Cited by 743Plant tissue culture and regenerationEpigenetics and DNA MethylationPlant Genetic and Mutation Studies

Epigenetic aspects of somaclonal variation in plants

Kaeppler, Shawn M., Kaeppler, Heidi F., Rhee, Yong·2000·Plant Molecular Biology

Abstract

Somaclonal variation is manifested as cytological abnormalities, frequent qualitative and quantitative phenotypic mutation, sequence change, and gene activation and silencing. Activation of quiescent transposable elements and retrotransposons indicate that epigenetic changes occur through the culture process. Epigenetic activation of DNA elements further suggests that epigenetic changes may also be involved in cytogenetic instability through modification of heterochromatin, and as a basis of phenotypic variation through the modulation of gene function. The observation that DNA methylation patterns are highly variable among regenerated plants and their progeny provides evidence that DNA modifications are less stable in culture than in seed-grown plants. Future research will determine the relative importance of epigenetic versus sequence or chromosome variation in conditioning somaclonal variation in plants.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1023/a:1006423110134

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Epigenetic variability observed at the phenotype level reflects adaptations of cellular processes to constraints of in vitro cultivation, which usually implies sequential dedifferentiation and re-differentiation.

    “This epigenetic variability, which frequently is observed at phenotype level, reflects, in reality, the adaptations of the cellular processes to the various constraints of the in vitro cultivation technology, that usually implies sequential dedifferentiation (formation of callus) and re-differentiation (regeneration of plants) [91,95,96,97,98,99,100].”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kaeppler, S. M., Kaeppler, H. F., & Rhee, Y.
Affiliations
University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Corresponding author
Kaeppler, Shawn M.
Venue
Plant Molecular Biology
Published
2000-06
Volume
43
Issue
2-3
Pages
179-188
ISSN
  • 0167-4412 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-5028
OpenAlex
W2119370926
Cited by
743
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 36 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 37 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 37 · 2015: 47 · 2014: 40 · 2013: 47 · 2012: 43
FWCI
3.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Plant Molecular Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Plant tissue culture and regeneration
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Epigenetics and DNA Methylation
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Genetic and Mutation Studies
Keywords
somaclonal variation, epigenetic modifications, DNA methylation, transposable elements, retrotransposons, gene silencing, gene activation, heterochromatin, cytogenetic instability, plant tissue culture, epigenetic inheritance
MeSH terms
Clone Cells, Plants, Genetic Variation, Transcriptional Activation, Gene Expression Regulation, Plant, Plant Cells

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