Paper · 2007 · Acta Horticulturae

GENETIC TRANSFORMATION OF OLIVE SOMATIC EMBRYOS THROUGH BIOLISTICS

G. Pérez-Barranco; J.A. Mercado; F. Pliego-Alfaro; et al.

4
claims
9
verbatim quotes
14
citations
5
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Considerable effort is being directed at the recovery of superior olive cultivars through conventional breeding. However, the development of biotechnological tools could speed up the development of new cultivars with superior traits, e.g., enhanced disease resistance. In this investigation, attempts have been made to develop a protocol that would allow genetic transformation of juvenile material from the cultivar 'Picual'. Initially, embryogenic cultures were established from mature seeds using radicle segments as explants. The effects of two different mineral formulations OMc vs. OMe on growth and maintenance of embryogenic cultures were evaluated. Results showed that although higher growth rate could be obtained with the OMc mineral formulation, a more organized growth occurred with the formulation with lower macroelements content (OMe). Moreover, culturing the embryogenic cultures for 3 weeks in liquid OMe medium followed by subculture of the fine fraction derived from the resulting suspension on a medium without growth regulators but supplemented with activated charcoal, allowed the development of white-opaque embryos, some of which could be converted into plants. For transformation of embryogenic cultures via particle bombardment, 3 different plasmids containing the GUS marker gene under the control of different promoters were used: pGUSINT (including the 35S promoter), pJGUSS (35S promoter with an enhancer) and pCGUΔ1 (sunflower ubiquitin promoter). The highest number of blue spots was obtained with the ubiquitin promoter. Hence, it has been selected for transformation of this cultivar. Experiments are now in progress to establish the most adequate conditions for selection of fully transformed somatic embryos.

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 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

OMc mineral formulation produced a higher growth rate of olive embryogenic cultures.

Taxon
OLIVEOlea europaeat0
Material
Picualt1
Treatment
OMc mineral formulatione0
Outcome
growth ratee0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
OMet1

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

Olea europaea
Olea europaea · TaxonHans Hillewaert · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“higher growth rate could be obtained with the OMc mineral formulation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 687–756 · show in text ↑
t0

“OLIVE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 26–31 · show in text ↑
t1

“cultivar 'Picual'. Initially, embryogenic cultures were established from mature seeds using radicle segments as explants. The effects of two different mineral formulations OMc vs. OMe”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 408–591 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

OMe produced more organized growth of olive embryogenic cultures.

Taxon
OLIVEOlea europaeat0
Treatment
OMee0
Outcome
organized growthe0
Direction
moree0

Not reportedComparator

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

Olea europaea
Olea europaea · TaxonHans Hillewaert · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a more organized growth occurred with the formulation with lower macroelements content (OMe)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 758–850 · show in text ↑
t0

“OLIVE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 26–31 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Liquid OMe culture followed by subculture produced white-opaque embryos, some convertible into plants.

Taxon
OLIVEOlea europaeat0
Treatment
culturing the embryogenic cultures for 3 weeks in liquid OMe medium followed by subculture of the fine fraction derived from the resulting suspension on a medium without growth regulators but supplemented with activated charcoale0
Outcome
development of white-opaque embryose0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Olea europaea
Olea europaea · TaxonHans Hillewaert · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“culturing the embryogenic cultures for 3 weeks in liquid OMe medium followed by subculture of the fine fraction derived from the resulting suspension on a medium without growth regulators but supplemented with activated charcoal, allowed the development of white-opaque embryos, some of which could be converted into plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 862–1185 · show in text ↑
t0

“OLIVE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 26–31 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The ubiquitin promoter produced the most blue spots in olive embryogenic cultures.

Taxon
OLIVEOlea europaeat0
Gene
ubiquitin promotere0
Outcome
number of blue spotse0
Direction
higheste0
Comparator
ubiquitin promotere0

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

Olea europaea
Olea europaea · TaxonHans Hillewaert · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The highest number of blue spots was obtained with the ubiquitin promoter”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1480–1553 · show in text ↑
t0

“OLIVE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 26–31 · show in text ↑

in vitro · growth · Olea europaea (common olive)Positive and negative results

19 papers: 17 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

15 papers more in this group

See all 19 papers →

class · growth · Olea europaea (common olive)Results agree

7 papers: 7 positive, 0 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 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.