Download - OAR@ICRISAT

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Brettell d al. (1986) analyzed regenerated Triticale plants for changes in rRNA genes located at the siie of nucldar organlm regions (the Nor loci) in chromorome 18, 6B and 1R and found reduction in the rDNA units. The reduction in the 1R rDNA spacer sequences was heritable and correlated wlth reduced c-banding at the position of Nor-R1 on chromosome 1 R. Lapltan et al. (1988) also reported arnpliiication of DNA In Trificale. Both amplification and dearnpllfication of DNA sequences among callus cuHures ol maize were reported by Brown et ai. (1991). In sugarcane Heinz and Mee (1971) detected metabolic differences which rnighl not atfed morphological characteristics on Obse~ing the isozyrne patierns of esterase, peroxidote, amylase and transaminase. 75% of the 53% ol regenerants which showed morphological variations revealed isozyrne dfflerences. In alfalfa Baertlein and McDaniel (1987) observed 9.1% of plants regenerated horn callus to be significantly dilferent hom the parent and from the other somaclones as judged horn the quantitative protein pattern. Somaclones were grouped according to linkoge b ed on protein electrophoresis pattern. Two showed non-overlap with parental grouping indicating significant molecular divergence. 2.22 MllOCHoNDRlAl DNA VARIAllON Many authors have investigated mitochondrlal DNA (rnt DNA) variability in tissue cultured plants. Urnbeck and Gengenbach (1983) observed the absence d a 6.6 kb mitochondtial DNA hagment in Idle varlant llnes regeneraled from a culture of a Texas mde rkrile cytoplasm mdre. Thk 6.6 kb lmgmnt k blhved to bo involved In Me male-steflle toxin- susceptible phenotype. McNay st al., (1984) 0bsow.d minor changes In the rnt DNA d moire
when hybddizatlon pattern of regenerated plant and 4 year old suspension cuHures were compared by membrane hybridlzalton with nlck-translated plasmid-like mt DNA pow S1 and S2 obtalned from cytoplasmic male sterile maize. Similarly no major molecular alterallon In restriction fragments were gmWated by the endonucleoses Barn HI and Hind Ill. The vafidion observed was mainly in the stoichiomtry of several restriction hagmenk. They suggest that minor varlatlons in restriction pattern could reflect alterations in frequency of circular mt DNA molecules, perhaps related to nuclear alterations occurring during the extended period d culture. Gengenbach et al. (1981) regenerated Helminthosporium mcrydis resistant maize plants which distinguished lhem from each other and from the T and N cytoplasm maize. The regenerated maize plants had a distinct mitochondrial DNA organization. In sorghum cell culture protoclones Kane ei 01. (1992) observed hypervariability in the mitochondrlal DNA. Loss, amplification and also a new set d lragmenk were observed. Considerable variation in restriction pattern of mt DNA d rice cell cuhres was obsewed by Chowdhury et al. (1988, 1990). Rearrangements involving repeal sequences and loss or duplication d genomlc regions were reporled. Saleh et al. (1990) obrewed substantial changes in the relative abundance d specific DNA sequences in long term surpension cultures d rice. Structural rearrangements in rnt DNA of regenerated whwt plonts were alx, observed (Hartman et al., 1989). Ozlus-Akins el d. (1984) reported quat7tiie diierences in reshictlon patterns d pearl millet mt DNA d cdl suyMnsion cultures. Grayburn and Bendich (1987) also observed variable abundance of rnt DNA fragmnk in cultured tobacco cdls. In Blauica cclmparhlr Shlnadegm et ai. (1989, 1991) ddocted both stoichiometric changer and the appwonce d novel nshlction togmk in 2 y w old cdl suspension culturer and dso In a group ol prolockmes.
Page 1 and 2: Application of Somaclonal Variation
Page 3 and 4: DECLARATION The research work embod
Page 5 and 6: Depaltment of Botany, 0.U) for beln
Page 7 and 8: US OF TABLES Between Pages Inorgani
Page 9 and 10: 21 Source of variation for the yiel
Page 11 and 12: 4 A Mature cotyledon of C. cajan cv
Page 13 and 14: No Tie i b UST OF FIGURES 1 lnlluen
Page 15 and 16: evollian of the thearetic01 asprt.
Page 17 and 18: used for identification of randomly
Page 19 and 20: on culture induced vs mutagen induc
Page 21 and 22: egions could resun in various anora
Page 23 and 24: In their efforts to select for Fusa
Page 25 and 26: Herftable resislance to non-specUlc
Page 27 and 28: profdn. They observed 23 ol91 mutog
Page 29 and 30: following plant rogoneration In 9 d
Page 31 and 32: per spike, kernel weight, yidd, tot
Page 33 and 34: ange from 11.5 to 39.5% and a tende
Page 35 and 36: nultlplo shoots, dwarts, abnormal l
Page 37 and 38: waxiness. glume and grain colour, g
Page 39 and 40: 2.2 MOLECULAR STUDIES OF SOMACLONAL
Page 41: one regenerant which was hetetozygo
Page 45 and 46: 2.3 TISSUE CUlWRE AND REGENERATION
Page 47 and 48: lomuldlon has Increased concenhatlo
Page 49 and 50: A compehenslve llst of whole plant
Page 51 and 52: TYPO Of Spocler regoneratlon Explan
Page 53 and 54: cotyledons. Rwna et al. (1992) rege
Page 55 and 56: 3. TISSUE CULTURE AND REGENERNION I
Page 57 and 58: Immature cotyledon explants obfdned
Page 59 and 60: cultured on MS semi-sdid medium sup
Page 61 and 62: In vltro grown seedllngs were used
Page 63 and 64: Three weeks after culture all the g
Page 65: PLATE 1 1 A. Callused cotyledonary
Page 68 and 69: PLATE 2
Page 70 and 71: 3A. Mature imbibed cotyledon ot C.
Page 72 and 73: 4A. lvlature colyiedo~? of CJ cujar
Page 74 and 75: Effect of different hormonal comb~n
Page 76 and 77: E 9 Cuiture Period (weegsj NO shoot
Page 78 and 79: PLATE 5
Page 80: IncreoJng the doses of rlrradlation
Page 84 and 85: 3.3 DISCUSSION Auxins In the presen
Page 86 and 87: axes when cultured on MS medium sup
Page 88 and 89: In the present investigation the In
Page 90 and 91: oMaln cotyledonary node tissue of s
Page 92 and 93:
Bama and Wakhiu (1994) oberved high
Page 94 and 95:
species producing pdyphenols In cul
Page 96 and 97:
4 ASSESSMENT OF SOMACLONAL VARIATIO
Page 98 and 99:
a RI Generafton: The R1 plants grow
Page 100 and 101:
Seed number per pod: Total number o
Page 102 and 103:
4.2 RESULTS 4.21 SOMACLONAL VARIATI
Page 105:
Phenotyprc variation in the field g
Page 108 and 109:
Frequency of phenotvplc varlation s
Page 110 and 111:
Table 8 Genotypic varlation in qual
Page 112 and 113:
Figure:i Ward's minimum variance de
Page 114:
Cluster means for the yleld paramet
Page 119 and 120:
Analysis of varlance for various yi
Page 121 and 122:
4.23 GAMMA-lRUD1ATED VS UN-IWADIAlE
Page 123 and 124:
Cluster means lor the yield paramet
Page 126 and 127:
Cluster means for the yield paramet
Page 128 and 129:
lowed ped incidence groups. Althoug
Page 130 and 131:
Analysis of varlance (GLM) for varl
Page 132 and 133:
with hawest index having the least
Page 134 and 135:
Table 22 Source of variation lor th
Page 136 and 137:
Phenolyplc cndgenofypic vorfollon f
Page 138 and 139:
PLATE 8
Page 140 and 141:
Table 25 Comparlson of Hellcoverpa
Page 142 and 143:
Fimnotyplc varkrfion torquditailve
Page 144 and 145:
mutations from recessive to dominan
Page 146 and 147:
The plants regenerated hom gamma in
Page 148 and 149:
ecovery ot such agronomically usefu
Page 150 and 151:
The dilferenltal exprdon d tomaclon
Page 152 and 153:
Ealy maturlty wor obtwed In malze b
Page 154 and 155:
MOLECULAR ANALYSIS OF SOMACLONAL PR
Page 156 and 157:
5.1.3 DNA AMPUFICATION AND PCR COND
Page 158:
Fruciionation of PCR prod~rcfs of t
Page 161 and 162:
5.3 DISCUSSION Among the varlants s
Page 163 and 164:
GENERAL DISCUSSION Chapter 6 The pr
Page 165 and 166:
thw to rnetaboliw BA quite efllclml
Page 167 and 168:
which adsoltx hydroxymelhyl-fuhrral
Page 169 and 170:
this study there has been no r.pott
Page 171 and 172:
fu- develop somaclonal lines usable
Page 173 and 174:
Due to the lack d sufficient geneti
Page 175 and 176:
of DNA sequences have been obwwed I
Page 177 and 178:
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Chapter 7 T
Page 179 and 180:
tho pufative somaclones with agrono
Page 181 and 182:
or large pod bearing length per bra
Page 183 and 184:
Preliminary analysis of the putativ
Page 185 and 186:
Bootliein, DA and McDanW, R.G. 1987
Page 187 and 188:
Brown, P.T.H and Lkz, H. 1986. Meth
Page 189 and 190:
Ween, LS., SMhman, D.D and Rlnw, H.
Page 191 and 192:
Franklln C.I., Revw, N., Gronzales,
Page 193 and 194:
Groacs, R.W., and Binghcm, E.T. (19
Page 195 and 196:
Johnson, L.B., SMenllle, D.1, Schla
Page 197 and 198:
KWy, W and H.J. Jacabson. 1990. Som
Page 199 and 200:
Maddock, S.E. RWott, R., Pomr, S.,
Page 201 and 202:
Mdns, F., Jr. 1983. Heritable varia
Page 203 and 204:
Niizeki, M., ishikawa, R and Sdto,
Page 205 and 206:
Powell. W., Hayter, A.M. Wood, W, D
Page 207 and 208:
Sanlos, A.V.P. dm, Outka, D.E., Coc
Page 209 and 210:
Sun, Z., Zhao. C., Zheng, K., Qi, X
Page 211 and 212:
Yu, K., Chdme, 0.R and Pwls, K.P. 1
Page 213 and 214:
The letter 'R' in this study indica
Page 215:
Presentations: PRASANNA LATHA, CH.,
show all

Download - OAR@ICRISAT

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?