic elimination during haploid formation in barley. Genelics 8, 263-
embryogenesis in herbaceous dicots. In In Vitro Embryogmesis i/1 275.
Pla/1ts, ed Thorpe, TA pp. 345-415. Dordrecht: Kluwer Hu, H. & Zeng, j.Z. 1984 Development of new varieties via
Academic. anther culture. In Handbook of Plant Cell Cul/ure, Vol. 3, eds
Choo, TM., Ho, K.M., Konishi, T & Martin, R.A 1992 Tests for Ammirato, P.Y., Evans, D.A, Sharp, W.R. & Yamada, Y pp. 65-
randomness among doubled-haploid lines derived by the bulbo- 90. New York: Macmillan.

414 World JO<Imalof Microbiology b Biotechnology. Vol]]. ]995

 Tissue culture and crop improvement

Kao, HM., Brown, G.G., Scoles, G. & Seguin-Swartz, G. 1991 Redenbaugh, K. (ed) 1993 Synseeds:Applications of Synthetic Seeds
Ogura cytoplasmic male sterility and triazine tolerant Brassica to Crop Improvement. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
napus cv. Westar produced by protoplast fusion. Plant Scierzce Sanada, M., Sakamoto, y, Hayashi, M., Mashiko. T., Okamoto, A
75,63-72. & Ohnishi, N. 1993 Celery and lettuce. In Synseeds: Applications
Karp, A 1994 Origins, causes and uses of variation in plant tissue of Synthetic Seeds to Crop Improvement, ed Redenbaugh, K.
cultures. In Plant Cell and Tissue Culture, eds VasiL I.K. & pp. 305-327. Boca Raton, FL:CRC Press.
Thorpe, TA pp. 139-151. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. Sasson, A 1993 Biotechnologies in Dweloping Countries: Presmt ami
Kartha, K.K. 1981 Meristem culture and cryopreservation- Future, Vol. 1. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and
methods and applications. In PLant Tissue Culture: Methods and Cultural Organization.
Applications in Agriculture, ed Thorpe, T.A pp. 181-211. New Schieder, O. & Kohn, H. 1986 Protoplast fusion and generation of
York: Academic Press. somatic hybrids. In Cell Culture and Somatic Cell Geneticsof Phmts.
Kasha, K.J.& Kao, K.N. 1970 High frequency haploid production Vol. 3, ed Vasil, I.K. pp. 569-588. New York: Academic Press.
in barley (Hordeum vulgare L). Nature 225,874-876. Scowcroft, W.R., Breltell, R.LS., Ryan, S.A, Davies, P.A & Pallotta,
Kleese, R.A & Duvick, ON. 1980 In Genetic Improvemerzt of Crops: M.A 1987 Somaclonal variation and genomic Rux. In Plant
Emergent Techniques, eds Rubenstein, I., Gengenbach, B., Phillips, Tissue and Cell Culture, eds Green, CE., Somers, D.A, Hackett.
R.L., Green, CE. pp. 24-43. Minneapolis: University of W.P. & Bisboer, D.o. pp. 275-286. New York: AR. Liss.
Minnesota. Singh, R.B. 1992 Current status and future prospects of plant
KrishnaRaj, S. & VasiL I.K. 1995 Somatic embryogenesis in herba- biotechnologies in developing countries in Asia. In Plant Biotech-
ceous monocots. In In Vitro Embryogerzesisin Plants, ed Thorpe, nologies for Developing Countries, eds Sasson, A & Costarini V.
TA pp. 417-471. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. pp. 141-162. London: Chayce Publication Services.
Kuckuck, H., Kobabe, G. & WenzeL G. 1991 Fundamentals of Plant Sproule, A, Donaldson, P., Dijak, M., Bevis, E., Pandeya, RooKeller,
Breeding. Berlin: Springer Verlag. W.A & Gleddie, S. 1991 Fertile somatic hybrids between trans-
LaL R. & LaL S. 1990 Crop Improvement Using Biotechnology. Boca genic Nicotiana tabacum and transgenic N. debneyiselected by dual
Raton, FL: CRC Press. antibiotic resistance. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 82, 450-456.
Larkin, P.J. & Scowcroft, W.R. 1981 Somaclonal variation-a Tanno-Suenaga, L., Ichikawa, H. & Imamura, ]. 1988 Transfer of
novel source of variability from cell culture for plant improve- CMS trait in Daucus carota L by donor-recipient protoplast
ment. Theoreticaland Applied Genetics 60, 197-214. fusion. Theoreticaland Applied Genetics 76, 855-860.
Larkin, P.J., BrettelL R.I.S., Ryan, S.A, Davies, P.A, Pallotta, M.A Thompson, M.R. & Thorpe, TA 1990 Biochemical perspectives
& Scowcroft, W.R. 1985 Somaclonal variation: impact on plant in tissue culture for crop improvement. In BiochemicalAspects of
biology and breeding strategies. In Biotechnology in Plant Science, Crop Improvement, ed Khanna, K.R. pp. 327-358. Boca Raton,
eds Day, P., Zaitlin, M. & Hollaender, A pp.83-1O0. New FL: CRC Press.
York: Academic Press. Thorpe, TA 1990 The current status of plant tissue culture. In
Maheshwari, P. & Rangaswamy, N.5. 1965 Embryology in relation Plant Tissue Culture: Applications and Limitations, ed Bhojwani,
to physiology and genetics. Advances in Botanical Research 2, 55. pp. 1-33. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
218-321. Tilton, V.R. & Russel, S.H. 1984 Applications of in vilro
Morrison, R.A & Evans, D.A 1988 Staploid plants from tissue pollination/fertilization technology. BioScience34, 239-241.
culture: new plant varieties in a shortened time frame. Bio/ Vardi, A, Arzee-Goren, P., Frydman-Shani, A, Bleichman, S. and
Technology 6, 684-690. Galun, E. 1989 Protoplast fusion-mediated transfer of organelles
Murashige, T. 1990 Plant propagation by tissue culture: a practice from Microcitms into Citrus and regeneration of novel alloplas-
with unrealized potential. In Handbook of Plant Cell Culture, Vol. mic trees. Theoreticaland Applied Genetics 78, 741-747.
5: Ornamental Plants, eds Ammirato, P.V., Evans, D.A, Sharp, Vasil, IK & Thorpe, TA. (eds) 1994 Plant Cell and Tissue Culture.
W.R. & Bajaj, YP.S. pp. 3-9. New York: McGraw Hill. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
O'Riordain, F. 1994 COST 87 Directory of European Plant Tissue Villalobos, V.M. & Engelmann, F. 1995 Ex situ conservation of
Culture Laboratories 1993. Brussels: Commission of the European plant gerrnplasm using biotechnology. World Journal of Microbi-
Communities. ology and Biotechnology 11, 375-382.
Palmer, CE. & Keller, W.A 1994 In vitro culture of oilseeds. In Wang, P.-]. & Charles, A. 1991 Micropropagation through meris-
Plant Cell and Tissue Culture, eds Vasil, LK. & Thorpe, TA tern culture. In Biotechnology in Agriculture and Forestry, Vol. 17:
pp. 413-455. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. High-Tech and Micropropagation I, ed Bajaj, YP.5. pp. 32-52.
Pandeya, R.5., Douglas, G.C, Keller, W.A, Setterfield, G. & Berlin: Springer Verlag.
Patrick, Z.A 1986 Somatic hybridization between Nicotiana Yeung, E.C, Thorpe, TA. & Jensen, CL 1981 In vitro fertilization
mstica and N. tabacum: development of tobacco breeding strains and embryo rescue. In Plant Tissue Culture: Methods and Applica-
with disease resistance and elevated nicotine content. Zeilschrift tions in Agriculture, ed Thorpe, T.A. pp. 253-271. New York:
fur Pflanzenzuchtung 96, 346-352. Academic Press.
Pandeya, R.5. & White, F.H. 1994 Delgold: a new Rue-cured Zapata-Arias, F.]., Torrizo, LB. & Ando, A. Current developments
tobacco. CanadianJournal of Plant Science64, 233-236. in plant biotechnology for genetic improvement: the case of
Plucknett, D.L & Smith, N.J.H. 1986 Sustaining agricultural yields. rice (Oryza sativa L) World Journal of Microbiology and Biotech-
BioScience36, 40-45. nology 11, 393-399.
Raghavan, V. 1980 Embryo culture. International Reviews of Cytol- Zenkteler, M. 1984 In-vitro fertilization and fertilization. In Cell
ogy Supplement lIB, 209-240. Culture and Somatic Cell Genetics of Plants, Vol. 1, ed VasiL I.K.
Raghavan, V. 1994 In vilro methods for the control of fertilization pp. 269-275. New York: Academic Press.
and embryo development. In Plant Cell and Tissue Culture, eds Zenkteler, M. 1990 In vitro fertilization and wide hybridization
VasiL I.K. & Thorpe, T.A pp. 173-194. Dordrecht: Kluwer in higher plants. CRC Critical Reviews in Plant Science9,267-279
Academic. Zhong, J.-J., Yu, J.-T & Yoshida, T. 1995 Recent advances in plant
Randolph, LF. 1945 Embryo culture of Iris seeds. Bulletin of the cell cultures in bioreactors. World Journal of Microbiology &
. American Iris Society 97, 33-45. Biotechnology 11, 461-467.
J
t
World Journalof Microbiology & Biotechnology.Vol 11. 1995 415