Gamma Rays and CarbonIon-Beams Irradiation for Mutation ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

4. 3. 2. 3. Juglone toxin response The analysis of variance reported not significant differences between cultivars. Fig. 44-C and Fig. 45-C are showing the LDNA-% frequency distribution by class limits of “Cavendish Enano’ and ‘Williams’, respectively. Lowest II-% values in ‘Cavendish Enano’ varied from 38.0 to 44.9 days and 33.0 to 39.9 days in ‘Williams’ simply observed between dotted vertical lines. Additionally, LDNA-% values from non-irradiated plants did not show values as lower as 44.0 % in ‘Cavendish Enano’ and 38% in ‘Williams’. Fig. 46 shows high (A) and low-affected (B) leaf discs by juglone. Buiatti and Ingram (1991) mentioned that leaf discs technique have been mainly used for early screening of segregation population within classical breeding program, or to direct in vitro selection of tolerant cells. Leaf-disc bioassays have been reported effective to evaluate resistance in several crops. Ostry et al. (1988) working with Septoria musiva, a disease of Populus spp, described that this method was sufficiently sensitive to distinguish among clones with high, moderate or low resistance, however it should only serve as a preliminary screening technique before field test. Sackston and Vimard (1988) used the leaf-discs immersion technique to study a host-pathogen interaction to distinguish resistant or susceptible sunflower lines to Plasmopara halstedii. Other techniques such as micro-cross sections of banana plantlets also have been used to select plants in vitro culture levels. Since Okole and Shulz (1996) obtained high regenerable callus and plantlets from micro-cross section of banana and plantain, they applied this method to select M. fijiensis-resistance cell lines. Okole and Shulz (1997) studied a double selection system; at first, micro-cross section was performed to access the growth into a crude fungal filtrate and then the regenerated shoot bud was subjected to the purified fungal toxin 2,4,8-trihydroxytetralone. 89
Only a partial resistance was observed in most of the regenerated plantlets after toxin selection. In addition, Stierle et al. (1991) isolated six different phytotoxin compounds from M. fijiensis, having different biological activity for each. The 2,4,8-trihydroxytetralone (tetralone) exhibited host selectivity comparable to that of the fungal pathogen at the 5µg/5µl level, following by juglone that was stronger than tetralone in terms of toxicity. In this research, it seems that the ion beam irradiation promoted mutation in cells, reacting different when they were confronted with the toxins. On the other hand, Etame (2003) characterizing M. fijiensis toxins by using a high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) revealed the presence of juglone, but did not reveal any of the M. fijiensis metabolites already reported. Once isolated this toxin, banana genotypes possessing different reactions were used to compare their susceptibility to M. fijiensis metabolites and their sensitivity to the infection by the pathogen. The most resistant genotypes to juglone (‘Fougamou’, ‘Pisang madu’, ‘M53’ and ‘Klutuk’) appeared also resistant to the infection, although some cultivars resistant to M. fijiensis are susceptible to juglone. Globally these results suggest that juglone could allow to identify the more resistant genotypes to the infection of M. fijiensis. Lepoivre et al. (2002) described that 250 ppm of juglone is required to induce necrosis in the leaf puncture bioassay using selected plants from embryo cell suspension of ‘Three hand planty’, however, the selected plants did not show higher resistance to black Sigatoka than the mother plant. Tables 10 and 11 shows the raw data obtained in the variables DDP-days, II-% and LDNA-% for ‘Cavendish Enano’ and ‘Williams’, respectively. 90
Page 1 and 2:
Gamma Rays and Carbon Ion-Beams Irr
Page 3 and 4:
Table of contents Chapter 1 1.1. In
Page 5 and 6:
4.2.1.1. Cultivars of banana……
Page 7 and 8:
and ‘Valery’, which are exporte
Page 9 and 10:
‘Cavendish Enano’, ‘Williams
Page 11 and 12:
Although it is now found only in Au
Page 13 and 14:
varieties bred at the Jamaican prog
Page 15 and 16:
such as ‘Paka’ (AA) and ‘Pisa
Page 17 and 18:
Resistance (PR). In connection with
Page 19 and 20:
large number of improved mutant cro
Page 21 and 22:
which migrated faster (Rf = 0.44) t
Page 23 and 24:
is juglone (5 hydroxy-1,4-napthoqui
Page 25 and 26:
experiments involving various biolo
Page 27 and 28:
Tanaka (1999) reported novel genes
Page 29 and 30:
2. 1. Materials and Methods Chapter
Page 31 and 32:
2. 1. 1. 4. FHIA-01 ‘FHIA-01’(M
Page 33 and 34:
(Gamma room)” and “Carbon ion-b
Page 35 and 36:
esulting from “Gamma Room” expe
Page 37 and 38:
traits as female sterility and part
Page 39 and 40:
3. 2. 1. 3. Chronic irradiation ( 1
Page 41 and 42:
Gy. ‘Williams’ and ‘Orito’
Page 43 and 44: a diploid clone (genomic constituti
Page 45 and 46: ‘Williams’ (93%), the necrotic
Page 47 and 48: etween the irradiation doses and th
Page 49 and 50: moment they are at the development
Page 51 and 52: A B C D Fig. 2. Cultivars of banana
Page 53 and 54: Weight of plantlets (g) Height of p
Page 55 and 56: Control 50 Gy 100 Gy 150 Gy Fig. 6.
Page 57 and 58: Control 50 Gy 100 Gy 150 Gy 200 Gy
Page 59 and 60: Survival rate (%) for LD50 Survival
Page 61 and 62: A B C D E F Fig. 12. A plant from
Page 63 and 64: B D AA E Fig 14. Banana meristems a
Page 65 and 66: A B C Orito Orito Orito Cavendish E
Page 67 and 68: No. plants No. plants No. plants No
Page 69 and 70: Circunference (cm) Plant height (cm
Page 71 and 72: Table 1. Differences of the plantle
Page 73 and 74: Table 3. Differences of the surviva
Page 75 and 76: Table 5. Selected materials reporti
Page 77 and 78: Table 8. Factor of effectiveness an
Page 79 and 80: deletion rather than point mutation
Page 81 and 82: were recorded. From the results, th
Page 83 and 84: 4. 2. 2. Assessment of banana plant
Page 85 and 86: placement among the plants (Fig. 30
Page 87 and 88: hours, photographs of the leaf-disc
Page 89 and 90: ‘Williams’ (B) was obtained by
Page 91 and 92: class limits values are clearly sep
Page 93: values in ‘Cavendish Enano’ ran
Page 97 and 98: Sigatoka but also fruit quality, po
Page 99 and 100: A C Fig. 23. Banana plantlets packa
Page 101 and 102: A C Fig. 25. Acclimatization of the
Page 103 and 104: A C Fig. 27. Survival plantlets for
Page 105 and 106: A C Fig. 29. Mycosphaerella fijiens
Page 107 and 108: A C Fig. 31. Labor during transplan
Page 109 and 110: B A Fig. 33. Establishment of the j
Page 111 and 112: A B Fig. 35. Regenerated plantlets
Page 113 and 114: Survival rate (%) for LD50 Survival
Page 115 and 116: 0 0.5 1 2 4 Fig 39. Banana plantlet
Page 117 and 118: A B C Fig. 41. Regenerated explants
Page 119 and 120: Range of optimum doses (Gy) 16 15 1
Page 121 and 122: Percent of plants Percent of plants
Page 123 and 124: LDNA-% LDNA-% DDP-days 100 80 60 40
Page 125 and 126: Fig. 49. Hexaploid cells in ‘Cave
Page 127 and 128: Table 10. Infection index (II-%), d
Page 129 and 130: Table 12. DDP-days, II-% and LDNA-%
Page 131 and 132: Chapter 5 General Discussion Gamma
Page 133 and 134: FHIA-01 were not able to compare du
Page 135 and 136: ‘W 1 II 31’. In the case of ‘
Page 137 and 138: Summary Both Gamma rays and Carbon
Page 139 and 140: A ‘Cavendish Enano’ plant with
Page 141 and 142: I extend my gratitude also to Dr. K
Page 143 and 144: Cohan, J, P., C. Abadie, K. Tomekp
Page 145 and 146:
Hase, Y., M. Yamaguchi and A. Tanak
Page 147 and 148:
Molina, G. C. and J. P. Krausz (198
Page 149 and 150:
Roux, N. S. (2001). Mutation induct
show all

Gamma Rays and CarbonIon-Beams Irradiation for Mutation ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?