2004
DOI: 10.17660/actahortic.2004.632.35
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Genetic Interaction Between Different Tissues in Citrus Periclinal Chimeras

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

12
28
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
12
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The chimera fruit exhibited a winged form, in spite of being carried on a stalk of M. fortalezensis, whose fruit is normally spheric ( Figure 1B). Because the outer layer of fruit normally comes off of the outer layer (LI) (Goffreda et al, 1990;Zhou et al, 2002), it was concluded that the chimera was formed in the epidermis of the cassava, M. esculenta (E). The meiotic investigation of the chimera flowering bud revealed that the chimera chromosome number was 2n = 54, which is the same as that of M. fortalezensis (Figure 2A), indicating that the formation of LII layer of the chimera was from M. fortalezensis ( Figure 2B).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The chimera fruit exhibited a winged form, in spite of being carried on a stalk of M. fortalezensis, whose fruit is normally spheric ( Figure 1B). Because the outer layer of fruit normally comes off of the outer layer (LI) (Goffreda et al, 1990;Zhou et al, 2002), it was concluded that the chimera was formed in the epidermis of the cassava, M. esculenta (E). The meiotic investigation of the chimera flowering bud revealed that the chimera chromosome number was 2n = 54, which is the same as that of M. fortalezensis (Figure 2A), indicating that the formation of LII layer of the chimera was from M. fortalezensis ( Figure 2B).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sporadic interspecific chimeras have commonly been shown to arise from adventitious shoot graft union formation of the scion and rootstock (e.g., Stewart et al, 1972;Burge et al, 2002;Zhou et al, 2002;Chen et al, 2006;Deng et al, 2007). Although no direct economic value of these chimera was determined in previous studies, these researchers foresaw the future potential of synthesizing chimeras for this purpose.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sporadic interspecific chimeras have been documented by some authors (Stewart et al, 1972;Burge et al, 2002;Zhou et al, 2002;Chen et al, 2006;Zhang et al, 2007). They arose from adventitious shoot formed on a graft union of a scion and rootstock, on field or tissue culture conditions, for different purposes, but not for formation of advantageous varieties, under plant breeding view, and with no significative economic value (Marcotrigiano and Gouin, 1984;Goffreda et al, 1990;Kaddoura and Mantell, 1991;Marcotrigiano, 1997b;Burge et al, 2002;Chen et al, 2006).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…There are sporadic reports of interspecific chimeras that had arisen from an adventitious shoot formed on a graft union of a scion and rootstock (Stewart et al, 1972;Burge et al, 2002;Zhou et al, 2002, Chen et al, 2006Zhang et al, 2007). A few chimeras have also been produced by tissue culture, but they have no economic value (Marcotrigiano and Gouin, 1984;Kaddoura and Mantell, 1991;Chen et al, 2006).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Likewise, there have been major contributions to the cytology of polypetalous plants. Important contributors from outside India include Zhou et al (2002), Lihová et al (2003), Ghaffari (2004), Yan-Jun et al (2006), Wang et al (2008), Sheng et al (2010), Gholipour and Sheidai (2010), Gömürgen et al (2011), Ranjbar et al (2012), Chung et al (2013), and de Resende et al (2013). Major contributions over the past few decades from India include Sarkar (1967-1968), Sharma (1970), Roy and Sharma (1971), Chatterjee and Sharma (1972), Sanjappa (1979), Hore (1971Hore ( , 1980, Panigrahi and Purohit (1984), Subramanian (1985), Govindarajan and Subramanian (1986) and Vaidya and Joshi (2003).…”
Section: Number Of Cytologically Known Speciesmentioning
confidence: 99%