An assessment of genetic fidelity of micropropagated plants of Chlorophytum borivilianum using RAPD markers
Open accessAbstract
Rapid micropropagation was achieved in Chlorophytum borivilianum Santapau and Fernandes using shoot base as explants. Multiple shoots were induced on Murashige and Skoog's (MS) medium supplemented with 3.0 mg dm-3 6-benzylaminopurine, 0.1 mg dm-3 1-naphthaleneacetic acid, 150 mg dm-3 adenine sulphates and 3 % saccharose. Rooting was readily achieved upon transferring the shoots onto half strength MS medium supplemented with 0.1 mg dm-3 indolebutyric acid and 2 % saccharose. Micropropagated plantlets were hardened in the greenhouse and successfully established in soil. Random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers were used to evaluate the genetic stability of the micropropagated plants. Thirty one arbitrary decamers were used to amplify genomic DNA from in vitro and in vivo plant material to assess the genetic stability. All RAPD profile analysis from micropropagated plants was genetically similar to mother plants.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
When used alone, RAPD generated only monomorphic bands across all analyzed plants (regenerants/mother plant) and had a low degree of reproducibility.
“Moreover, numerous studies show that, when used alone, RAPD generated only monomorphic bands across all the analyzed plants (regenerants/mother plant) [65,66,67,68] and had a low degree of reproducibility.”
From Somaclonal Variation—Advantage or Disadvantage in Micropropagation of the Medicinal Plants (2023) · cites this paper as [68]
The results passage (page not supplied) reports monomorphic RAPD amplification products across the micropropagated Chlorophytum borivilianum plants, and the discussion says their bands matched the mother plant. The paper does not report a low degree of RAPD reproducibility; its methods say the reactions were repeated three times. Its finding is specific to these plants, not RAPD results generally. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Genetic Fidelity of Organized Meristem-Derived Micropropagated Plants: A Critical Reappraisal
Rani, V., & Raina, S. N. (2000) · In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology - Plant · doi:10.1007/s11627-000-0059-6 · Cited by 325 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Ahuja, M.R.: In vitro propagation of poplar and aspen. -In: Bonga, J.M., Durzan, D.J. (ed.): Cell and Tissue Culture in Forestry. Vol. 3. Pp. 207-223.
- Jain, S.M., Brar D.S., Ahloowalia B.S. (ed.): Somaclonal Variation and Induced Mutations in Crop Improvement. - Kluwer Publishers, Dordrecht 1998.
- Merkle, S.A., Chou, P.L., Sommer, H.E.: Stability of highly repeated sequences in the DNA of embryogenic cultures of yellow poplar. -In: Cheliak, W.M., Yapa, A.C. (ed.): Molecular Genetics of Forest Trees. P. 80. Petawawa National Forestry Institute, Chalk River 1988.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Somaclonal Variation—Advantage or Disadvantage in Micropropagation of the Medicinal Plants
Duta-Cornescu, G., Constantin, N., Pojoga, D.-M., Nicuta, D., & Simon-Gruita, A. (2023) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms24010838 · Cited by 108 · see citing works
“leaves from 15 micropropagated plants and one field-grown plant 31 RAPD primers 100% monomorphism—all RAPD profile genetically similar to mother plant [68]”
Background
- Authors
- Samantaray, S., & Maiti, S.
- Affiliations
- Directorate of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants Research (IN)
- ORCID
- Samantaray, S.
- Venue
- Biologia plantarum
- Publisher
- Institute of Experimental Botany
- Published
- 2010-06-01
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 334-338
- ISSN
- 0006-3134 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-8264
- OpenAlex
- W2000659635
- Cited by
- 31
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 1.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Biologia Plantarum (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Indian Council of Agricultural Research
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Plant tissue culture and regeneration
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic diversity and population structure
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Flowering Plant Growth and Cultivation
- Keywords
- Chlorophytum borivilianum, micropropagation, genetic fidelity, genetic stability, RAPD markers, benzyladenine, naphthaleneacetic acid, indole-3-butyric acid, acclimatization, in vitro to in vivo transfer
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
