Molecular spectrum of somaclonal variation in regenerated rice revealed by whole-genome sequencing
Abstract
Somaclonal variation is a phenomenon that results in the phenotypic variation of plants regenerated from cell culture. One of the causes of somaclonal variation in rice is the transposition of retrotransposons. However, many aspects of the mechanisms that result in somaclonal variation remain undefined. To detect genome-wide changes in regenerated rice, we analyzed the whole-genome sequences of three plants independently regenerated from cultured cells originating from a single seed stock. Many single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and insertions and deletions (indels) were detected in the genomes of the regenerated plants. The transposition of only Tos17 among 43 transposons examined was detected in the regenerated plants. Therefore, the SNPs and indels contribute to the somaclonal variation in regenerated rice in addition to the transposition of Tos17. The observed molecular spectrum was similar to that of the spontaneous mutations in Arabidopsis thaliana. However, the base change ratio was estimated to be 1.74 × 10(-6) base substitutions per site per regeneration, which is 248-fold greater than the spontaneous mutation rate of A. thaliana.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Global DNA methylation is the most evaluated epigenetic somaclonal variation; in plants it is at higher levels than in other eukaryotes and is correlated with expression of different genes and changes in mobility of transposable elements.
“The most evaluated epigenetic somaclonal variation is global DNA methylation, which, in plants, is at higher levels compared with other eukaryotes, and is correlated with the expression of different genes, and changes in the mobility of the numerous transposable elements presented in plant genomes [99,101,102,103,104,105,106,107,108,109].”
From Somaclonal Variation—Advantage or Disadvantage in Micropropagation of the Medicinal Plants (2023) · cites this paper as [107]
Cites
Next is now: new technologies for sequencing of genomes, transcriptomes, and beyond
Lister, R., Gregory, B. D., & Ecker, J. R. (2009) · Current Opinion in Plant Biology · doi:10.1016/j.pbi.2008.11.004 · Cited by 274 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Somaclonal variations and their applications in horticultural crops improvement
Krishna, H., Alizadeh, M., Singh, D., Singh, U., Chauhan, N., Eftekhari, M., & Sadh, R. K. (2016) · 3 Biotech · doi:10.1007/s13205-016-0389-7 · Cited by 436 · see citing works
Modrzejewski, D., Hartung, F., Lehnert, H., Sprink, T., Kohl, C., Keilwagen, J., & Wilhelm, R. (2020) · Frontiers in Plant Science · doi:10.3389/fpls.2020.574959 · Cited by 151 · see citing works
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
Tissue Culture-Induced Heritable Genomic Variation in Rice, and Their Phenotypic Implications
Zhang, D., Wang, Z., Wang, N., Gao, Y., Liu, Y., Wu, Y., Bai, Y., Zhang, Z., Lin, X., Dong, Y., et al. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0096879 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
Genetic Variation and Unintended Risk in the Context of Old and New Breeding Techniques
Singer, S. D., Laurie, J. D., Bilichak, A., Kumar, S., & Singh, J. (2021) · Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences · doi:10.1080/07352689.2021.1883826 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Biswas, P., & Kumar, N. (2023) · Molecular Marker Techniques · doi:10.1007/978-981-99-1612-2_12 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Genetic Basis of Somaclonal Variation
Linacero, R., & Ballesteros, I. (2024) · Somaclonal Variation: Basic and Practical Aspects · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-51626-9_1 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
- Authors
- Miyao, A., Nakagome, M., Ohnuma, T., Yamagata, H., Kanamori, H., Katayose, Y., Takahashi, A., Matsumoto, T., & Hirochika, H.
- Affiliations
- Institute of Agrobiological Sciences (JP)
- Corresponding author
- Miyao, Akio
- Venue
- Plant and Cell Physiology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2011-12-07
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 256-264
- ISSN
- 0032-0781 (ISSN-L)
- 1471-9053
- OpenAlex
- W2151545076
- Cited by
- 135
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 3.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Plant and Cell Physiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Plant tissue culture and regeneration
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Genetic and Mutation Studies
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Chromosomal and Genetic Variations
- Keywords
- somaclonal variation, transposon transposition, single nucleotide polymorphisms, indels, mutation rate, plant cell culture, spontaneous mutation, Arabidopsis thaliana comparison
- MeSH terms
- Base Sequence, DNA Transposable Elements, Homozygote, Molecular Sequence Data, Mutation, Regeneration, Oryza, Reproducibility of Results, Sequence Alignment, Sequence Analysis, DNA, Genome, Plant, Chromosome Segregation, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, INDEL Mutation, Mutation Rate
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