SP-2 (Prunus spinosa) Klonal Anaç Adayının in vitro Rejenerasyonu Üzerine Farklı Bitki Büyüme Düzenleyici Konsantrasyonlarının Etkileri

Öz

Bu çalışma, Kahramanmaraş doğal ortamından seleksiyon ıslahıyla elde edilen klonal anaç adayı SP-2 (Prunus spinosa) (Uğur ve Paydaş Kargı 2017)’nın doku kültürüyle üretilebilme olanaklarının araştırılması amacıyla 2017 yılında yürütülmüştür. Çalışmada, MS (Murashige and Skoog) besi ortamı ve bu ortama ilave edilen iki farklı hormon ve bitki büyüme düzenleyici kombinasyonları MS-1 (TDZ 0.75 mg/l, NAA 0.5 mg/l, GA₃ 0.5 mg/l, 0.5 mg/l) MS-2 (TDZ 1.5 mg/l, NAA 1.5 mg/l, GA₃ 0.5 mg/l, 0.5 mg/l ),  kontrol olarak ise MS-0 (Hormonsuz normal MS) kullanılmıştır. Çalışma sonunda explant başına en yüksek kardeş bitkicik sayısının MS-1 ortamından (12.60 adet/explant) ve en uzun sürgün uzunluğunun 14.19 mm değeriyle MS-0 ortamından elde edildiği saptanmıştır. Çalışma sonunda en yüksek kardeşlenme oranının elde edildiği ve daha az miktarda hormonun kullanıldığı MS1 ortamının, MS2 ortamına göre daha başarılı ve ekonomik olduğuna karar verilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Anaç,Erik,in vitro,Prunus spinosa

Effects of Different Concentrations of Plant Growth Rugulators on in vitro Regeneration of SP-2 (Prunus spinosa) Clonal Candidate Rootstock

Abstract

Progagation possibilities in vitro conditions with applied  plant growth regulators concentration  of SP-2 (Prunus spinosa) (Ugur and Paydas Kargi 2017) candidate rootstock which obtained by selection breeding programm in Kahramanmaras natural environment  was determined in this study at 2017 year. MS (Murashige and Skoog) medium, and this medium added two different plant growth regulator combinations MS-1 (TDZ 0.75 mg L^-1, NAA 0.5 mg L^-1, Ga3 0.5 mg L^-1 0.5 mg L^-1) MS-2 (TDZ 1.5 mg L^-1, NAA 1.5 mg L^-1, Ga3 0.5 mg L^-1, 0.5 mg L^-1) and MS-0 (normal MS without any hormone) as control was used material. Maximum cumulated shoots per explant at the MS-1 medium (12.60 pieces explant^-1) and longest shoot lenght at the MS-0 medium (14.19 mm) was found.It was decided that would be MS-1 medium more economic than MS-2 medium because less  amount of hormones used.

Keywords

• Rootstock,Plum,in vitro,Prunus spinosa

References

1. Andreu P., Marin J.A (2005). In vitro culture establishment and multiplication of the Prunus rootstock ‘Adesoto101’ (Prunus institia L.) as affected by the type of propagation of the donor plant and by the culture medium composition. Scientia Horticulturae 106: 258-267 EscalettesV., Dosba F (1993). In vitro adventitious shoot regenation from leaves of Prunus spp. Plant Science 90: 201-209. Gülsoy E., Balta F (2014). Aydın ili Yenipazar, Bozdoğan ve Karacasu ilçeleri badem (Prunus amygdalus Batch) seleksiyonu. Akademik Ziraat Dergisi 3(2):61-68 Hammatt, N (1999). Delayed flowering and reduced branching in micropropagated mature wild cherry (Prunus avium L.) compared with rooted cuttings and seedlings. Plant Cell Rep. 18: 478–484. Howard, B.H., Jones, O.P., Vasek, J (1989). Long-term improvement in the rooting of plum cuttings followingapparent rejuvenation. J. Hort. Sci. 64: 147–156. Huetteman C.A., Preece J.E (1993). Thidiazuron: a potent cytokinin for woody plant tissue culture. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture, 33: 105–119. Jones, O.P., Hadlow, W.C.C (1989). Juvenile-like character of apple tree produced by grafting scions androotstocks produced by micropropagation. J. Hort. Sci. 64: 395–401. Miloseviç,T (2006). Effetcs Of Interstock On Seasonal Changes In Microelement Concentrations In Apricot Leaf. Acta Hort. 701:719-722. Mok M.C., Mokd.W.S., Turner J.E., Mujer C.V (1987).Biological and biochemical effects of cytokinin active phenylurea derivates in tissue culture systems. Hort-Science, 26: 1194–1197. Murashige T., Skoog F (1962). A revised medium for rapid growth and bioassays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol. Plant., 15: 473 – 497. Nowak B., Miczynski K., Hudy L (2004). Sugar uptake and utilisation during adventitious bud differantion on in vitro leaf explant of ‘Wegeirka Zwykla’ plum (Prunus domestica). Plant Cell,Tissue and Organ Culture 76: 255-260. Petri C., Scorza R (2009). Factors affecting adventitious regenation from in vitro leaf explant of ‘ Improved French’ plum, the most important dried plum cultivar in the USA. Annals of Applied Biology 156: 79-89. Pipinis E, Milios E, Mavrokordopoulou O, Gkanatsiou C, Aslanidou M, Smiris P (2012). Effect of pretreatments on seed germination of Prunus mahalab L. Not. Bot. Hort.Agrobo. 40 (2):183-189 Rujic V.Dj., Vujovic T.I (2008).The effects of cytokinin types and their concentration on in vitro multiplication of sweet cherry cv. Lapins (Prunus avium L.) Hort. Sci. Prague), 35 (1): 12–21 Sathyanarayana BN, Varghese DB (2007). Plant Tissue Culture: Practices and New Experimental Protocols. I. K. International. pp. 106 Uğur R., Altun Ö., Özatar H.O., Aras S., Erayman M., Paydaş Kargı S (2016). Yalova Atatürk Bahçe Kültürleri Merkez Araştırma Enstitüsü Dergisi 45 (1) : 325-328 Uğur,R.,Paydaş Kargı,S (2017). Kahramanmaraş Florasından Kayısıya Anaç Olabilecek Bazı Yabani Erik Genotiplerinin Belirlenmesi. Çukurova Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi , (Yayın Aşamasında). Webster, C.A., Jones, O.P (1992). Performance of field hedge and stoolbed plants of micropropagated dwarfingapple rootstock clones with different degrees of apparent rejuvenation. J. Hort. Sci. 67: 521–528. Wolella E.K (2017). Surface sterilization and in vitro propagation of Prunus domestica L. cv. Stanley using axillary buds as explants. Journal of Biotech Research 8:18-26 Zou, Y.N (2010). Micropropagation of Chinese plum (Prunus salicina Lindl) using Mature stem segments. Not.Bor.Hort.Agrobot.Cluj 38 (3): 214-218.