Agricultural Science Digest

  • Chief EditorArvind kumar

  • Print ISSN 0253-150X

  • Online ISSN 0976-0547

  • NAAS Rating 5.52

  • SJR 0.156

Frequency :
Bi-monthly (February, April, June, August, October and December)
Indexing Services :
BIOSIS Preview, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Agricultural Science Digest, volume 22 issue 3 (september 2002) : 170 - 172

CALLUS INDUCTION AND PLANT REGENERATION FROM EMBRYOS OF KARNAL BUNT RESISTANT AND SUSCEPTIBLE WHFAT GENOTYPES

Jyoti Tandon, Veena Chawla, a.p. Luthra, Monilm
1Department of Genetics, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar - 125004, India

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Tandon Jyoti, Chawla Veena, Luthra a.p., Monilm (2024). CALLUS INDUCTION AND PLANT REGENERATION FROM EMBRYOS OF KARNAL BUNT RESISTANT AND SUSCEPTIBLE WHFAT GENOTYPES. Agricultural Science Digest. 22(3): 170 - 172. doi: .

ABSTRACT

Embryos excised from immature grains of two Kamal bunt resistant (HD29 arid WH 283) and three susceptible(HD2329, HD2009 and WH147) genotypes were cultured on Murashige and Skoog (1962) (MS) and Gressh of and Doy (1972) (GD) media supplemented with various growth regulators. Callus was induced within 4.33 to 6.33 days in embryos of all the five genotypes on all the media. Callusing response i.e per cent embryos showing callus induction and regeneration response (% calli showing regeneration) depended upon genotype, media and genotype x media interactions. On an average over media cv WH147 showed maximum (88.92%) callusing response. GD medium supplemented with 2 mg/1 of 2,4-D was the best for callus induction. Maximum regeneration frequency was observed in cv HD 2009. Among different media tried, MS medium supplemented with 0.5 mg/1 of 2,4-D was the test for regeneration in these genotypes.

KEYWORDS

    REFERENCES

    1. Agarwal, DK and Tiwari,S. (1995). IndianJ. Genet., 55:50-57.
    2. Chauhan, R.S. and Singh, B.M. (1995). Proc. Indian Natn. Sci. Acad B61:479-486.
    3. Dahiya, M. etal. (1995a).lndian J. Pl. Physiol. 38 (1):10-14.
    4. Dahiya, M. etal. (1995b). In: National Symposium on Recent advances in Biosciences, Rohtak from Nov. 3-5, Abst. No. 15.
    5. Gosal, S.S. et al. (1996). In: In vitro Haploid Production in Higher Plants (Jain, S.M. Eds.) Vol. 4. Kluwer Academic
    6. Publishers. Netherlands, 1-37p.
    7. Gresshof, P.M. and Doy, C.H. (1972). Planta, 107:167-170.
    8. Heyser, J.M. et a/. (1985). Z. Pflanzeazucht, 94:218-233.
    9. Itu, S. and Abe, J. (1990). Bufl. tohoku Nat. Agric. Exp. Sta. 81:33-40.
    10. Kintzois, S. et al. (1996). Cereal Res. Comm., 24:147-153.
    11. Murashige, T. and Skoog, F. (1962). Physiol. PI. 15: 135-147.
    12. Papenfuss, J.M. and Carman, J.G. (1987). Crop Sci. 27: 588-593.
    13. Redway, FA, Vasil., v., Lu, D. and Vasil, I.K.(1990). Theor. Appl. Genet. 79:609-617. .
    14. Siddiq, E.A. and Sharma, N.P. (1995). In: Genetic Research and Education: Current trends and the next fifty years (Sharma et al. Eds.) Indian Society of Genetics and Plant Breeding, New Delhi, p 271-286.
    15. Zhou, M.D. and Lee, T.T. (1983). Can. J. Bot. 62: 1393-1397.
    Reviewed By

    Download Article
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)