Virus Elimination in Plants: History
View Latest Version
Please note this is an old version of this entry, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Subjects: Biotechnology & Applied Microbiology
Contributor:
Katalin Magyar-Tábori

Virus elimination from plants is mostly based on the in vitro culture of isolated meristem, and in addition thermotherapy, chemotherapy, electrotherapy, and cryotherapy can also be applied. Treatments can result in low rate of survival, inhibited growth, incomplete development, or abnormal morphology.  The rate of destruction depends on the genotypes and physiological condition of plants. There are several ways to decrease the harmful effect of treatments. 

  • virus eradication
  • meristem isolation
  • thermotherapy
  • chemotherapy
  • electrotherapy
  • cryotherapy
  • phytotoxicity

1. Introduction

The phytopathogen viruses can cause very significant economic losses in crop yield and quality [1][2]. In vegetatively propagated plants (tuberous plants, bulbs, fruits, etc.), they can be of particular importance, as they are more likely to be passed on to the offspring with the propagating material [3][4][5].
Viruses are very simple “organisms”, and to this day there is a debate about whether we can consider them to be living things at all [6]. They are very small in size (mostly 5–300 nm), and are constructed of a hereditary material (nucleic acid template molecule(s)) that is in general protected by a protein/lipoprotein envelope. Viruses are obligate parasites [7].
Due to the failure of own specific metabolic processes (protein synthesis, etc.), there is no pesticide to control viruses [8][9]. Cultivation of resistant cultivars may be one solution to the problem [2], but in the case of vegetatively propagated plant species, the planting of virus-free propagating material is the most effective method of control [10].
Virus elimination in general occurs under in vitro conditions based on meristem isolation. Production of planting material of vegetatively propagated crops is worldwide based on the micropropagation of virus- and pathogen-free in vitro shoot cultures [5][11], which can originate from non-adventitious (axillary or apical) or adventitious buds [12][13]. Beside organogenesis the micropropagation can also occur by somatic embryogenesis [11][14].
During the virus elimination process, it is possible to separate the virus-free part (meristematic region of shoot/root tips) from the virus-infected plant parts, since the distribution of viruses in the plant is not uniform [15][16]. Many viruses are not found in the apical dome of meristem [17], and their presence in the meristematic region can be affected by exogenous (environmental conditions) and endogenous (developmental stage of plants) factors [18]. At least four reasons are known why meristem can be free of some viruses, as follows:
(1)
Intensive metabolic processes and the raised auxin concentration accompanying active cell division in meristems inhibit viral replication as well [9].
(2)
The RNA silencing involved in the plant defense mechanism against viruses [19], could also play an important role in prevention of accumulation of viruses and viroids in the apex [20][21][22].
(3)
The spread of viruses in plants from cell to cell is relatively slow, and their long-distance movement in plant mostly occurs via the vascular system [7] that does not exist in the meristem yet [23][24][25].
(4)
Wang et al. [26] supposed a relationship between the presence of viruses and the plasmodesmata development, since they observed a few (non-branched) plasmodesmata in the cell walls of tissues where the virus was not detected, while they occurred frequently in the tissues infected by virus such as the base of first leaf primordium.
Meristem isolation and culture are often combined with other treatments (thermo- and chemotherapy) to increase the effectiveness of virus eradication [27][28]. There are other methods to obtain virus-free plantlets (electrical treatment, cryotherapy, embryogenesis) [29][30][31][32][33][34].
Even though the environmental condition for in vitro culture is highly controlled, the explants and developing plantlets suffer from several stress factors. These factors are injury occurring during meristem isolation, incomplete plant development (i.e., shoot without root), high humidity and high level of gases in vessel, supra-optimal levels of nutrients, sucrose and growth regulators in medium, etc. [35][36]. Virus elimination treatments applied in tissue culture can result in further stress effects including high or very low temperature and toxicity of chemicals leading to changes in physiology and/or morphology of plantlets [36]. Apart from inhibited growth of in vitro shoots, hyperhydricity is one of the most common morpho-physiological anomalies in in vitro cultures as a response to inappropriate environmental factors, i.e., high humidity, inadequate plant growth regulator (PGR) levels, etc. [35].

2. Meristem Excision and Culture

2.1. The Background

Usually the apical meristem of the shoot is very small (about 100 µm in diameter), dome shaped, and consists of about 800–1200 cells. However, the size and the shape are various depending on the species and developmental stage of plant. The shoot apex includes also the other surrounding tissues of the meristems and organs found at the distal end of the shoot [37].
Localization of viruses in the plant varies depending on the virus and plant species infected. For example, the Apple stem grooving virus (ASGV) was detected in the whole shoot tip of apple (Malus domestica Borkh.), even in the youngest region [38]. Wang et al. [26] found that the Raspberry bushy dwarf virus (RBDV) in raspberry (Rubus ideaus L.) existed in all tissues including leaf primordia (LP) and the base of meristem; virus did not present only in the least differentiated cells of the apical dome (AD). However, the smallest part of meristem, which could be mechanically isolated, was the 0.1 mm in length with the youngest leaf primordium in the case of raspberry (Rubus idaeus L., ‘Z13’) [26].
Excision and culture of meristem in this size (0.1–0.3 mm) are feasible only under sterile conditions, because the wounded area is too large in relation to the volume of explant, and any kind of contamination would be fatal for it [39]. Even under sterile conditions, the loss due to contamination can be very high in overly susceptible species, as there are many small sites in phylotaxis or they may be contaminated with soil [40]. It seems that normal plant development requires an apical shoot tip containing at least 1–2 leaf primordia that can ensure the production of auxins and cytokinins [9].
Even though the ability of meristems to survive was proven to be better under drought [35], freezing [41], or heat [26] stress than other tissues (leaves, cotyledons), the excised meristem suffers from several stresses during isolation and cultivation. The wounding accompanied by excision of meristem resulted in a stress similar to that caused by herbivorous insects, and reactive oxygen species (ROS) are produced in a very short time, which damages the meristems [35][39]. Browning of explants may also be a serious problem in species producing polyphenols [9]. Polyphenol oxidase (PPO) is one of the enzymes responsible for wounding induced browning of explant, which can even lead to death of those [42]. In wounded cells, PPO and its substrate (polyphenols) are released from the vacuoles and from plastids/chloroplast, where they are localized. Polyphenols can react with molecular oxygen; this reaction is catalyzed by PPO, and finally dark pigment (melanin) will be produced. Antioxidant enzymes (peroxidases (POX), superoxide dismutase (SOD)) also play role in explant browning [43].
In addition to wounds, chemical stress also affects the plant during the disinfection process using standard chemicals such as sodium hypochlorite, ethanol, and mercuric chloride [3][35]. However, both the extent of wound damage and the contamination can be reduced by use of hypodermic needle for meristem isolation [44][45][46][47]. Mother plant can be pre-treated by fungicide and bactericide chemicals in order to decrease the rate of contamination of shoot tips; thus, a less harmful disinfection procedure can be used [9].
Although shoot initiation could be observed after about 10 days in sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam) [44][47] or 7–21 days in summer squash (Cucurbita pepo L., ‘Bulum’, ‘Rumbo’) [48], even several months can be taken for obtaining fully-developed healthy plantlets, during which time the in vitro cultures may become contaminated or the medium may dry out [3]. In vitro plant regeneration from isolated meristem/shoot tip takes place through organogenesis, as a response to wounding; in general, new organs or whole plantlets can develop. Even though plant cells have a very strong regeneration capability due to their developmental flexibility [49], the survival and regeneration rate of explants are significantly different, which depends on several factors.

2.2. Effect of the Meristem Size on the Regeneration Ability of Explant

The size of the excised part is crucial: as the size of the excised meristems increased from less than 0.1 to 0.5 mm gradually, the regeneration rates increased from 10–20% up to 44–50% in cardamom (Amomum subulatum Roxb.) [50] (Table 1). Similarly, survival rates of carnation (Dianthus caryophyllus L.) shoot meristems increased from 20% to 80% with an increase of explant size from 0.1 to 0.4 mm [51]. Wang et al. [26] also detected positive correlation between the shoot tip length of raspberry (Rubus idaeus L., ‘Z13’) and its survival rate and regeneration capacity. The explant excised in 0.1 mm survived in 25%, and 40.0% of them regenerated to shoots, while 40% of shoot tips in 0.2 mm length survived with 65% regeneration rate. Significantly more shoots (95%) survived in the case of the 0.3 mm shoot tip, and each of them was able to regenerate the shoot. Similarly, sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam.) meristems in the length of longer than 0.3 mm were only able to survive [52].
Meristems between 1 and 2 mm in size showed at least 79.2% regeneration rate with 100% virus elimination rate in the case of both Sugarcane mosaic virus (SCMV) and Sugarcane yellow leaf virus (ScYLV) in sugarcane (Saccharum spp. L., ‘NCo376’) virus elimination experiments. Plantlets developed from the larger shoot apex remained all infected by viruses, while smaller explants responded with shoot development only at a 46.4–53.9% rate [53]. Meristems 0.3–0.6 mm in size were proven to be the most sui0le for the establishment of in vitro culture in apple (Malus domestica Borkh.), although some shoots initiated from explants sized 0.5–0.6 mm remained infected by Apple chlorotic leaf spot virus (ACLSV). A high rate of loss (44.4%) could be observed in the case of meristems smaller than 0.3 mm, due to their dehydration, while the culture of meristem explants excised in larger than 0.6 mm size failed in virus removal. Moreover, the presence of phenolic browning was also more frequent in meristem explants > 0.5 mm [40]. The size of the meristem can also affect the time required for regeneration; in the meristem culture of cardamom (Amomum subulatum Roxb., ‘Golsahi’ and ‘Ramsahi’), the shoot initiation occurred within 14–18 weeks on explants larger than 0.3 mm, while regeneration on smaller meristems could be observed after 18–24 weeks [50].
The size of isolated meristem significantly affected the shoot length in potato (Solanum tuberosum L.): meristems were excised in 100, 200, and 300 µm, and the length of shoots in the average of two cultivars were 5.2, 7.2, and 9.7 cm, respectively, after 60 days of culture initiation [54]. The optimal size of the meristem depended on the genotype in the case of fig (Ficus carica L.) varieties. The highest regeneration rates (96%) were achieved by isolation of meristem in 0.5 mm length in the case of Capri fig ‘Assafri’. Two of the Tunisian local figs showed the best results when a meristem of 1.0 mm length was used for culture in the case of ‘Zidi’ and ‘Bither Abiadh’, resulting in 79% and 73.3% regeneration rates, respectively. The third Tunisian local fig (‘Soltani’) showed the highest regeneration rate (95.2%) when meristem of 1.5 mm length was isolated [55]. However, it was observed in each variety that culture initiation by larger shoot apex (1.5 mm) was accompanied by death of the explant base in high rate (up to 76.45%, depending on genotype).

2.3. Effect of the Genotypes, Explant Source, and Age on the Regeneration Ability of Isolated Meristems

The survival of the meristem explants and the success of shoot regeneration was still also affected by many factors, including the genotypes and physiological stage of the mother plant, or other environmental factors such as plant growth regulators (PGR), nutrient supply, light condition, etc., reviewed by Bidabadi and Jain [56]. Interaction between the factors can often be detected; however, one of the most important factors proved to be the PGR content of initiation medium, e.g., in sweet potato (I. batatas (L.) Lam) [57] and in grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) [58].
The regenerative capacity of genotypes can be very different; for example, in potato (S. tuberosum L.), it varied between 40% and 80% [59]; in summer squash (Cucurbita pepo L.) between 69% and 75% [48]; and in fig (Ficus carica L.) between 51.7–78.3% [60]. Other factors, however, can also play role in the rate of responsiveness, as was observed when 100 genotypes of garlic (Allium sativum L.) were involved in virus elimination experiments based on meristem isolation. Although very high regeneration rates (90–100%) were observed in garlic meristems in length of 1.0 mm (2–3 leaf primordia), when 0.3–0.8 mm sized meristems were isolated, their survival and regeneration rate varied between 1% and 80%, and six genotypes did not regenerate the shoot at all [61].
In another experiment, 10 genotypes of tested 51 garlic accessions showed better results on PGR-free medium, while the others performed better on media containing PGRs (0.1 mg/L β-indolyl-acetic acid (IAA) + 0.1 mg/L kinetin (KIN) or 0.01 mg/L α-naphthalene acetic acid (NAA) + 0.01 mg/L 6-benzyladenine (BA)), and the majority of them preferred the latter medium [61]. Although the same PGRs were used for meristem cultures of fig (F. carica L.), the best levels of them (BA and gibberellic acid, GA3) were different for fig cultivars [60].
Table 1. Results and details of meristem cultures experiments.

2.4. Effect of the Medium Component on the Regeneration Ability of Explants

Murashige-Skoog (MS) [62] and Woody Plant Medium (WPM) [63] are the most frequently used basic media for in vitro shoot culture, supplements such as PGRs can affect significantly the survival of explants. Very low rate of shoot initiation (5.4–21.6% depending on genotypes) could be achieved from sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam.) meristems on medium without PGRs [57], while Kaushal et al. [45] did not observe any organogenesis on gentian (Gentiana kurroo Royle) explants cultured on medium lacking PGRs. Similarly, Anisuzzaman et al. [46] could not detect any development on okra (Abelmoschus esculentus L. (Moench.)) meristems cultured on medium without any PGR. Application of NAA and GA3 alone failed to induce shoot development from meristem explants of ‘Brondal’ sweet potato (I. batatas (L.) Lam.) cultivar, while addition of 1 mg/L BA alone to medium induced the shoot regeneration at about a 1% rate. The presence of BA either alone or combined with NAA or GA3 was proven to be necessary for shoot initiation [64]. BA level was crucial to increase the shoot initiation percentage of other cultivars of sweet potato (I. batatas (L.) Lam.), which increased as BA level increased from 0.1 to 2.0 mg/L (‘Lo-323’ and ‘Zapallo’) or to 5.0 mg/L (‘Belella’ and ‘Temesgen’). Although 100% regeneration rate were observed in ‘Belella’ and ‘Temesgen’ cultured on medium with 5.0 mg/L BA, the shoots were dwarf and highly multiplied. In the case of ‘Lo-323’ and ‘Zapallo’ genotypes, application of 2.0 mg/L BA resulted in the best shoot initiation rates (90% and 80%, respectively) and shoots were of good quality [44]. Lower level of BA (1.0 mg/L) was found to be optimum for ‘Awassa-83’, ‘Guntute’, and ‘Awassa local’ sweet potato (I. batatas (L.) Lam.) cultivars, which resulted in shoot induction at more than 60.0% of the rate of isolated meristems [57]. High regeneration rate (83%) could be achieved by using 1.0 mg/L BA and 0.5 mg/L IAA for culture of gentian (G. kurroo Royle) meristems [45]. The same level of BA applied alone as PGR resulted in the best survival rates (72% and 67%) in meristem cultures of both okra (A. esculentus L. (Moench.)) genotypes ‘Parbhani Kranti’ and ‘SL-44’ [46]. In meristem cultures of grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) with increase of both cytokinins (BA and KIN) level (from 0.0 to 1.0 mg/L), the amount of formed callus increased, especially in the case of BA [65]. Combination of 0.1 mg/L BA with 0.015 mg/L KIN was the best in the shoot induction medium also for sugarcane (Saccharum spp. L., ‘NCo376’) meristems, resulting in a 100% regeneration rate and high shoot number per meristem (13.7), while those meristems cultured on medium without KIN (0.5 and 2.0 mg/L BA) yielded less than five shoots per meristem, although their regeneration rates were different: 55% and 100%, respectively. However, the lowest regeneration response (50%) and quite a few shoots (six per explant) were detected on meristems grown on medium with a combination of 2.0 mg/L BA and 1.0 mg/L KIN, supplemented with 0.5 mg/L NAA [52]. Sweet potatoes (I. batatas (L.) Lam) tended to respond to unfavorable cytokinin content of the medium with undesirable callus formation: use of thidiazuron (TDZ) or BA led to callus formation and failed in shoot induction [52]. When cultivars responded to BA with abundant callus development, the KIN also could be used efficiently for meristem cultures in several sweet potato (I. batatas (L.) Lam) genotypes; when 2.0 mg/L KIN was added to medium with 0.5 mg/L GA3, the survival rates of explants varied between 62.5% and 79.2% depending on genotypes [47]. The best shoot initiation responses (75% survival rate of isolated meristems with high vigor) were obtained by application of liquid Murashige–Skoog medium (MS) [62] with 2.0 mg/L KIN and 0.5 mg/L GA3 without any kind of callus development [52]. The same PGR combination (2.0 mg/L KIN and 0.5 mg/L GA3) was the most effective for summer squash (Cucurbita pepo L.) regeneration (75.5% and 69.27% regeneration rates) from meristem in the case of ‘Bulum’ and ‘Rumbo’, respectively [48]. Addition of 0.5 mg/L GA3 to meristem culture medium containing 2.0 mg/L KIN increased the survival rate by about 14% in average of seven sweet potato (I. batatas (L.) Lam.) genotypes, compared those cultured on the medium without GA3 [47]. GA3 level had to be increased from 1.0 to 2.0 mg/L to achieve the best regeneration rate (63.3%) in ‘Awassa local’ sweet potato (I. batatas (L.) Lam.) cultivar [57]. Even a much higher level GA3 (up to 20 mg/L) also enhanced the shoot regeneration in the case of ‘Brondal’ sweet potato (I. batatas (L.) Lam.) cultivar; regardless, there were no significant differences between shoot regeneration capability of meristems cultured on media with 5.0, 10.0, and 20.0 mg/L GA3 content. However, the most shoots were obtained on the medium containing 10.0 mg/L GA3 due to multiplied shoots developed on meristems [64].
Application of more than 0.05 mg/L of NAA in the medium of sweet potato (I. batatas (L.) Lam) meristem culture led to formation of abundant calli without the ability of shoot regeneration [57]. Addition of 0.1 mg/L isopentyl adenosine (IPA) to the culture initiation medium containing 0.2 mg/L BA and 0.1 mg/L NAA also resulted in significantly higher rate of fig (Ficus carica L.) explants (58.3–81.3%), showing callus development on three of the four varieties tested, compared to the medium without IPA (20.4–62.2%). However, no callus development was observed in ‘Soltani’ cultivar on medium with IPA, this variety was also characterized by poor callus development (0–8.75%) on other media [55]. Excised sweet potato (I. batatas (L.) Lam.) meristems preferred the culture on the liquid medium instead of the semi-solid medium, where the majority of explants were not responsive enough, maybe due to the higher accessibility of the nutrients and water in the liquid medium compared to the semi-solid medium [52]. Application of the liquid medium was also preferred for species that suffered from polyphenolic browning, because the toxic molecules (quinone compounds) are less able to accumulate around the explants [40]. Inhibition of production of phenolic molecules by addition of 2-aminoindane-2-phosphonic acid (AIP) into the medium can reduce the rate of browning as was reported in Artemisia annua L., Ulmus americana L., and Acer saccharinum L. in vitro cultures [66]. Addition of antioxidants to the medium or as pre-treatment for mother plants, such as phloroglucinol (PG), ascorbic acid (AA), citric acid (CA), etc., can prevent the browning of meristem cultures [55][67][68]. Adsorption of toxic materials by application of activated charcoal (AC) in the medium also frequently used solution in tissue cultures [69]. Application of 2.0 g/L AC in culture initiation medium can also enhance the regeneration ability of meristems isolated from several grapevine (V. vinifera L.) cultivars [70].
Shoot length of sweet potato (I. batatas L. Lam) cultivars varied depending on the genotypes and BA level added to the shoot initiation medium. After three months of culture period, the longest shoots (8.8 cm) developed on ‘LO-323’ explants on medium supplemented with 0.5 mg/L BA, while similar growth was observed in ‘Belella’ (8.2 cm) on the medium with 1.0 mg/L BA. The shortest shoots developed on ‘Zapallo’ explants, where the best results (2.9 cm) were obtained by application of 1.0 mg/L BA [44]. Although significantly more shoots developed on the meristems of grapevine (V. vinifera L.) cultured on media supplemented with BA (0.2–1.0 mg/L) compared to those induced by media with the same levels of KIN, the shoot elongation was greatly inhibited [65]. In the case of different sized grapevine (V. vinifera L., ‘Flame Seedless’) meristems explants (0.5 and 1.0 mm), the number of shoots were almost the same (0.9–1.0 shoots per explant) when meristems were cultured on cytokinin-free medium. However, when they were grown on media containing BA (0.5–1.5 mg/L), significantly more shoots developed on the larger explant. Increasing the BA concentration from 0.5 to 1.0 mg/L in media also significantly increased the number of shoots, while a further increase to 1.5 mg/L no longer resulted in a further significant change. In any case, the higher number of shoots was accompanied by a decrease in the length of the shoots [58]. In the case of ‘Brondal’ sweet potato (I. batatas L. Lam) cultivar, the significantly longest shoots (up to 20 mm) developed on medium supplemented with 10.0 mg/L GA3, compared to those shoots (<14 mm) grown on media with 0.0 and 5.0 mg/L GA3, each medium contained also 1.0 mg/L BA, while the length of shoots regenerated on the medium with 20.0 mg/L GA3 did not differ from either [64]. The PGR content in the medium can be supposed to be the most determining factor affecting the rate of shoot growth from the isolated meristem.

2.5. Effect of the Season and In Vitro Culture Condition on the Regeneration Ability of Explants

April and May were the best seasons for the establishment of grapevine (Vitis vinifera L., ‘Flame seedless’) meristem culture, because the phenolic content of plant was low [58]; the beginning of summer is still appropriate for the establishment of grapevine tissue culture, during the period of rapid shoot growth [71]. Similarly, in the case of temperate trees, the spring months are best suited for starting in vitro culture when they are in the active growth phase [9][43]. After initiation cultures of plants producing polyphenols, they should be stored under dark and cool conditions for a short period, in order to reduce the activity of enzymes [9][43][60][65]. Frequent transfer to fresh medium is also required for these species [60][72]. Photoperiod also can affect the success of shoot regeneration. Murashige [73] reported that Calanchoe sp. regenerated better under short day illumination, which is required for its flowering, while walnuts (Juglans sp.) preferred a long day photoperiod for shoot proliferation.

2.6. Solutions for Improvement of Survival and Regeneration Ability of Explants after Meristem Isolation

Pre-treatment of the mother (donor) plant by chemicals to reduce contamination, and timing of the shoot tip/meristem collection and excision can improve the survival of explants. Technically, the use of sharp and thin tools for meristem isolation (hypodermic needle) can reduce the rate of injury. Decisions about the size of the meristem to be excised should be made considering the virus type (its localization) and plant species and cultivar; moreover, the positive correlation between the survival rate and the size of meristem should be taken into account. Application of an adequate medium for in vitro culture initiation from meristems is also necessary to enhance the responsiveness of explants and their regeneration capacity; liquid medium may be preferred, proper balance of PGRs is necessary, and the type and level of cytokinins and auxins are especially crucial. Additives applied in the initiation media such as antioxidants (AA, CA, polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP)), or absorbents (AC) play an important role in prevention losses due to phenolic browning. Growing conditions are also to be fitted to the requirements of genotypes, and if needed, a dark and cool environment should be ensured.

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/plants10040670

References

  1. Cembali, T.; Folwell, R.J.; Wandschneider, P.; Eastwell, K.C.; Howell, W.E.; Economic implications of a virus prevention program in deciduous tree fruits in the US.. Crop Prot. 2003, 22, 1149–1156, 10.1016/S0261-2194(03)00156-X.
  2. Rubio, L.; Galipienso, L.; Ferriol, I.; Detection of plant viruses and disease management: Relevance of genetic diversity and evolution.. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 1092, 10.3389/fpls.2020.01.092.
  3. Mori, K.; Production of virus-free plants by means of meristem culture.. JARQ 1971, 6, 1-7, .
  4. G.J. Hu; N. Hong; L.P. Wang; H.J. Hu; G.P. Wang; Efficacy of virus elimination from in vitro-cultured sand pear (Pyrus pyrifolia) by chemotherapy combined with thermotherapy. Crop Protection 2012, 37, 20-25, 10.1016/j.cropro.2012.02.017.
  5. Sochacki, D.; Podwyszyńska, M.; Virus eradication in narcissus and tulip by chemotherapy.. Floric. Ornam. Biotechnol. 2012, 6, 114-121, .
  6. Hurst, C.J.; Lindquist, H.D.A. . Defining the Ecology of Viruses.; Hurst, C.J., , Eds.; Academic Press: London, 2000; pp. 3-39.
  7. Hull, R. . Matthew’s Plant Virology; Academic Press: London, 2002; pp. 1-1056.
  8. Gergerich, R.C.; Dolja, V.V. Introduction to plant viruses, the invisible foe. Plant Health Instr. 2006, doi:10.1094/PHI-I-2006-0414-01.
  9. Bhojwani, S.S.; Dantu, P.K. . Production of virus-free plants. ; Bhojwani, S.S.; Dantu, P.K. , Eds.; Springer: India, New Delhi, 2013; pp. 227-243.
  10. Jones, R.A.C.; Control of plant virus diseases. . Adv. Virus Res. 2006, 67, 205-244, 10.1016/S0065-327(06)67006-1.
  11. Butt, S.J.; Varis, S.; Nasir, I.A.; Shahid, A.; Ali, Q.; Micro propagation in Advanced Vegetable Production: A review.. Adv. Life Sci. 2015, 2, 48-57, .
  12. Read, P.E.; Preece, J.E. . Cloning: Plants—Micropropagation/tissue culture. ; van Alfen, N.K., Eds.; Academic Press: London, UK, 2014; pp. 317-336.
  13. De Klerk, G.-J.; Micropropagation of Bulbous Crops: Technology and present state. . Floric. Ornam. Biotechnol. 2012, 6, 1-8, .
  14. Seckinger, G.R. . Micropropagation of vegetable crop species. ; Debergh, P.C., Zimmerman, R.H., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht: The Netherlands, 1991; pp. 265-284.
  15. Bennett, C.W.; The relation of viruses to plant tissues. Bot. Rev. 1940, 6, 427-473, .
  16. Morel, G.; Martin, C.; Guerison de dahlias atteints d’une maladie a virus. . Comptes Rendus l’Academie Sci. 1952, 235, 1324-1325, .
  17. Coleman, M.C.; Powel, W. . Virus eliminating and testing. ; Lindsey, K. , Eds.; Springer Science+Business Media: Dordrecht: The Newtherlands, 1992; pp. 1-132.
  18. Mochizuki, T.; Ohki, S.T. . Detection of plant Virus in Meristem by Immunohistochemistry and In Situ Hybridization.; Uyeda, I., Masuta, C. , Eds.; Springer Science+Business Media: New York, NY, USA, 2015; pp. 275-287.
  19. Dawson, W.O.; Gene silencing and virus resistance: A common mechanism. . Trends Plant Sci. 1996, 1, 107-108, .
  20. Wang, M.B.; Masuta, C.; Smith, N.A.; Shimura, H.; RNA silencing and plant viral diseases. . Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 2012, 25, 1275-1285, .
  21. Frank Schwach; Fabian E. Vaistij; Louise Jones; David C. Baulcombe; An RNA-Dependent RNA Polymerase Prevents Meristem Invasion by Potato Virus X and Is Required for the Activity But Not the Production of a Systemic Silencing Signal. Plant Physiology 2005, 138, 1842-1852, 10.1104/pp.105.063537.
  22. Francesco Di Serio; Angel-Emilio Martínez De Alba; Beatriz Navarro; Andreas Gisel; Ricardo Flores; RNA-Dependent RNA Polymerase 6 Delays Accumulation and Precludes Meristem Invasion of a Viroid That Replicates in the Nucleus. Journal of Virology 2009, 84, 2477-2489, 10.1128/jvi.02336-09.
  23. Marie Baucher; Mondher El Jaziri; Olivier Vandeputte; From primary to secondary growth: origin and development of the vascular system. Journal of Experimental Botany 2007, 58, 3485-3501, 10.1093/jxb/erm185.
  24. Wen-Lu Bi; Xin-Yi Hao; Zhen-Hua Cui; Ranjith Pathirana; Gayle M. Volk; Qiao-Chun Wang; Shoot tip cryotherapy for efficient eradication of grapevine leafroll-associated virus-3 from diseased grapevine in vitro plants. Annals of Applied Biology 2018, 173, 261-270, 10.1111/aab.12459.
  25. Q.C. Wang; J.P.T. Valkonen; Elimination of two viruses which interact synergistically from sweetpotato by shoot tip culture and cryotherapy. Journal of Virological Methods 2008, 154, 135-145, 10.1016/j.jviromet.2008.08.006.
  26. Qiaochun Wang; Wilmer J. Cuellar; Minna-Liisa Rajamäki; Yukimasa Hirata; Jari P. T. Valkonen; Combined thermotherapy and cryotherapy for efficient virus eradication: relation of virus distribution, subcellular changes, cell survival and viral RNA degradation in shoot tips. Molecular Plant Pathology 2008, 9, 237-250, 10.1111/j.1364-3703.2007.00456.x.
  27. Huiling Gong; Clement Igiraneza; Leonce Dusengemungu; Major In Vitro Techniques for Potato Virus Elimination and Post Eradication Detection Methods. A Review. American Potato Journal 2019, 96, 379-389, 10.1007/s12230-019-09720-z.
  28. A. Panattoni; A. Luvisi; E. Triolo; Review. Elimination of viruses in plants: twenty years of progress. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research 2013, 11, 173-188, 10.5424/sjar/2013111-3201.
  29. Snezana Milosevic; Aleksandar Cingel; Sladjana Jevremovic; Ivana Stankovic; Aleksandra Bulajic; Branka Krstic; Angelina Subotic; Virus elimination from ornamental plants using in vitro culture techniques. Pesticidi i fitomedicina 2012, 27, 203-211, 10.2298/pif1203203m.
  30. De Oliveira Prudente, D.; Paiva, R.; de Souza, L.B.; de Oliveira Paiva, P.D.; Cryotherapy as a technique for virus elimination in ornamental species.. Plant Cell Cult. Micropropag 2017, 13, 29-33, .
  31. Meybodi, D.E.; Mozafari, J.; Babaeiyan, N.; Rahimian, H.; Application of Electrotherapy for the Elimination of Potato Potyviruses.. J. Agr. Sci. Tech. 2011, 13, 921-927, .
  32. H. Lozoya-Saldana; F. Abelló J.; G. De La R. García; Electrotherapy and shoot tip culture eliminate potato virus X in potatoes. American Potato Journal 1996, 73, 149-154, 10.1007/bf02853073.
  33. I.-C. Guţă; E.-C. Buciumeanu; L.D. Tătaru; B. Oprescu; C.M. Topală; New approach of electrotherapy for grapevine virus elimination. Acta Horticulturae 2019, 1242, 697-702, 10.17660/actahortic.2019.1242.103.
  34. Hormozi-Nejad, M.H.; Mozafari, J.; Rakhshandehroo, F.; Elimination of Bean common mosaic virus using an electrotherapy technique/Bekämpfung des Gewöhnlichen Bohnenmosaik-Virus per Elektrotherapietechnik. J. Plant Dis. Prot. 2010, 117, 201-205, .
  35. De Klerk, G.-J.; Stress in plants cultured in vitro. . Propag. Ornam. Plants 2007, 7, 129-137, .
  36. Desjardins, Y.; Dubuc, J.F.; Badr, A.; In Vitro Culture of Plants: A Stressful Activity! . Acta Hortic. 2009, 812, 29-50, .
  37. Medford, J.; Vegetative Apical Meristems. The Plant Cell 1992, 4, 1029-1039, .
  38. Lei Zhao; Min-Rui Wang; Zhen-Hua Cui; Long Chen; Gayle M. Volk; Qiao-Chun Wang; Combining Thermotherapy with Cryotherapy for Efficient Eradication of Apple stem grooving virus from Infected In-vitro-cultured Apple Shoots. Plant Disease 2018, 102, 1574-1580, 10.1094/pdis-11-17-1753-re.
  39. Łukaszuk, E.; Ciereszko, I. . Plant responses to wounding stress. ; Łaska, G., Eds.; Polis Botanical Society: Białystok, Poland, 2012; pp. 73-85.
  40. Manu Vivek; Manju Modgil; Elimination of viruses through thermotherapy and meristem culture in apple cultivar ‘Oregon Spur-II’. VirusDisease 2018, 29, 75-82, 10.1007/s13337-018-0437-5.
  41. Q.C. Wang; B. Panis; F. Engelmann; M. Lambardi; J.P.T. Valkonen; Cryotherapy of shoot tips: a technique for pathogen eradication to produce healthy planting materials and prepare healthy plant genetic resources for cryopreservation. Annals of Applied Biology 2009, 154, 351-363, 10.1111/j.1744-7348.2008.00308.x.
  42. Chuanjun, X.; Ru, Z.; Li, L.; Zeng, B.; Huang, J.; Huang, W.; Hu, O.; The Effects of Polyphenol Oxidase and Cycloheximide on the Early Stage of Browning in Phalaenopsis Explants. . Hort. Plant J. 2015, 1, 172-180, 10.16420/j.issn.2095-9885.2015-0030.
  43. Judit Dobránszki; Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva; Micropropagation of apple — A review. Biotechnology Advances 2010, 28, 462-488, 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2010.02.008.
  44. Tekalign Wondimu; Tileye Feyissa; Girma Bedadav; Meristem culture of selected sweet potato ( Ipomoea batatas L. Lam.) cultivars to produce virus-free planting material. The Journal of Horticultural Science and Biotechnology 2012, 87, 255-260, 10.1080/14620316.2012.11512861.
  45. Kaushal, S.; Sidana, A.; Dev, K.; In vitro plant production through apical meristem culture of Gentiana kurroo Royle. . J. Med. Plants Stud. 2014, 3, 4-9, .
  46. Mohammad Anisuzzaman; Ahmad H. Kabir; Kanak K. Sarker; Shamima Jarin; Mohammad F. Alam; Micropropagation ofAbelmoschus esculentusL. (Moench.) for disease free plantlets through meristem culture. Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection 2010, 43, 460-466, 10.1080/03235400701875430.
  47. Iftekhar Alam; Shamima Akhtar Sharmin; Mst. Kamrun Naher; Jahangir Alam; Mohammad Anisuzzaman; Mohammad Firoz Alam; Elimination and detection of viruses in meristem-derived plantlets of sweetpotato as a low-cost option toward commercialization. 3 Biotech 2012, 3, 153-164, 10.1007/s13205-012-0080-6.
  48. Ahmad H. Kabir; Shakti P. Pal; Kanak K. Sarker; Shamima A. Sharmin; Mohammad F. Alam; Virus elimination and pathogen-free plantlets regeneration inCucurbita pepoL.. Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection 2010, 43, 527-537, 10.1080/03235400801939862.
  49. Momoko Ikeuchi; Yoichi Ogawa; Akira Iwase; Keiko Sugimoto; Plant regeneration: cellular origins and molecular mechanisms. Development 2016, 143, 1442-1451, 10.1242/dev.134668.
  50. Aryal, M.R.; Paudel, N.; Ranjit, M.; Elimination of Chhirkey and Foorkey viruses from meristem culture of large Cardamom (Amomum subulatum Roxb.). . Eur. Online J. Nat. Soc. Sci. 2018, 7, 424-443, .
  51. Amal A. Ahmed; Eman A.H. Khatab; Rehab A. Dawood; Amira M. Ismeil; Evaluation of Tip Culture and Thermotherapy for Elimination of Carnation Latent Virus and Carnation Vein Mottle Virus from Carnation Plants. International Journal of Virology 2012, 8, 234-239, 10.3923/ijv.2012.234.239.
  52. Alam, I.; Sharmin, S.A.; Naher, K.; Alam, J.; Anisuzzaman, M.; Alam, M.F.; Effect of growth regulators on meristem culture and plantlets establishment in sweet potato [Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam.]. . Plant Omics 2010, 3, 35-39, .
  53. S. Ramgareeb; S. J. Snyman; T. Van Antwerpen; R. S. Rutherford; Elimination of virus and rapid propagation of disease-free sugarcane (Saccharum spp. cultivar NCo376) using apical meristem culture. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture (PCTOC) 2009, 100, 175-181, 10.1007/s11240-009-9634-7.
  54. K. Almaarri; R. Massa; F. Albiski; Evaluation of some therapies and meristem culture to eliminate Potato Y potyvirus from infected potato plants. Plant Biotechnology 2012, 29, 237-243, 10.5511/plantbiotechnology.12.0215a.
  55. Bayoudh, Ch.; Labidi, R.; Majdoub, A.; Mars, M.; In vitro propagation of caprifig and female fig varieties (Ficus carica L.) from shoot-tips. . J. Agr. Sci. Tech. 2015, 17, 1597-1608, .
  56. Siamak Shirani Bidabadi; S. Mohan Jain; Cellular, Molecular, and Physiological Aspects of In Vitro Plant Regeneration. Plants 2020, 9, 702, 10.3390/plants9060702.
  57. Dugassa, G.; Feyuissa, T.; In vitro production of virus-free sweet potato [Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam.] by meristem culture and thermotherapy. . Ethiop. J. Sci. 2011, 34, 17-28, .
  58. Fayek, M.A.; Jomaa, A.H.; Shalaby, A.B.A.; Al-Dhaher, M.M.A.; Meristem tip culture for in vitro eradication of grapevine leaf roll-associated virus-1 (GLRaV-1) and grapevine fan leaf virus (GFLV) from infected flame seedless grapevine plantlets.. Iniciación Investig 2009, 4, a1-a11, .
  59. Zhibo Zhang; Qiao-Chun Wang; Carl Spetz; Dag-Ragnar Blystad; In vitro therapies for virus elimination of potato-valuable germplasm in Norway. Scientia Horticulturae 2019, 249, 7-14, 10.1016/j.scienta.2019.01.027.
  60. Songül Çömlekçioğlu; Ayzin B. Kuden; Yldz Aka Kacar; Muharrem A. Kamberoglu; Meristem culture of two fig cultivars in Turkey. Fruits 2007, 62, 125-131, 10.1051/fruits:2007006.
  61. Senula, A.; Keller, E.R.J.; Leseman, D.E.; Elimination of viruses through meristem culture and thermotherapy for the establishment of an in vitro collection of garlic (Allium sativum). . Acta Hortic 2000, 530, 121-128, .
  62. Murashige, T.; Skoog, F.; A revised medium for rapid growth and bioassays with tobacco tissue cultures. . Physiol. Plant. 1962, 15, 473-497, .
  63. Lloyd, G.; McCown, B.; Commercially feasible micropropagation of mountain laurel Kalmia latifolia by use of shoot tip culture. Comb. Proc. Int. Plant Prop. Soc. 1980, 30, 421-427, .
  64. Rose T Masekesa; E Gasura; A Matikiti; Gt Kujeke; E Ngadze; D Icishahayo; F Chidzwondo; Ai Robertson; EFFECT OF BAP, NAA AND GA3, EITHER ALONE OR IN COMBINATION, ON MERISTEM CULTURE AND PLANTLET ESTABLISHMENT IN SWEET POTATO (CV BRONDAL). AFRICAN JOURNAL OF FOOD, AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION AND DEVELOPMENT 2016, 16, 10653-10669, 10.18697/ajfand.73.15875.
  65. Shatnawi, M.; Anfoka, G.; Shibli, R.; Al-Mazráawi, M.; Shahrour, W.; Arebiat, A.; Clonal propagation and cryogenic storage of virus-free grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) via meristem culture.. Turk. J. Agric. For. 2011, 35, 173-184, 10.3906/tar-0912-519.
  66. Andrew Maxwell Phineas Jones; Praveen Kumar Saxena; Inhibition of Phenylpropanoid Biosynthesis in Artemisia annua L.: A Novel Approach to Reduce Oxidative Browning in Plant Tissue Culture. PLOS ONE 2013, 8, e76802, 10.1371/journal.pone.0076802.
  67. Jaime A. Teixeira Da Silva; Andrea Gulyás; Katalin Magyar-Tábori; Min-Rui Wang; Qiao-Chun Wang; Judit Dobránszki; In vitro tissue culture of apple and other Malus species: recent advances and applications. Planta 2019, 249, 975-1006, 10.1007/s00425-019-03100-x.
  68. Babaei, N.; Abdullah, N.A.P.; Saleh, G.; Abdullah, T.L.; Control of contamination and explant browning in Curculigo latifolia in vitro cultures.. J. Med. Plants Res. 2013, 7, 448-454, 10.5897/JMPR012.859.
  69. T. Dennis Thomas; The role of activated charcoal in plant tissue culture. Biotechnology Advances 2008, 26, 618-631, 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2008.08.003.
  70. Oláh, R.; The use of activated charcoal in grapevine tissue culture. . Vitis 2017, 56, 161-171, 10.5073/vitis.2017.56.161-171.
  71. Sim, S.T. Virus Elimination from Grape Selections Using Tissue Culture; FPS Grape Program Newsletter, Foundation Plant Services, University of California: Berkeley, CA, USA, 2006; pp. 30–31.
  72. Eun Ju Cheong; Raymond Mock; Ruhui Li; Elimination of five viruses from sugarcane using in vitro culture of axillary buds and apical meristems. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture (PCTOC) 2012, 109, 439-445, 10.1007/s11240-011-0108-3.
  73. Murashige, T.; Regeneration of plants. . Calif. Agric., Special Issue: Genetic Engineering of Plants 1982, 36, 19-20, .
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
This entry is offline, you can click here to edit this entry!
ScholarVision Creations
Feedback