Использование явления реювенилизации для получения вегетативного потомства древесных

Обложка

Цитировать

Полный текст

Открытый доступ Открытый доступ
Доступ закрыт Доступ предоставлен
Доступ закрыт Только для подписчиков

Аннотация

Вегетативное размножение обеспечивает возможность масштабирования ценного растительного материала в наиболее короткие сроки. Особую важность оно приобретает при разведении древесных культур с сохранением ценных биологических и морфологических сортовых особенностей отдельных особей. Использование такого подхода позволяет быстро размножать особо ценные произрастающие в парках и лесах растения, в то время как при семенном воспроизводстве не сохраняются их ценные наследственные признаки. В связи с этим создание и совершенствование надежных способов вегетативного размножения древесных видов не теряет своей актуальности. Как известно, вегетативное размножение деревьев достигается в ювенильной фазе развития, а не на стадии зрелости, что сильно ограничивает использование этого подхода. Такая ситуация может быть преодолена путем применения технологий, основанных на активном использовании реювенилизации – явлении, биологическая природа которого на сегодняшний день остается недостаточно изученной. Тем не менее, накоплен значительный исследовательский опыт инициации реювенилизации, т.е. проведения процедур искусственного возвращения взрослых растений или отдельных их частей в юное состояние. В настоящей статье приводится обзор технологий, позволяющих реализовать процесс переключения стратегии развития растения с фазы зрелости к ювенильному состоянию. К ним относятся культивирование меристем, химическая обработка растительного материала, сильная обрезка и хеджирование, использование корневых отпрысков и коппинг, инициация развития пазушных и эпикормических почек, прививка и микропрививка, повторное субкультивирование, а также соматический эмбриогенез. Для дальнейшего успешного развития этого направления требуется применение комплексного подхода, основанного на совокупности омиксных технологий и методов молекулярной генетики, молекулярной и клеточной биологии.

Полный текст

Доступ закрыт

Об авторах

В. Н. Шмаков

Федеральное государственное бюджетное учреждение науки Сибирский институт физиологии и биохимии растений Сибирского отделения Российской академии наук

Автор, ответственный за переписку.
Email: vladwork70@gmail.com
Россия, Иркутск

В. И. Бельков

Федеральное государственное бюджетное учреждение науки Сибирский институт физиологии и биохимии растений Сибирского отделения Российской академии наук; Федеральное государственное бюджетное образовательное учреждение высшего образования “Иркутский государственный университет”

Email: vladwork70@gmail.com
Россия, Иркутск; Иркутск

Ю. М. Константинов

Федеральное государственное бюджетное учреждение науки Сибирский институт физиологии и биохимии растений Сибирского отделения Российской академии наук; Федеральное государственное бюджетное образовательное учреждение высшего образования “Иркутский государственный университет”

Email: vladwork70@gmail.com
Россия, Иркутск; Иркутск

Список литературы

  1. Giri C.C., Shyamkumar B., Anjaneyulu C. Progress in tissue culture, genetic transformation and applications of biotechnology to trees: an overview // Trees. 2004. V. 18. P. 115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-003-0287-6
  2. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2020: Main report. Rome: FAO. 2020. 186 p. https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9825en
  3. El-Kassaby Y.A., Klápště J. Genomic selection and clonal forestry revival // Proc. 3rd international conference of the IUFRO unit 2.09.02 on “Woody plant production integrating genetic and vegetative propagation technologies” September 8-12, 2014. / Eds. Park Y.S., Bonga J.M. Vitoria-Gasteiz. Spain. 2014. P. 98.
  4. Ewald D. Micropropagation of Larix species via organogenesis // Protocols for Micropropagation of Woody Trees and Fruits / Eds. Jain S.M., Häggman H. Springer. 2007. P. 125. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6352-7_12
  5. Williams C.G., Savolainen O. Inbreeding depression in conifers: implications for using selfing as a breeding strategy // For. Sci. 1996. V. 42. P. 102. https://doi.org/10.1093/FORESTSCIENCE/42.1.102
  6. Bonga J.M. Conifer clonal propagation in tree improvement programs // Vegetative propagation of forest trees / Eds. Park Y.S., Bonga J.M., Moon H.K. National Institute of Forest Science (NIFoS). Seoul. Korea. 2016. P. 3.
  7. Krasnoperova V., Bukharina I., Islamova N. Features introduction to the culture in vitro of coniferous trees // AgroEcoInfo. Electronic science-productive magazine. 2016. V. 24. № 2. (In Russian) https://agroecoinfo.ru/STATYI/2016/2/st_211.doc
  8. Isah T. Explant rejuvenation in the clonal propagation of woody plants // Plant Cell, Tissue Organ Cult. 2023. V. 154. P. 209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11240-023-02520-8
  9. Park Y.S., Bonga J.M. Conifer micropropagation: its function in tree improvement programs // Micropropagation of Woody Plants / Eds. Ahuja M.R. Kluwer Academic. Dordrecht. 1992. P. 457. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8116-5_27
  10. von Aderkas P., Bonga J.M. Influencing micropropagation and somatic embryogenesis in mature trees by manipulation of phase change, stress and culture environment // Tree Physiol. 2000. V. 20. P. 921. https://doi.org/ 10.1093/treephys/20.14.921
  11. Bonga J.M. A comparative evaluation of the application of somatic embryogenesis, rooting of cuttings, and organogenesis of conifers // Can. J. For. Res. 2015. V. 45. P. 379. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2014-0360
  12. Bonga J.M., von Aderkas P. Rejuvenation of tissues from mature conifers and its implications for propagation in vitro // Clonal Forestry I, Genetics and Biotechnology / Eds. Ahuja M.R., Libby W.J. Springer-Verlag. Berlin. Heidelberg. 1993. P. 182. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-84175-0_12
  13. Park Y.S. Implementation of conifer somatic embryogenesis in clonal forestry: technical requirements and deployment considerations // Ann. For. Sci. 2002. V. 59. P. 651. https://doi.org/10.1051/forest:2002051
  14. Bonga J.M., MacDonald J.E., von Aderkas P. Cloning of conifers, with emphasis on mature trees. // Advances in plant biotechnology / Eds. Rao G.P., Zhao Y., Radchuck V.V., Batnagar S.K. Studium Press LLC. Houston. 2008. P. 475.
  15. Bonga J.M., Klimaszewska K., von Aderkas P. Recalcitrance in clonal propagation, in particular of conifers // Plant Cell, Tissue Organ Cult. 2010. V. 100. P. 241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11240-009-9647-2
  16. Trontin J-F., Aronen T., Hargreaves C., Montalbán I.A., Moncaleán P., Reeves C., Quoniou S., Lelu-Walter M.-A., Klimaszewska K. International effort to induce somatic embryogenesis in adult pine trees // Vegetative propagation of forest trees / Eds. Park Y.S., Bonga J.M., Moon H.K. National Institute of Forest Science (NIFoS). Seoul. Korea. 2016. P. 211.
  17. Wang Y., Yao R. Optimization of rhizogenesis for in vitro shoot culture of Pinus massoniana Lamb // J. For. Res. 2019. V. 32. P. 203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-019-01076-8
  18. Zarei M., Salehi H., Jowkar A. Controlling the barriers of cloning mature Picea abies (L.) H. Karst. via tissue culture and co-cultivation with Agrobacterium rhizogenes // Trees. 2020. V. 34. P. 637. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-019-01945-z
  19. Beck S.L., Dunlop R., van Staden J. Rejuvenation and micropropagation of adult Acacia mearnsii using coppice material // Plant Growth Regul. 1998. V. 26. P. 149. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006179620554
  20. Zhang Z., Sun Y., Li Y. Plant rejuvenation: from phenotypes to mechanisms // Plant Cell Reports. 2020. V. 39. P. 1249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00299-020-02577-1
  21. Bonga J.M. Can explant choice help resolve recalcitrance problems in in vitro propagation, a problem still acute especially for adult conifers? // Trees. 2017. V. 31. P. 781. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-016-1509-z
  22. Mikhalevskaya O.B., Shabasheva A.A. Cyclic rejuvenation in the development of shoots of canary island pine (Pinus canariensis C. Sm.) // Russ. J. Dev. Biol. 2013. V. 44. P. 19. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1062360412050062
  23. Vidoy-Mercado I., Narváez I., Palomo-Ríos E., Litz R.E., Barcelу-Muсoz A., Pliego-Alfaro F. Reinvigoration/rejuvenation induced through micrografting of tree species: signaling through graft union // Plants. 2021. V. 10. P. 1197. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10061197
  24. Birnbaum K.D., Roudier F. Epigenetic memory and cell fate reprogramming in plants // Regeneration. 2017. V. 4. P. 15. https://doi.org/10.1002/reg2.73.eCollection 2017 Feb
  25. Ratclife O.J., Amaya I., Vincent C.A., Rothstein S., Carpenter R., Coen E.S., Bradley D.J. A common mechanism controls the life cycle and architecture of plants // Development. 1998. V. 125. P. 1609. https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.125.9.1609
  26. Moon H.K., Park S.Y., Kim Y.W., Kim S.H. Somatic embryogenesis and plantlet production using rejuvenated tissues from serial grafting of a mature Kalopanax septemlobus tree // In Vitro Cell Dev. Biol. Plant. 2008. V. 44. P. 119. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11627-008-9122-5
  27. Greenwood M.S., Day M.E., Schatz J. Separating the effects of tree size and meristem maturation on shoot development of grafted scions of red spruce (Picea rubens Sarg.) // Tree Physiol. 2010. V. 30. P. 459. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpq004
  28. Read P.E., Bavougian C.M. In vitro rejuvenation of woody species // Protocols for micropropagation of selected economically-important horticultural plants. Methods in molecular biology. V. 994 / Eds. Lambardi M. et al. Springer Science Business Media. New York. 2013. P. 383. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-62703-074-8_30
  29. Nascimento B., Sá A.C.S., Lemos L.B.D., Rosa D.P.D., Pereira M.D.O., Navroski M.C. Three epicormic shoot techniques in I. paraguariensis mother trees and its cutting according to the material rejuvenation degree // Cerne. 2018. V. 24. P. 240. https://doi.org/10.1590/01047760201824032584
  30. Salomão L.C.C., Siqueira D.L.D., Silva D.F.P.D. Production of ‘Ubá’ mango tree submitted to rejuvenation pruning and fertilized with nitrogen // Revista Brasileira De Fruticultura. 2018. V. 40. P. e812. https://doi.org/ 10.1590/0100-29452018812
  31. Massoumi M., Krens F.A., Visser R.G.F., De Klerk G.M. Azacytidine and miR156 promote rooting in adult but not in juvenile Arabidopsis tissues // J. Plant Physiol. 2017. V. 208. P. 52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2016.10.010
  32. Irish E.E., McMurray D. Rejuvenation by shoot apex culture recapitulates the developmental increase of methylation at the maize gene Pl-Blotched // Plant Mol. Biol. 2006. V. 60. P. 747. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11103-005-5620-6
  33. Stange L. Cellular interactions during early differentiation // Cellular Interactions. Encyclopedia of Plant Physiology. V. 17 // Eds. Linskens H.F., Heslop-Harrison J. Springer. Berlin. Heidelberg. 1984. P. 424. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-69299-4_20
  34. Burrows G.E. Leaf axil anatomy in the Araucariaceae // Aust. J. Bot. 1987. V. 35. P. 631. https://doi.org/10.1071/bt9870631
  35. Soyars C.L., James S.R., Nimchuk Z.L. Ready, aim, shoot: stem cell regulation of the shoot apical meristem // Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2016. V. 29. P. 163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbi.2015.12.002
  36. Monteuuis O. Rejuvenation of a 100-year-old Sequoiadendron giganteum through in vitro meristem culture. I. Organogenic and morphological arguments // Physiol. Plant. 1991. V. 81. P. 111. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.1991.tb01721.x
  37. Prehn D., Serrano C., Mercado A., Stange C., Barrales L., Arce-Johnson P. Regeneration of whole plants from apical meristems of Pinus radiata // Plant Cell, Tissue Organ Cult. 2003. V. 73. P. 91. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022615212607
  38. Ballester A., Corredoira E., Vieitez A.M. Limitations of somatic embryogenesis in hardwood trees // Vegetative propagation of forest trees / Eds. Park Y.S., Bonga J.M., Moon H.K. National Institute of Forest Science (NIFoS). Seoul. Korea. 2016. P. 56.
  39. Bonga J.M. Adventitious shoot formation in cultures of immature female strobili of Larix decidua // Physiol. Plant. 1984. V. 62. P. 416. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.1984.tb04595.x
  40. Wang K.X., Karnosky D.F., Timmis R. Adventitious bud production from mature Picea abies: rejuvenation associated with female strobili formation // Woody plant biotechnology / Eds. Ahuja M.R. Plenum Press. New York. 1991. P. 83. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-1-4684-7932-4_11
  41. Cardoso J.C., Martinelli A.P., Latado R.R. Somatic embryogenesis from ovaries of sweet orange cv. Tobias // Plant Cell, Tissue Organ Cult. 2012. V. 109. P. 171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11240-011-0073-x
  42. Michaux-Ferriére N., Grout H., Carron M.P. Origin and ontogenesis of somatic embryos in Hevea brasiliensis (Euphorbiaceae) // Am. J. Bot. 1992. V. 79. P. 174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2445105
  43. Miyashima S., Sebastian J., Lee J.-Y., Helariutta Y. Stem cell function during plant vascular development // EMBO J. 2013. V. 32. P. 178. https://doi.org/10.1038/emboj.2012.301
  44. Sugimoto K., Jiao Y., Meyerowitz E.M. Arabidopsis regeneration from multiple tissues occurs via a root development pathway // Dev. Cell. 2010. V. 18. P. 463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2010.02.004
  45. Wu H., Hu Z.-H. Comparative anatomy of resin ducts of the Pinaceae // Trees. 1997. V. 11. P. 135. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s004680050069
  46. Bonga J.M. Organogenesis in vitro of tissues from mature conifers // In Vitro. 1981. V. 17. P. 511. https://doi.org/10.2307/4292533
  47. Pulianmackal A.J., Kareem A.V.K., Durgaprasad K., Trivedi Z.B., Prasad K. Competence and regulatory interactions during regeneration in plants // Front. Plant Sci. 2014. V. 5. P. 1. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00142
  48. Steward F.C., Mapes M.O., Mears K. Growth and organized development of cultured cells. II. Organization in cultures grown from freely suspended cell // Am. J. Bot. 1958. V. 45. P. 705. https://doi.org/ 10.1002/j.1537-2197.1958.tb10599.x
  49. Greenwood M.S. Rejuvenation of forest trees // Plant Growth Regul. 1987. V. 6. P. 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00043947
  50. Benson E.E. Special symposium: In vitro plant recalcitrance. In vitro plant recalcitrance: an introduction // In Vitro Cell Dev. Biol. Plant. 2000. V. 36. P. 141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11627-000-0029-z
  51. Zimmerman R.H., Hackett W.P., Pharis R.P. Hormonal aspects of phase change and precocious flowering // Hormonal Regulation of Development III / Eds. Pharis R.P., Reid D.M. Springer-Verlag. Heidelberg. 1985. P. 79. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-67734-2_4
  52. Niu S.H., Li Z.X., Yuan H.W., Fang P., Chen X.Y., Li W. Proper gibberellin localization in vascular tissue is required to regulate adventitious root development in tobacco // J. Exp. Bot. 2013. V. 64. P. 3411. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/ert186
  53. Ivanchenko M.G., Muday G.K., Dubrovsky J.G. Ethylene-auxin interactions regulate lateral root initiation and emergence in Arabidopsis thaliana // Plant J. 2008. V. 55. P. 335. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2008.03528.x
  54. Poethig R.S. Phase change and the regulation of shoot morphogenesis in plants // Sci. 1990. V. 250. P. 923. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.250.4983.923
  55. Kiyosue T., Takano K., Kamada H., Harada H. Induction of somatic embryogenesis in carrot by heavy metal ions // Can. J. Bot. 1990. V. 68. P. 2301. https://doi.org/10.1139/b90-293
  56. Rout G.R., Samantaray S., Das P. Somatic embryogenesis and plant regeneration from callus culture of Acacia catechu - a multipurpose leguminous tree // Plant Cell, Tissue Organ Cult. 1995. V. 42. P. 283. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/BF00030000
  57. McCabe P.F., Valentine T.A., Forsberg L.S., Pennell R.I. Soluble signals from cells identified at the cell wall establish a developmental pathway in carrot // Plant Cell. 1997. V. 9. P. 2225. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.9.12.2225
  58. Schmidt E.D.L., de Jong A.J., de Vries S.C. Signal molecules involved in plant embryogenesis // Plant Mol. Biol. 1994. V. 26. P. 1305. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/BF00016476
  59. Shinshi H., Mohnen D., Meins F.Jr. Regulation of a plant pathogenesis-related enzyme: inhibition of chitinase and chitinase mRNA accumulation in cultured tobacco tissues by auxin and cytokinin // Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1987. V. 84. P. 89. https://doi.org/ 10.1073/pnas.84.1.89
  60. De Jong A.J., Cordewener J., Lo Schiavo F., Terzi M., Vandekerckhove J., Van Kammeren A., De Vries S.C. A carrot somatic embryo mutant is rescued by chitinase // Plant Cell. 1992. V. 4. P. 425. https://doi.org/10.2307/3869444
  61. Pittock C., Weinman J.J., Rolfe B.G. The activity of a tobacco basic chitinase promotor in transgenic white clover provides insights into plant development and symbiosis // Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 1997. V. 24. P. 555. https://doi.org/10.1071/PP97019
  62. Mo L.H., Egertsdotter U., von Arnold S. Secretion of specific extracellular proteins by somatic embryos of Picea abies is dependent on embryo morphology // Ann. Bot. 1996. V. 77. P. 143. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbo.1996.0016
  63. Mason W.L., Menzies M.I., Biggin, P. A comparison of hedging and repeated cutting cycles for propagating clones of Sitka spruce // Forestry. 2002. V. 75. P. 149. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/75.2.149
  64. Mitchell R.G., Zwolinski J., Jones N.B. A review on the effects of donor maturation on rooting and field performance of conifer cuttings // Southern African Forestry J. 2004. V. 201. P. 53. https://doi.org/10.1080/20702620.2004.10431774
  65. Masaka K., Torita H., Kon H., Fukuchi M. Seasonality of sprouting in the exotic tree Robinia pseudoacacia L. in Hokkaido, northern Japan // J. For. Res. 2017. V. 20. P. 386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10310-015-0488-z
  66. Clapa D., Fira A. Tissue culture and ex-vitro acclimation of Rhododendron sp // Bulletin University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine CLUJ-NAPOCA. 2007. V. 64. P. 39. https://doi.org/10.15835/buasvmcn-hort:1899
  67. St. Clair J.B., Kleinschmit J., Svolba J. Juvenility and serial vegetative propagation of Norway spruce clones (Picea abies Karst.) // Silvae Genet. 1985. V. 34. P. 42.
  68. Crawford B.C.W., Sewell J., Golembeski G., Roshan C., Long J.A., Yanofsky M.F. Genetic control of distal stem cell fate within root and embryonic meristems // Sci. 2015. V. 347. P. 655. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa0196
  69. Economou A.S., Spanoudaki M.J. Regeneration in vitro of oleaster Elaeagnus angustifolia L.) from shoot tips of mature trees // Acta Hortic. 1988. V. 227. P. 363. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.1988.227.66
  70. Minghe L., Faxin H. Performance of Chinese-fir (Cunninghamia lanceolata (Lamb.) Hook.) plantlets from upper-crown and basal origins as modified by grafting and development as buried ramets before explant harvest // Silvae Genet. 2001. V. 50. P. 37.
  71. Boulay M. Conifer micropropagation: applied research and commercial aspects // Cell and tissue culture in forestry, case histories: gymnosperms, angiosperms and palms. V. 3 / Eds. Bonga J.M., Durzan D.J. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Dordrecht. 1987 P. 185.
  72. Meier A.R., Saunders M.R., Michler C.H. Epicormic buds in trees: a review of bud establishment, development and dormancy release // Tree Physiol. 2012. V. 32. P. 565. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tps040
  73. Harmer R. Production and use of epicormic shoots for the vegetative propagation of mature oak // Forestry. 1988. V. 61. P. 305. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/61.4.305-a
  74. Brand M.H., Lineberger R.D. In vitro rejuvenation of Betula (Betulaceae): morphological evaluations // Am. J. Bot. 1992. V. 79. P. 618. https://doi.org/ 10.2307/2444877
  75. Henry P.H., Preece J.E. Production and rooting of shoots generated from dormant stem sections of Acer species // Hort. Sci. 1997. V. 32. P. 1274. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.32.7.1274
  76. Vieitez A.M., Corredoira C., Ballester A., Muñoz F., Durán J., Ibarra M. In vitro regeneration of the important North American oak species Quercus alba, Quercus bicolor and Quercus rubra // Plant Cell, Tissue Organ Cult. 2009. V. 98. P. 135. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11240-009-9546-6
  77. Selby C., Watson S., Harvey B.M.R. Morphogenesis in Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis (Bong.) Carr.) bud cultures-tree maturation and explants from epicormic shoots // Plant Cell, Tissue Organ Cult. 2005.V. 83. P. 279. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11240-005-7016-3
  78. Cortizo M., De Diego N., Moncalean P., Ordas R.J. Micropropagation of adult Stone Pine (Pinus pinea L.) // Trees. 2009. V. 23. P. 835. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-009-0325-0
  79. De Diego N., Montalban I.A., Fernandez de Larrinoa E., Moncalean P. In vitro regeneration of Pinus pinaster adult trees // Can. J. For. Res. 2008. V. 38. P. 2607. https://doi.org/10.1139/x08-102
  80. De Diego N., Montalban I.A., Moncalean P. In vitro regeneration of adult Pinus sylvestris L. trees // South African J. Bot. 2010. V. 76. P. 158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2009.09.007
  81. Wan Y., Fan F. Direct organ regeneration from apical shoot buds of adult Pinus massoniana Lamb // In Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. Plant. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11627-024-10415-2
  82. Boulay M. In vitro propagation of tree species // Plant tissue and cell culture / Eds. Green C.E., Somers D.A., Hackett W.P., Biesboer D.D. Liss. New York. 1987. P. 367.
  83. Fraga M.F., Cañal M.J., Aragonés A., Rodríguez R. Factors involved in Pinus radiata D. Don. micrografting // Ann. For. Sci. 2002. V. 59. P. 155. https://doi.org/10.1051/forest:2002002
  84. Chang I.-F., Chen P.-J., Shen C.-H., Hsieh T.-J., Hsu Y.-W., Huang B.-L., Kuo C.-I., Chen Y.-T., Chu H. A., Yeh K.-W., Huang L.-C. Proteomic profiling of proteins associated with the rejuvenation of Sequoia sempervirens (D. Don) Endl // Proteome Sci. 2010. V. 8. P. 64. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-5956-8-64
  85. Ondro W.J., Couto L., Betters D.R. The status and practice of forestry in Brazil in the early 1990s // For. Chronicle. 1995. V. 7. P. 106. https://doi.org/10.5558/tfc71106-1
  86. Su X.C. Study on the differences of the seedling of different generations from successive tissue culture of Chinese fir clone // J. Fujian College Forestry. 2000. V. 20. P. 353.
  87. Ashapkin V.V., Kutueva L.I., Vanyushin B.F. Aging epigenetics: accumulation of errors or realization of a specific program? // Biochem. 2015. V. 80. P. 1406. https://doi.org/ 10.1134/S0006297915110024
  88. Hübl S., Zoglauer K. Entwicklung einer Vermehrungsmethode für züchterisch wertvolle Lärchen. Beitr // Forstwirtschaft. 1991. V. 25. P. 18.
  89. Kretzschmar U., Ewald D. Vegetative propagation of 140-year-old Larix decidua trees by different in vitro techniques // Plant Physiol. 1994. V. 144. P. 627. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0176-1617(11)82149-8
  90. Castander-Olarieta A., Moncaleán P., Montalbán I.A. Somatic embryogenesis in Pines // Somatic Embryogenesis. Methods in Molecular Biology. V. 2527/ Eds. Ramírez-Mosqueda M.A. Humana. New York. 2022. P. 41. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-0716-2485-2_4
  91. Klimaszewska K., Rutledge R.G. Is there potential for propagation of adult spruce trees through somatic embryogenesis? // Vegetative propagation of forest trees / Eds. Park Y.S., Bonga J.M., Moon H.K. National Institute of Forest Science (NIFoS). Seoul. Korea. 2016. P. 195.
  92. Ruaud J.N., Bercetche J., Paques M. First evidence of somatic embryogenesis from needles of 1-year-old Picea abies plants // Plant Cell Rep. 1992. V. 11. P. 563. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/BF00233093
  93. Harvengt L., Trontin J.F., Reymond I., Canlet F., Pâques M. Molecular evidence of true-to-type propagation of a 3-year-old Norway spruce through somatic embryogenesis // Planta. 2001. V. 213. P. 828. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004250100628
  94. Varis S., Klimaszewska K., Aronen T. Somatic embryogenesis and plant regeneration from primordial shoot explants of Picea abies (L.) H. Karst. somatic trees // Front. Plant Sci. 2018. V. 9. P. 1551. https://doi.org/ 10.3389/fpls.2018.01551
  95. Klimaszewska K., Overton C., Stewart D., Rutledge R.G. Initiation of somatic embryos and regeneration of plants from primordial shoots of 10-year-old somatic white spruce and expression profiles of 11 genes followed during tissue culture process // Planta. 2011. V. 233. P. 635. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-010-1325-4

Дополнительные файлы

Доп. файлы
Действие
1. JATS XML
Скачать
2. Рис. 1. Методы реювенилизации взрослого растительного материала.

Скачать (543KB)
Метаданные

© Российская академия наук, 2024