Cited by 12Plant tissue culture and regenerationFlowering Plant Growth and CultivationPlant Molecular Biology Research

Induction of Somatic Embryogenesis and Evaluation of Genetic Stability in Regenerated Plants of Magnolia Dealbata

Open access
CHAVEZ-CORTAZAR, A., MATA-ROSAS, M., OYAMA, K., SAMAIN, M.S., QUESADA, M.·2020·Biologia plantarum

Abstract

The utility of plant tissue culture for the mass propagation of trees is well known, but continuous in vitro multiplication of plant material may increase the possibility of somaclonal variation; therefore, it is essential to evaluate the genetic integrity of regenerants from species-specific in vitro protocols prior to mass production and implementation. The objectives of this study were: 1) to determine the effect of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) concentration over two cycles of secondary somatic embryogenesis in Magnolia dealbata; and 2) to verify the genetic stability of the regenerants obtained. The embryogenic response was not significantly affected by the concentration of 2,4-D but did vary across cycles of induction. The addition of 4.52 μM 2,4-D induced the highest total number of embryos (100.5), the mean number of somatic embryos (25.1) and somatic embryos per explant (80.6). In both 2,4-D concentration (2.26 or 4.52 μM), genetic integrity between the donor and the propagated clones was 0.90, and the low genetic instability (≤ 0.10 in both PGR treatments) might be due to effect of cyclic somatic embryogenesis or the different response of the explants at stress in in vitro culture conditions. However, it is necessary to examine more cell lines and somatic embryogenesis cycles.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.32615/bp.2020.006

Cites

65 of 65 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

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

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 68 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
CHAVEZ-CORTAZAR, A., MATA-ROSAS, M., OYAMA, K., SAMAIN, M. S., & QUESADA, M.
Affiliations
Instituto de Ecología (MX)
Venue
Biologia plantarum
Published
2020-03-11
Volume
64
Pages
224-233
ISSN
  • 0006-3134 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-8264
OpenAlex
W3012207813
Cited by
12
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3
FWCI
0.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • Biologia Plantarum (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Plant tissue culture and regeneration
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Flowering Plant Growth and Cultivation
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Molecular Biology Research
Keywords
Magnolia dealbata, somatic embryogenesis, genetic stability, somaclonal variation, 2,4-D, secondary somatic embryogenesis, plant tissue culture, regenerated plants, plant genetic resources

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