影响火鹤愈伤组织诱导、增殖和芽分化的因素研究
Study on Factors Influencing Callus Induction, Proliferation and Bud Differentiation of Anthurium scherzerinum

作者: 杜宝贵 * , 梁彩红 , 黎扬辉 , 易懋升 :广州花卉研究中心; 张志胜 :华南农业大学广东省植物分子育种重点实验室;

关键词: 火鹤愈伤组织诱导增殖芽分化Anthurium scherzerinum Callus Induction Proliferation Bud Differentiation

摘要: 本研究旨在通过研究影响火鹤组培快繁的因素,以其为大规模种苗生产提供参考。试验以Graffity3个火鹤品种的组培苗为材料,研究了影响火鹤愈伤组织诱导、增殖和芽分化的因素。研究结果表明,3个品种的组培苗叶片愈伤组织诱导率差异不明显;6-BA在无菌苗叶片愈伤组织诱导和分化过程中,是主要影响因素;单独使用2,4-D的愈伤诱导率低,仅为20.84%。在愈伤组织块分化过程中,6-BA + NAA组合的分化率比6-BA + 2,4-D组合的高;不同外植体的愈伤组织诱导率和褐变率差异不显著,叶柄的愈伤组织诱导率最高,为97.22%,叶片次之,根尖的愈伤组织诱导率最低,为93.06%。该试验初步获得了火鹤组培快繁的相关技术体系,为火鹤规模化生产提供了依据。 

In order to provide reference to the mass seedling production, the factors influencing the callus induction, proliferation and bud differentiation of Anthurium scherzerinum were studied by using the steriled seedling of 3 varieties such as Graffity as materials. Result: The results showed that the callus inducing rates of the 3 varieties were not obvious. 6-BA is the main influencing factor in the process of callus induction and bud differentiation. The inducing rate by using 2,4-D only was low, 20.84%. In the process of bud dif- ferentiation, the differentiation of combination of 6-BA + NAA is higher than that of combination of 6-BA + 2,4-D. The inducing rate and browning rate of callus were not obvious between different explants, in which the inducing rate of petiole was the highest, 97.22%, followed by leaf, the induction rate of root tip was the lowest, 93.06%. The related technical system of tissue culture of Anthurium scherzerinum was obtained from the test, which providing a basis to the large-scale production.

文章引用: 杜宝贵 , 梁彩红 , 黎扬辉 , 易懋升 , 张志胜 (2012) 影响火鹤愈伤组织诱导、增殖和芽分化的因素研究。 农业科学, 2, 43-48. doi: 10.12677/HJAS.2012.23008

参考文献

[1] R. L. M. Pierik. Anthurium andraeanum plantlets produced from cultivated in vitro. Plant Physiology, 1976, 37(1): 80-82.

[2] T. Geier. Morphogenesis and plant regeneration from spadix fragments of Anthurium scherzerianum. In: A. Fujiwara, Ed., Plant Tissue Culture. Tokyo: Proceedings of the 5th International Cong Plant Tissue and Cell Culture, 1982: 137-139.

[3] M. Hamidah, A. G. A. Karim and P. Debergh. Somatic em- bryogenesis and plant regeneration in Athurium scherzerianum. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture, 1997, 48: 189-193.

[4] T. Geier, et al. Factors affecting plant regeneration from leaf segments of Anthurium scherzerianum schott (Araceae) cultured in vitro. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture, 1986, 6(2): 115- 125.

[5] 兰芹英, 仇玉萍, 张远辉等. 不同红掌品种的叶片、叶柄和茎段愈伤组织的诱导及植株再生[J]. 西北植物学报, 2003, 23(6): 1006-1009.

[6] 姜蕾, 兰天维, 黎扬辉等. 影响红掌愈伤组织诱导、增殖和芽分化的因素[J]. 种子, 2006, 25(11): 26-30.

[7] 赵云鹏. 红掌人工诱变与遗传学分析[D]. 长沙: 湖南农业大学, 2002: 12-18.

[8] 周辉明, 尚伟, 陈燕等. 外植体、基本培养基和生长调节剂对红掌愈伤组织诱导影响的研究[J]. 江西农业学报, 2010, 22(1): 64-65.

[9] 江如燕, 张施君, 郑迎东. 红掌的组织培养和快速繁殖[J]. 仲恺农业技术学院, 2002, 15(4): 47-53.

[10] 陈华, 吴子平. 粉女郎红掌组培快繁技术研究[J]. 安徽农学通报, 2010, 16(21): 55-57.

[11] 潘学峰, 潘梅, 洪世军. 红掌叶片愈伤组织的诱导与植株再生[J]. 海南大学学报自然科学版, 2000, 18(2): 144-149.

[12] 李景. 哥伦比亚花烛的组织培养研究[D]. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2001: 28-30.

[13] 陈华林. 不同培养条件和外植体处理对红掌品种组培效果的影响[J]. 园林花卉, 2003, l31(4): 35-37.

[14] 王进茂, 郑均宝, 高秀丽等.花烛组织培养的研究[J]. 河北林果研究, 2000, 15(1): 69-74.

[15] 岑益群, 蒋如敏, 邓志龙. 安祖花离体增殖的形态发生与理化因子效应[J]. 园艺学报, 1993, 20(2): 187-192.

[16] 郭维明, 赵云鹏, 文方德. 花烛愈伤组织不同继代培养的再分化差异[J]. 园艺学报, 2004, 31(1): 69-72.

[17] 夏时云, 麦瑜玲, 许继勇等. 提高红掌叶片愈伤组织诱导和植株分化及壮苗律的技术研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2005, 21(2): 45-48.

[18] 刘玉东, 刘艳军, 杨静慧. 巨型红掌茎尖组织培养及快繁技术的研究[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2009, 37(12): 5358-5359.

[19] 李冰, 陈丽, 王梅等. 不同激素浓度对红掌品种组培效果的影响[J]. 现代农业科技, 2010, 8: 220-221.

[20] 崔月羚. 花烛离体培养与快速繁殖技术研究[D]. 南京: 南京农业大学, 2006: 45-48.

分享
Top