From chromosome doubling to DNA sequence changes: outcomes of an improved in vitro procedure developed for allotriploid “Híbrido de Timor” (Coffea arabica L. × Coffea canephora Pierre ex A. Froehner)

Analysis of Genome Size of Sixteen Coffea arabica Cultivars Using Flow Cytometry

“…Likewise, some variations in nuclear DNA content between species are possibly artifacts caused by the inability of the dye to access DNA, since the fluorescent stains PI and DAPI can yield significantly different values for the same sample (Noirot et al, 2002;2003b). The studies on nuclear DNA content in C. arabica cultivars by FCM have been reported Clarindo and Carvalho, 2009;Clarindo et al, 2012Clarindo et al, , 2013Sanglard et al, 2017;Sattler et al, 2016), and therefore additional studies on more cultivars will be helpful for breeding programs, as well as, from a basic standpoint, for phylogenetic analysis of coffee cultivars.…”

Autotetraploid Coffea canephora and Auto-Alloctaploid Coffea arabica From In Vitro Chromosome Set Doubling: New Germplasms for Coffea

“…Lindl. (Blasco et al, 2015), allotriploid "Híbrido de Timor" (Coffea canephora Pierre ex A. Froehner x Coffea arabica L., Sanglard et al, 2017), Eucalyptus grandis W. Hill ex Maiden, Eucalyptus urophylla S. T. Blake, Eucalyptus benthamii Maiden & Cambage, and homoploid E. urophylla x E. grandis .…”

“…Nowadays, the more promising in vitro procedure associates the indirect somatic embryogenesis (ISE) pathway with the antitubulin agent treatment. This in vitro pathway is based on somatic embryo recovery-the possibility of regenerating a plantlet from a single cell (Stewart et al, 1958)-which maximizes the occurrence of only solid polyploids from CSD exploring the ISE (Wu and Mooney, 2002;Dutt et al, 2010;Acanda et al, 2015;Sanglard et al, 2017).…”

“…Pro-embryogenic cells of friable calli in semisolid medium (Wu and Mooney, 2002;Petersen et al, 2003;Zhang et al, 2007;Sanglard et al, 2017) or of cellular aggregate suspensions (CAS) in liquid medium (Dutt et al, 2010;Acanda et al, 2015) have been exposed to different antitubulin agents for different times and concentrations. CSD was performed from semisolid system for Spathiphyllum wallisii Regel (Eeckhaut et al, 2004), Citrus L. (Wu and Mooney, 2002;Petersen et al, 2003;Zhang et al, 2007), homoploid Vitis x Muscadinia (Xie et al, 2015), anorthoploid Coffea "Híbrido de Timor" (Sanglard et al, 2017), Lilium distichum Nakai, and Lilium cernuum Komar (Fu et al, 2019). Differently, Dutt et al [(2010), for Citrus reticulata Blanco] and Acanda et al [(2015), for Vitis vinifera L. "Mencía"] conducted the CSD from CAS, which they established from friable calli propagated in liquid medium.…”

“…Variations in the ISE response have been observed after treatment with antitubulin agents, as the rate of somatic embryos and plantlets (responsive or unresponsive) recovered from the friable calli or CAS (Wu and Mooney, 2002;Zhang et al, 2007;Sanglard et al, 2017). The causes of these variations can be associated with the in vitro conditions, the occurrence of somaclonal variation during the ISE pathway and/or the cytotoxic effect of the antitubulin treatment that involves a pulse using different compounds and concentrations (Dhooghe et al, 2011).…”