Analysis of diversity using simple sequence repeat (SSR): Distinctions between original Parmentiera cereifera tree and somaclones
Open accessAbstract
The possibility of culturing Parmentiera cereifera in vitro was tested. Shoot tips and lateral buds were cultured in three media that were based on Murashige and Skoog (MS) but supplemented with different types and concentrations of growth regulators. Thirty-eight simple sequence repeat (SSR) primers were used to assess the genetic stability of the regenerated plantlets. Lateral buds recorded the highest significant mean values for shoot, root length, and the number of leaves when cultured in MS + 1.2 mg/l of 6-benzylaminopurine (BAP) + 1.5 g/l of activated charcoal. Seeds were also grown in different media. The best results were obtained with MS basal medium. The resulting shoots were rooted in MS medium, with 1.5 g/l of activated charcoal. Regenerated plants were acclimatized in the greenhouse. The 38 SSR primers produced 63 scorable bands ranging from 1 to 3, with an average of 1.68 per primer. Fifty-five monomorphic bands were obtained that ranged from 0 to 3, with an average of 1.45 per primer. The coefficient of similarity matrix ranged from 0.92 to 1.0, with an average of 97.4. Dendrogram generated using the SSR data tended to group the in vitro plants with the mother plant into two major clusters. The first cluster contained 19 in vitro plants with the mother plant and consisted of 4 subgroups. The second cluster contained in vitro plants, P-15, which had the lowest genetic similarity (92%) with the mother plant. The results revealed the increase in the degree of similarity between the tested plants in the SSR analyses. Therefore, micropropagation is a safe mode for multiplication of true-to-type plants of P . cereifera .
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?
SSR markers are considered genetically stable because, when used, they did not reveal any polymorphism, or only a very low level of it, between the original plants and the regenerants.
“SSR markers are considered genetically stable because, when used, they did not reveal any polymorphism, or only a very low level of it, between the original plants and the regenerants [81,82,83].”
From Somaclonal Variation—Advantage or Disadvantage in Micropropagation of the Medicinal Plants (2023) · cites this paper as [81]
The SSR analysis reports low polymorphism (60 of 1,324 bands, 4.49%) and concludes that the micropropagated Parmentiera cereifera plants are genetically stable. It does not say that the SSR markers themselves are genetically stable; they are the means used to assess stability. (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
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 18
- Agarwal T, Gupta AK, Patel AK, Shekhawat NS (2015) Micropropagation and validation of genetic homogeneity of Alhagi maurorum using SCoT, ISSR and RAPD markers. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 120(1):313- 323 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11240-014-0608-z · DOI
- Anand M, Brar J, Sood A (2013) In vitro propagation of an edible bamboo bam- busa Bambos and assessment of clonal Fidelity through molecular markers. J Med Bioeng 2(4):257-261 https://doi.org/10.12720/jomb.2.4.257-261 · DOI
- Bhatia R, Singh KP, Sharma TR, Jhang T (2011) Evaluation of the genetic fidelity of in vitro-propagated gerbera (Gerbera jamesonii Bolus) using DNA-based markers. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 104(1):131-135 https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11240-010-9806-5 · DOI
- Engelmann F (2011) Use of biotechnologies for the conservation of plant biodiversity. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 47(1):5-16 https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11627-010-9327-2 · DOI
- Esmaiel NM, Elshafei AA, Zakri AM, Al-Doss AA, Barakat MN (2014) Assessment of clonal fidelity of micro-propagated Lagunaria patersonii plants by TRAP and SSR markers. J Food Agric Environ 12(2):916-921
- Hashish KI, Taha LS, IbrahimS M (2015) Micropropagation potentiality and pigments content of hibiscus rosa-sinensis l. as affected by gamma radiation. Int J ChemTech Res 8(9):131-136
- Martins M, Sarmento D, Oliveira MM (2004) Genetic stability of micropropagated almond plantlets, as assessed by RAPD and ISSR markers. Plant Cell Rep 23(7):492-496 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00299-004-0870-3 · DOI
- Purohit S, Nandi SK, Paul S, Tariq M, Palni LMS (2017) Micropropagation and genetic fidelity analysis in Amomum subulatum Roxb.: a commercially important Himalayan plant. J Appl Res Med Aromatic Plants 4:21-26 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmap.2016.07.003 · DOI
- Rahman MH, Rajora OP (2001) Microsatellite DNA somaclonal variation in micropropagated trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides). Plant Cell Rep 20(6):531-536 https://doi.org/10.1007/s002990100365 · DOI
- Ray T, Dutta I, Saha P, Das S, Roy SC (2006) Genetic stability of three economically important micropropagated banana (Musa spp.) cultivars of lower indo-Gangetic plains, as assessed by RAPD and ISSR markers. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 85(1):11-21 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11240-005-9044-4 · DOI
- Rout GR, Mohapatra A, Jain SM (2006) Tissue culture of ornamental pot plant: a critical review on present scenario and future prospects. Biotechnol Adv 24(6):531-560 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2006.05.001 · DOI
- Rout GR, Reddy GM, Das P (2001) Studies on in vitro clonal propagation of Paulownia tomentosa Steud. and evaluation of genetic fidelity through RAPD marker. Silvae Genetica 50(5-6):208-212
- Saha S, Adhikari S, Dey T, Ghosh P (2016) RAPD and ISSR based evaluation of genetic stability of micropropagated plantlets of Morus alba L. variety S-1. Meta Gene 7:7-15 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mgene.2015.10.004 · DOI
- Saha S, Kader A, Sengupta C, Ghosh P (2012) In vitro propagation of Ocimum Gratissimum L. (Lamiaceae) and its evaluation of genetic gidelity using RAPD marker. Am J Plant Sci 3(1):64-74 https://doi.org/10.4236/ajps.2012.31006 · DOI
- Sathyanarayana N, Bharath TN, Vikas PB, Rajesha R (2008) In vitro clonal propagation of Mucuna pruriens var. utilis and its evaluation of genetic stability through RAPD markers. Afr J Biotechnol 7(8):973-980
- Thakur J, Dwivedi MD, Sourabh P, Uniyal PL, Pandey AK (2016) Genetic homogeneity revealed using SCoT, ISSR and RAPD markers in micropropagated Pittosporum eriocarpum Royle-an endemic and endangered medicinal plant. PLoS One 11(7):1-17 https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0159050 · DOI · Paper page
- Treviño JA, Muñoz-Alemán JM, Pérez-Molphe-Balch E, Rodríguez-Sahagún A, Morales-Domínguez JF (2017) In vitro propagation from bud and apex explants of Moringa oleifera and evaluation of the genetic stability with RAMP marker. S Afr J Bot https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2016.10.003 · DOI
- Thora AS, Sonone NA, Choudhari VV, Devarumath RM, Babu KH (2017) Plant regeneration from cell suspension culture in Saccharum officinarum L. and ascertaining of genetic fidelity through RAPD and ISSR markers. 3 Biotech 7(1):1-12
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
- Authors
- Elshafei, A. A., & Esmaiel, N. M.
- Affiliations
- National Research Centre (EG)
- Agricultural Research Center (EG)
- Corresponding author
- Elshafei, Adel Ahmed
- ORCID
- Elshafei, Adel Ahmed
- Venue
- Bulletin of the National Research Centre
- Published
- 2018-12
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 1110-0591 (ISSN-L)
- 2522-8307
- OpenAlex
- W2904216414
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2023: 1 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Bulletin of the National Research Centre/Bulletin of the National Research Center (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Greater South Information System
- Funders
- King Saud University
- Deanship of Scientific Research, King Saud University
- 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 › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
- Keywords
- somaclonal variation, micropropagation, genetic stability, microsatellite markers, in vitro culture, shoot tip culture, axillary buds, benzyladenine, activated carbon, genetic similarity
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
