Paper · 2011 · Journal of Applied Biological Chemistry

Production of Transgenic Plants in Brassica napus Winter Cultivar 'Youngsan'

Kyung-Hee Roh; Bo-Kyoung Kwak; Hyun-Uk Kim; et al.

9
claims
17
verbatim quotes
5
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

국내 육성 추파 품종인 '영산' 유채의 자엽 부착 잎자루 부위를 이용하여 재분화와 형질전환의 효율 증진에 영향을 주는 요인을 살펴보았다. 줄기 형성율은 NAA 0.5 mg/L와 Kinetin 2~4mg/L가 혼용 첨가된 배지에서 61~71%로 가장 양호하였다. 또한 질산은(Silver nitrate) 5~9 mg/L 첨가는 재분화에 필수적이었고, $GA_3$ 0.01 mg/L 첨가는 재분화에 긍정적인 영향을 주는 것으로 관찰되었다. 아그로박테리움의 Strain 종류, 공동배양 시간, 그리고 형질전환체 초기 선발시 항생제 농도 조절(저${\rightarrow}$고농도)에 따른 '영산' 유채의 형질전환 효율을 살펴본 결과, 아그로박테리움의 Strain 선정이 가장 중요한 요인으로 조사되었다. 특히, EHA105 succinamopine strain을 사용하였을 때 형질전환 효율이 26.8%로 가장 효과적이었다. Bar 유전자와 GUS 유전자가 내재된 형질전환체는 제초제 '바스타' 살포시 생존하고, X-Gluc으로 염색되었다. 그리고 Southern 분석을 통해 후대로 유전자가 안정적으로 유전됨을 확인하였다. To improve genetic transformation of Brassica napus winter cultivar 'Youngsan', factors influencing shoot regeneration and transformation from cotyledonary petioles were investigated. Shoot induction was enhanced in the combination of 0.5 mg/L NAA and 2~4 mg/L kinetin. Silver nitrate was essential for successful shoot regeneration, ranging from 5 to 9 mg/L. The addition of $GA_3$ promoted plant regeneration. Among the tested Agrobacterium strains, co-cultivation times, and antibiotic selection regimes, choice of appropriate Agrobacterium strain was the most critical factor for efficient transformation of B. napus cv. 'Youngsan'. The EHA105 succinamopine strain was the most efficient and the maximum transformation efficiency was 26.8%. Transgenic shoots were selected on 10 mg/L phosphinothricin (PPT) containing media. The transgenic plants expressing bar and gus genes were resistant for commercial herbicide "Basta" and stained with X-Gluc. Southern blot hybridization indicated that the presence of one to three gus gene copies per genome and inheritance of the gus gene into the $T_1$ generation.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 9

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NAA with kinetin enhanced shoot induction.

Taxon
Brassica napusBrassica napust0
Treatment
0.5 mg/L NAA and 2~4 mg/L kinetine0
Outcome
Shoot inductione0
Direction
enhancede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica napus
Brassica napus · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Shoot induction was enhanced in the combination of 0.5 mg/L NAA and 2~4 mg/L kinetin.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 754–839 · show in text ↑
t0

“Brassica napus”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 35–49 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Silver nitrate was essential for shoot regeneration.

Taxon
Brassica napusBrassica napust0
Treatment
Silver nitratee0
Outcome
shoot regeneratione0
Value
5 to 9 mg/Le0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica napus
Brassica napus · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Silver nitrate was essential for successful shoot regeneration, ranging from 5 to 9 mg/L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 840–929 · show in text ↑
t0

“Brassica napus”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 35–49 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

GA3 addition promoted plant regeneration.

Taxon
Brassica napusBrassica napust0
Treatment
$GA_3$e0
Outcome
plant regeneratione0
Direction
promotede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica napus
Brassica napus · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The addition of $GA_3$ promoted plant regeneration.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 930–981 · show in text ↑
t0

“Brassica napus”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 35–49 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Agrobacterium strain choice was the most critical transformation factor.

Taxon
B. napusBrassica napuse0
Material
Youngsane0
Interactor
AgrobacteriumAgrobacteriume0other
Outcome
efficient transformatione0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica napus
Brassica napus · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Agrobacterium
Agrobacterium · Interactor · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDidierFy · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“choice of appropriate Agrobacterium strain was the most critical factor for efficient transformation of B. napus cv. 'Youngsan'.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1078–1206 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

EHA105 gave maximum transformation efficiency of 26.8%.

Taxon
Brassica napusBrassica napust0
Interactor
EHA105 succinamopine straine0other
Outcome
transformation efficiencye0
Direction
maximume0
Value
26.8%e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica napus
Brassica napus · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The EHA105 succinamopine strain was the most efficient and the maximum transformation efficiency was 26.8%.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1207–1314 · show in text ↑
t0

“Brassica napus”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 35–49 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Transgenic bar and gus plants resisted Basta herbicide.

Taxon
Brassica napusBrassica napust0
Gene
bar and gus genese0
Outcome
resistant for commercial herbicide "Basta"e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica napus
Brassica napus · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The transgenic plants expressing bar and gus genes were resistant for commercial herbicide "Basta"”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1399–1497 · show in text ↑
t0

“Brassica napus”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 35–49 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Transgenic bar and gus plants stained with X-Gluc.

Taxon
Brassica napusBrassica napust0
Gene
bar and gus genese0
Outcome
stained with X-Gluce0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica napus
Brassica napus · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The transgenic plants expressing bar and gus genes were resistant for commercial herbicide "Basta" and stained with X-Gluc.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1399–1522 · show in text ↑
t0

“Brassica napus”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 35–49 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Transgenic plants contained one to three gus copies per genome.

Taxon
Brassica napusBrassica napust0
Gene
gus genee0
Outcome
gus gene copies per genomee0
Value
one to threee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica napus
Brassica napus · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the presence of one to three gus gene copies per genome”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1566–1621 · show in text ↑
t0

“Brassica napus”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 35–49 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The gus gene was inherited into the T1 generation.

Taxon
Brassica napusBrassica napust0
Gene
gus genee0
Outcome
inheritance of the gus gene into the $T_1$ generatione0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica napus
Brassica napus · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“inheritance of the gus gene into the $T_1$ generation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1626–1679 · show in text ↑
t0

“Brassica napus”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 35–49 · show in text ↑

kinetin · growth · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 2 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. negative
See all 4 papers →

silver(1+) nitrate · growth · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results

11 papers: 9 positive, 2 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. positive

7 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

1-naphthaleneacetic acid · growth · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results

22 papers: 19 positive, 3 negative or no effect

18 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. negative

18 papers more in this group

See all 22 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.