Skip to main content
Log in

Improving in vitro mineral nutrition for diverse pear germplasm

  • Micropropagation
  • Published:
In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology - Plant Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Mineral nutrition in the media used for growth of in vitro plants is often difficult to optimize due to complex chemical interactions of required nutrients. The response of plant tissue to standard growth media varies widely due to the genetic diversity of the plant species studied. This study was designed as the initial step in determining the optimal mineral nutrient requirements for micropropagation of shoot tips from a collection of genetically diverse pear germplasm. Five mineral nutrient factors were defined from Murashige and Skoog salts: NH4NO3, KNO3, mesos (CaCl2·2H20–KH2PO4–MgSO4), micronutrients (B, Cu, Co, I, Mn, Mo, and Zn), and Fe-EDTA. Each factor was varied over a range of concentrations. Treatment combinations were selected using response surface methods. Five pears in three species (Pyrus communis ‘Horner 51,’ ‘Old Home × Farmingdale 87,’ ‘Winter Nelis,’ Pyrus dimorphophylla, and Pyrus ussuriensis ‘Hang Pa Li’) were grown on each treatment combination, responses were measured, and each response was analyzed by analysis of variance. The analyses resulted in the identification of the following factors with the single largest effects on plant response: shoot quality (mesos), leaf spotting/necrosis (mesos), leaf size (mesos), leaf color (mesos, NH4NO3, and KNO3), shoot number (NH4NO3 and Fe), nodes (NH4NO3 and KNO3), and shoot length (mesos and Fe). Factors with the largest effects (mesos and Fe) were similar among the genotypes. This approach was very successful for defining the appropriate types and concentrations of mineral nutrients for micropropagation of diverse pear genotypes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adelberg JW, Delgado MP, Tomkins JT (2010) Spent medium analysis for liquid culture micropropagation of Hemerocallis on Murashige and Skoog medium. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol- Plant 46:95–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aranda-Peres AN, Martinelli AP (2009) Adjustment of mineral elements in the culture medium for the micropropagation of three Vriesea Bromeliads from the Brazilian Atlantic Forest: The importance of calcium. HortScience 44(1):106–112

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell RL, Reed BM (2002) In vitro tissue culture of pear: advances in techniques for micropropagation and germplasm preservation. Acta Hort 596:412–418

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell RL, Srinivasan C, Lomberk D (2009) Effect of nutrient media on axillary shoot proliferation and preconditioning for adventitious shoot regeneration of pears. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol-Plant 45:708–714

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Design-Expert Design-Expert 8 (2010) Minneapolis, MN: Stat-Ease, Inc

  • Driver JA, Kuniyuki AH (1984) In vitro propagation of Paradox walnut rootstock. HortScience 19:507–509

    Google Scholar 

  • Evens TJ, Niedz RP ARS-Media: Ion Solution Calculator (2008) Version 1. Ft. Pierce, FL: U.S. Horticultural Research Laboratory

  • Kintzios S, Stavropoulou E, Skamneli S (2004) Accumulation of selected macronutrients and carbohydrates in melon tissue cultures: association with pathways of in vitro dedifferentiation and differentiation (organogenesis, somatic embryogenesis). Plant Sci 167:655–664

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd G, McCown B (1980) Commercially feasible micropropagation of mountain laurel, Kalmia latifolia, by use of shoot-tip culture. Comb Proceed Int Plant Prop Soc 30:421–427

    Google Scholar 

  • Murashige T (1974) Plant propagation through tissue cultures. Ann Rev Plant Physiol 25:135–166

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Murashige T, Nakano R (1965) Morphogenetic behaviour of tobacco tissue cultures and implication of plant senescence. Am J Bot 52(8):819–827

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murashige T, Skoog F (1962) A revised medium for rapid growth and bio assays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol Plant 15:473–497

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nas MN, Read PE (2004) A hypothesis for the development of a defined tissue culture medium of higher plants and micropropagation of hazelnuts. Scientia Hortic 101:189–200

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Niedz RP, Evens TJ (2006) A solution to the problem of ion confounding in experimental biology. Nature Methods 3:417

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Niedz RP, Evens TJ (2007) Regulating plant tissue growth by mineral nutrition. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol-Plant 43:370–381

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Niedz RP, Hyndman SE, Evens TJ (2007) Using a Gestalt to measure the quality of in vitro responses. Scientia Hortic 112:349–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preece J (1995) Can nutrient salts partially substitute for plant growth regulators? Plant Tiss Cult Biotech 1:26–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Quoirin M, Lepoivre P (1977) Improved media for in vitro culture of Prunus. Acta Hort 78:437–442

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramage CM, Williams RR (2002) Mineral nutrition and plant morphogenesis. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol-Plant 38:116–124

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Reed BM (1995) Screening Pyrus germplasm for in vitro rooting response. HortScience 30:1292–1294

    Google Scholar 

  • Singha S (1986) Pear (Pyrus communis). In: Bajaj YPS (ed) Biotechnology in Agriculture and Forestry. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, Berlin, pp 198–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Singha S, Townsend EC, Oberly GH (1985) Mineral nutrient status of crabapple and pear shoots cultured in vitro on varying concentrations of three commercial agars. J Am Soc Hort Sci 110:407–411

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sotiropoulos TE, Fotopoulos S, Dimassi KN, Tsirakoglou V (2006) Response of the pear rootstock to boron and salinity in vitro. Biol Plant 50:779–781

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Thakur A, Kanwar JS (2008) Micropropagation of ‘wild pear’ Pyrus pyrifolia (Burm.F.) Nakai. I. Explant establishment and shoot multiplication. Not Bot Hort Agrobot Cluj 36:103–108

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Williams RR (1993) Mineral nutrition in vitro—a mechanistic approach. Aust J Bot 41:237–251

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao H, Gu N (1990) Pear. In: Chen Z, Evans DA, Sharp WR, Ammirato PV, Sondahl MR (eds) Handbook of plant cell culture. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 264–277

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank NCGR lab personnel for assistance with collection of the data for this study. This project was funded by a grant from the Oregon Association of Nurseries and the Oregon Department of Agriculture and by United States Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service CRIS project 5358-21000-0-38-00D.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Barbara M. Reed.

Additional information

Editor: Lynn Dahleen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Reed, B.M., Wada, S., DeNoma, J. et al. Improving in vitro mineral nutrition for diverse pear germplasm. In Vitro Cell.Dev.Biol.-Plant 49, 343–355 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11627-013-9504-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11627-013-9504-1

Keywords

Navigation