Cited by 8Plant tissue culture and regenerationBerry genetics and cultivation researchEpigenetics and DNA Methylation

Exploring Genetic and Epigenetic Changes in Lingonberry Using Molecular Markers: Implications for Clonal Propagation

Open access
Sharma, Umanath, Sikdar, Arindam, Igamberdiev, Abir U., Debnath, Samir C.·2023·Current Issues in Molecular Biology

Abstract

Lingonberry (Vaccinium vitis-idaea L.) is an important and valuable horticultural crop due to its high antioxidant properties. Plant tissue culture is an advanced propagation system employed in horticultural crops. However, the progeny derived using this technique may not be true-to-type. In order to obtain the maximum return of any agricultural enterprise, uniformity of planting materials is necessary, which sometimes is not achieved due to genetic and epigenetic instabilities under in vitro culture. Therefore, we analyzed morphological traits and genetic and epigenetic variations under tissue-culture and greenhouse conditions in lingonberry using molecular markers. Leaf length and leaf width under greenhouse conditions and shoot number per explant, shoot height and shoot vigor under in vitro conditions were higher in hybrid H1 compared to the cultivar Erntedank. Clonal fidelity study using one expressed sequence tag (EST)—polymerase chain reaction (PCR), five EST—simple sequence repeat (SSR) and six genomic (G)—SSR markers revealed monomorphic bands in micropropagated shoots and plants in lingonberry hybrid H1 and cultivar Erntedank conforming genetic integrity. Epigenetic variation was studied by quantifying cytosine methylation using a methylation-sensitive amplification polymorphism (MSAP) technique. DNA methylation ranged from 32% in greenhouse-grown hybrid H1 to 44% in cultivar Erntedank under a tissue culture system. Although total methylation was higher in in vitro grown shoots, fully methylated bands were observed more in the greenhouse-grown plants. On the contrary, hemimethylated DNA bands were more prominent in tissue culture conditions as compared to the greenhouse-grown plants. The study conclude that lingonberry maintains its genetic integrity but undergoes variable epigenetic changes during in vitro and ex vitro conditions.

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 · 10.3390/cimb45080397

Cites

52 of 52 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?

  • In Vaccinium vitis-idaea micropropagated shoot tips, genetic equality was observed.

    “Genetic equality observed.”

    From Somaclonal Variation and Clonal Fidelity in Commercial Micropropagation: Challenges and Perspectives (2025) · cites this paper as [129]

    The Abstract reports monomorphic marker bands in micropropagated lingonberry shoots and plants, supporting genetic integrity in the material tested. The Materials and Methods (§2.1) say the cultures began from leaf explants and that shoots were sampled for DNA analysis; our copy does not establish the finding specifically for shoot tips. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    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

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sharma, U., Sikdar, A., Igamberdiev, A. U., & Debnath, S. C.
Affiliations
  • Memorial University of Newfoundland (CA)
  • Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (CA)
Corresponding author
Debnath, Samir C.
Venue
Current Issues in Molecular Biology
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2023-07-28
Volume
45
Issue
8
Pages
6296-6310
ISSN
  • 1467-3037 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-3045
OpenAlex
W4385341248
Cited by
8
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 1
FWCI
0.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Issues in Molecular Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Memorial University of Newfoundland
  • Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Plant tissue culture and regeneration
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Berry genetics and cultivation research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Epigenetics and DNA Methylation
Keywords
lingonberry, Vaccinium myrtillus, clonal fidelity, epigenetic variation, DNA methylation, cytosine methylation, micropropagation, in vitro culture, greenhouse cultivation, genetic stability, morphological variation, hybrid cultivars, EST-SSR markers, genomic SSR markers, hemimethylation

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