Evaluation of Karyotype Status of Musa L. Somaclonal Variants (Musaceae: Zingiberales)

Tissue culture regenerated materials of Musa L. spp. (banana and plantain) along with their somaclonal variants were assessed for karyotype abnormalities to be used as indicators for rapid cytological marking. The results show that although slight variations were noted in karyomorphometric characters, like chromosome number, arm length, total chromosome length, and total chromosome volume, these were not significant (P £ 0.05). Therefore, chromosomal abnormalities may not be accurate markers for somaclonal variation in these species. The need to not overemphasise chromosomal instability resulting from culture techniques was highlighted. Other possible causes of somaclonal variations were proposed to explain this phenomenon in Musa spp.

Evaluation of Karyotype Status of Musa L. Somaclonal Variants (Musaceae: Zingiberales)

Tissue culture regenerated materials of Musa L. spp. (banana and plantain) along with their somaclonal variants were assessed for karyotype abnormalities to be used as indicators for rapid cytological marking. The results show that although slight variations were noted in karyomorphometric characters, like chromosome number, arm length, total chromosome length, and total chromosome volume, these were not significant (P £ 0.05). Therefore, chromosomal abnormalities may not be accurate markers for somaclonal variation in these species. The need to not overemphasise chromosomal instability resulting from culture techniques was highlighted. Other possible causes of somaclonal variations were proposed to explain this phenomenon in Musa spp.

___

  • Baetcke KD, Sparrow AH, Nauman AF & Schwammer SS (1967). The relationship of DNA content to nuclear and chromosomal volumes and radiosensitivity (LD50). Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 58: 533-540.
  • Barry- Etienne D, Bertrand B, Vasquez N & Etienne H (2002). Comparison of somatic embryogenesis-derived coffee (Coffea arabica L.) Plantlets generated in vitro or ex vitro: Morphological, mineral and water characteristics. Ann Bot 90: 77-85.
  • Bennet MD (1972). Nuclear DNA content and minimum generation time in herbaceous Plants. Proc. Roy. Soc. London 3. 181: 109-135.
  • FAO (1995). Food Agriculture Organization Year Book 1994. Rome Italy.
  • Harper G, Osuji JO, Heslop-Harrison JS (Pat) & Hull R (1999). Integration of banana streak badnavirus into Musa genome: Molecular cytogenetic evidence. Virology 255: 207-213.
  • Hartwell LH, Hood L, Goldberg ML, Reynolds AE, Silver LM & Veres CR (2000). Genetics: from genes to genomes. New York: McGrawHill.
  • Kosina R & Heslop-Harrison JS (1996). Molecular cytogenetics of an amphiploid trigeneric hybrid between Triticum durum, Thinopyrum distichum and Lophopyrum elongatum. Ann Bot 78: 583-589.
  • Larking TJ & Scrowcroft WR (1981). Somaclonal variation – a novel source of variability from cell cultures for plant improvement. Theor Appl Genet 60: 197.
  • Mantell SH, Matthews JA & McKee RA (1985). Principles of Plant Biotechnology. An Introduction to Genetic Engineering in Plants. London: Blackwell Scientific Publications.
  • Naranjo CA, Ferrari MR, Palermo AM & Poggio L (1998). Karyotype, DNA content and meiotic behaviour in five South American species of Vicia (Fabaceae). Ann Bot 82: 752-764.
  • Osuji JO, Harrison G, Crouch J & Heslop-Harrison JS (1997). Identification of the genomic constitution of Musa L. lines (Bananas, Plantains, Hybrids) using molecular cytogenetics. Ann Bot 80: 787-793.
  • Osuji JO, Crouch J, Harrison G & Heslop-Harrison JS (1998). Molecular cytogenetics of Musa species, cultivars and hybrids: Location of 18S-5.8S – 25S and 5S rDNA and Telomere-like sequences. Ann Bot 82: 243-248.
  • Price HJ, Sparrow AH & Nauman AF (1973). Correlation between nuclear volume, cell volume and DNA content in meristematic cells of herbaceous angiosperms. Experientia 29: 1028-1029.
  • Samson JA (1982). Tropical Fruits. New York: Longman. Sandoval J Tapia A Muller L & Villabobos V (1991). Obervaciones sobre la variabilidad encontrada en plantas micropropagades de Musa cv. Falso Cuerno AAB. Fruits 46: 533-539.
  • Srowcroft WR & Larkin PJ (1982). Somaclonal variation: a new option for plant improvement. In: Vasil IK et al. (Eds.) Plant Improvement and Somatic Genetics. New York: Academic Press. Simmonds NW (1966). Bananas. 2nd Ed. New York: Longman.
  • Van’t Hoff J & Sparrow AH (1963). A relationship between DNA content and nuclear volume and minimum mitotic cycle time. Proc Natl Acad Sc USA. 49: 897-902.
  • Vuylsteke D, Swennen R, Wilson GF & De Langhe E (1988). Phenotypic variation among in vitro propagated plantains (Musa spp. cultivar AAB). Scientia Horticulturae 36: 79-88.
  • Vuylsteke D, Swennen R, Wilson GF & De Langhe E (1991). Somaclonal variations in Plantains (Musa spp. AAB group) derived from shoot-tip culture. Fruits 46: 429-439.
  • Wang S, Lapitan NLV & Tsuchiya T (1992). Characterization of Telomeres in Hordeum vulgare chromosomes by in situ hybridization. II. Healed broken chromosomes in telotrisomic 4L and acrotrisomic 4L4S lines. Genome 35:975-980.