Response of some durum wheat (Triticum durum Desf.) genotypes on tissue culture parameters

Year 2020, , 123 - 128, 01.04.2020

Berk Benlioğlu , Nilüfer Koçak Şahin , Melehat Avcı Birsin

https://doi.org/10.29136/mediterranean.590104

Abstract

The research was carried out using 13 durum wheat genotypes Altın 40/98, Ankara 98, Berkmen-469, Çeşit 1252, Eminbey, İmren, Kızıltan-91, Kunduru 414/44, Kunduru 1149, Meram 2002, Mirzabey 2000, Selçuk 97, Yelken 2000 that are important in breeding programs as parents due to their tolerance against biotic-abiotic stresses and high adaptation features. Biotechnological characterization of these genotypes was made by determining their responses to callus culture parameters. The study used mature embryos, obtained from their seeds under sterile conditions that were cultured on agar solidified MS medium containing 2 mg l-1 2,4-D. The developed calli were transferred to MS medium without any hormones to form shoots and roots and were compared among themselves with significant difference among genotypes in the parameters of callus weight, regeneration capacity (%) and culture effect at the level of P<0.01. Berkmen-469, Kızıltan-91 and Eminbey had the highest regeneration capacity and culture effect values among 13 durum wheat genotypes that induced maximum callus regeneration. These genotypes were found to have higher genetic transformation ability and could form the basis for the development of resistant varieties with biotechnological methods in future.

Keywords

Embryo culture, Genotypic effect, Durum wheat, Triticum durum, Regeneration

Makarnalık buğday (Triticum durum Desf.) çeşitlerinin doku kültürü parametrelerine tepkisi

Abstract

Bu araştırmada Türkiye makarnalık buğday tarımında öneme sahip ve biyotik-abiyotik stres faktörlerine yüksek adaptasyon özelliklerinden dolayı ıslah programlarında ebeveyn olarak yararlanılan 13 makarnalık buğday genotipi (Altın 40/98, Ankara 98, Berkmen-469, Çeşit 1252, Eminbey, İmren, Kızıltan-91, Kunduru 414/44, Kunduru 1149, Meram 2002, Mirzabey 2000, Selçuklu 97, Yelken 2000) kullanılmıştır. Bu genotiplerin, kallus kültürü parametrelerine olan tepkileri belirlenerek biyoteknolojik karakterizasyonları yapılmıştır. Olgun embriyoların kullanıldığı araştırmada, steril koşullarda tohumlardan çıkartılan embriyolar 2 mg l-1 2,4-D ve MS mineral maddelerini içeren katı besin ortamında kültüre alınmıştır. Gelişen kalluslar, sürgün ve kök oluşturabilmeleri için hormon içermeyen MS ortamına transfer edilmiştir. 13 makarnalık buğday genotipinin olgun embriyoları karşılaştırıldığında; kallus ağırlığı, rejenerasyon kapasitesi ve kültür etkisi parametrelerinde genotipler arasındaki farkın P<0.01 düzeyinde önemli olduğu belirlenmiştir. Test edilen 13 makarnalık buğday genotipinden Berkmen-469, Kızıltan-91 ve Eminbey en yüksek rejenerasyon kapasitesi ve kültür etkisi değerlerinin oluşturarak, rejenerasyon yeteneği en yüksek kallusları meydana getirmişlerdir. Bu genotiplerin doğrudan gen aktarılabilme potansiyellerinin diğer genotiplere göre daha yüksek olduğu ve önümüzdeki dönemlerde biyoteknolojik yöntemlerle dayanıklı çeşit geliştirilmesine taban oluşturabilecek genotipler olduğu belirlenmiştir.

Keywords

Embriyo kültürü, Genotipik etki, Makarnalık buğday, Triticum durum, Rejenerasyon

References

• Aadel H, Ahansal K, Udupa SM, Gaboun F, Abdelwahd R, Douira A, Iraqi D (2016) Effect of genotypes and culture media on embryogenic callus induction and plantlet regeneration from mature and immature bread wheat embryos. Agricultural Research 33: 61-69.
• Acar H (2006) Kışlık buğdayın (Triticum sp.) in vitro koşullarda vernalizasyonu. Doktora Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
• Ahmet H, Adak MS (2007) Irak’ta yetiştirilen bazı ekmeklik buğday çeşitlerinde kallus oluşumu ve bitki rejenerasyonu. Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi 13: 285-292.
• Akinyosoye ST, Adetumbi JA, Amusa OD, Olowolafe MO, Olasoji JO (2014) Effect of seed size on in vitro seed germination, seedling growth, embryogenic callus induction and plantlet regeneration from embryo of maize (Zea mays L.) seed. Nigerian Journal of Genetics 28(2): 1-7.
• Bajji M, Lutts S, Kinet JM (2000) Physiological changes after exposure to and recovery from polyethylene glycol-induced water deficit in callus cultures issued from durum wheat (Triticum durum Desf.) cultivars differing in drought resistance. Journal of Plant Physiology 156(1): 75-83.
• Birsin MA, Önde S, Özgen M (2001) Callus induction and plant regeneration from mature embryos of oat (Avena sativa L.). Turkish Journal of Biology 25: 427-434.
• Birsin M, Özgen M (2004) A comparison of callus induction and plant regeneration from different embryo explant of Triticale. Cellular & Molecular Biology Letters 9: 353-361.
• Bozkurt M (2012) Türkiye dünya durum buğdayı üretiminde üçüncü. Ekmek, Bisküvi ve Makarna Sektörü İhtisas Dergisi 1: 74-75.
• Delporte F, Pretova A, Du Jardin, P, Watillon B (2014) Morphohistology and genotype dependence of in vitro morphogenesis in mature embryo cultures of wheat. Protoplasma 251: 1455-1470.
• FAO (2019) Plant production statistics. 19 http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QC. Erişim 20 Şubat 2019.
• Farshadfar E, Jamshidi B, Cheghamirza K, Hashemzadah H (2012a) Evaluation of drought tolerance in breat wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) using immature embryo culture. Annals of Biological Research 3(1): 330-338.
• Farshadfar E, Jamshidi B, Cheghamirza K, Teixeira da Silva JA (2012b) Evaluation of drought tolerance in bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) using in vivo and in vitro techniques. Annals of Biological Research 3(1): 465-476.
• Gonzales JM, Friero E, Jouve N (2001) Influence of genotype and culture medium on callus formation and plant regeneration from immature embryos of Triticum turgidum desf. cultivars. Plant Breeding 120: 513-517.
• Grigoryeva LP, Shletser IA (2006) Screening wheat cultivars for morphogenesis ability in immature embryo culture in vitro. Biologia 3: 64-66.
• Hakam N, Udupa SM, Gaboun F, Rabha A, Ibriz M, Iraqi D (2014) Effect of genotypes and culture media on embryogenic callus induction and plantlet regeneration from mature embryos of durum wheat. Romanian Agricultural Research 31: 121-128.
• Haliloğlu K (2002) Wheat immature embryo culture for embryogenic callus induction. Journal of Biological Sciences 2(8): 520-521.
• İbrahim AS (2012) An efficient regeneration system via somatic embryogenesis in some egyptian durum wheat cultivars mediated high-throughput transformation of durum wheat using Agrobacterium tumefaciens. Research Journal of Agriculture and Biological Sciences 8(3): 369-384.
• Jasdeep P, Avijit T, Varsha S, Harinder V, Sanjay S (2019) Cultivar specific response of callus induction and plant regeneration from mature embryos in different elite Indian wheat. Research Journal of Biotechnology 14(2): 1- 8.
• Mahmood IA, Razzaqand Z, Khan U (2012) Evaluation of tissue culture responses of promising wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars and development of efficient regeneration system. Pakistan Journal of Botany 44(1): 277- 284.
• Malik K, Birla D, Yadav H, Sainger M, Chaudhary D, Jaiwal PK (2017) Evaluation of carbon sources, gelling agents, growth hormones and additives for efficient callus induction and plant regeneration in Indian wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) genotypes using mature embryos. Journal of Crop Science and Biotechnology 20(3): 185-192.
• Miroshnichenko DN, Klementyeva AA, Salina EA, Dolgov SV (2019) Evaluation of in vitro plant regeneration efficiency in Siberian wheat cultivars. Current Challenges in Plant Genetics, Genomics, Bioinformatics and Biotechnology 24: 126-128.
• Murashige T, Skoog F (1962) A revised medium for rapid growth and bioassays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiologia Plantarum 15: 473-497.
• Özgen M, Türet M, Özcan S, Sancak C (1996) Callus induction and plant regeneration from immature and mature embryos of winter durum wheat genotypes. Plant Breeding 115: 455-458.
• Özgen M, Türet M, Altınok S, Sancak C (1998) Efficient callus induction and plant regeneration from mature embryo culture of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) genotypes. Plant Cell Reports 18(3-4): 331-335.
• Özgen M, Türet M, Avcı M (2001) Cytoplasmic effects on the tissue culture response of callus from winter wheat mature embryos. Plant Cell, Tissue Organ Culture 64: 81-84.
• Özgen M, Avcı Birsin M, Benlioğlu B (2017) Biotechnological characterization of a diverse set of wheat progenitors (Aegilops sp. & Triticum sp.) using callus culture parameters. Plant Genetic Resources: Characterization & Utilization 15(1): 45-50.
• Pellegrineschi A, Brito RM, Mclean S, Hoisington D (2004) Effect of 2,4- Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid and NaCl on the establishment of callus and plant regeneration in durum and bread wheat. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture 77: 245-250.
• Przetakiewicz A, Orczyk W, Nadolska-Orczyk A (2003) The effect of auxin on plant regeneration of wheat, barley and Triticale. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture 73: 245-256.
• Sayar MT, Birsin MA, Ulukan H, Özgen M (1999) Effect of seed size on the tissue culture response of callus from mature embryos of wheat species. Wheat Information Service 89: 1-6.
• Steel RG, Torrie JH, Dickey DA (1980) Principles and procedures of statistics: a biometrical approach (Vol. 633). New York, USA: McGraw-Hill, New York.
• Swati S, Priya AK, Manoj KY (2019) Development of drought tolerant wheat through mutagenic and plant tissue culture tools. International Research Journal of Biological Sciences 1: 4-12.
• Tuberosa R, Rauaglia S, Lucchese C (1998) Callus induction and plant regeneration in Italian cultivars of bread wheat. Agricultural Medicine 18: 361-365.
• TUİK (2019) “Bitkisel Üretim İstatistikleri”. https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/medas/?kn=92&locale=tr. Erişim 20 Şubat 2019.
• Witrzens B, Brettell RI, Murray FR, McElroy D, Li Z, Dennis ES (1998) Comparison of three selectable marker genes for transformation of wheat by microprojectile bombardment. Functional Plant Biology 25(1): 39-44.
• Zale JM, Wier HB, Kidwell KK, Steber CM (2003) Callus induction and plant regeneration from mature embryos of a diverse set of wheat genotypes. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture 76: 277-281.