Paper · 2017 · International Journal of Agronomy

Optimization of Protocols for In Vitro Regeneration of Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum)

Shakra Jamil; Rahil Shahzad; Ghulam Mohyuddin Talha; et al.

9
claims
17
verbatim quotes
16
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Sugarcane contributes 60–70% of annual sugar production in the world. Somaclonal variation has potential to enhance genetic variation present within a species. Present study was done to optimize an in vitro propagation protocol for sugarcane. The experiments included four varieties, 9 callus induction media, 27 regeneration media, and 9 root induction media under two-factor factorial CRD. Data were recorded on callus induction, embryogenic callus formation, shoot elongation (cm), root induction, and plant regeneration. Statistically significant differences existed between genotypes and treatments for callus induction (%), embryogenic callus formation (%), shoot elongation (cm), root induction, and plant regeneration (%). All parameters showed dependency on genotypes, culture media, and their interaction. Highest callus induction (95%) embryogenic callus formation (95%) was observed in callus induction media 5. Highest plantlet regeneration (98.9%) capacity was observed in regeneration media 11 whereas maximum shoot elongation (12.13 cm) and root induction (8.32) were observed in rooting media 4. G1 showed best response for all traits and vice versa for G4. Hence it was concluded that G1, callus induction media 5, regeneration media 11, and rooting media 4 are the best conditions for in vitro propagation of sugarcane.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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

Observationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Genotypes and treatments differed significantly for callus, shoot, root, and regeneration traits.

Taxon
Sugarcanet0
Outcome
callus induction (%), embryogenic callus formation (%), shoot elongation (cm), root induction, and plant regeneration (%)e0

Verbatim

e0

“Statistically significant differences existed between genotypes and treatments for callus induction (%), embryogenic callus formation (%), shoot elongation (cm), root induction, and plant regeneration (%).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 525–730 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 55–88 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All measured parameters depended on genotypes, culture media and their interaction.

Taxon
Sugarcanet0
Treatment
culture mediae0
Outcome
All parameterse0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“All parameters showed dependency on genotypes, culture media, and their interaction.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 731–815 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 55–88 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Callus induction media 5 yielded the highest callus induction of 95%.

Taxon
Sugarcanet0
Treatment
callus induction media 5e0
Outcome
callus inductione0
Direction
Higheste0
Value
95%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Highest callus induction (95%) embryogenic callus formation (95%) was observed in callus induction media 5.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 816–923 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 55–88 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Callus induction media 5 yielded the highest embryogenic callus formation of 95%.

Taxon
Sugarcanet0
Treatment
callus induction media 5e0
Outcome
embryogenic callus formatione0
Direction
Higheste0
Value
95%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Highest callus induction (95%) embryogenic callus formation (95%) was observed in callus induction media 5.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 816–923 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 55–88 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Regeneration media 11 had the highest plantlet regeneration capacity at 98.9%.

Taxon
Sugarcanet0
Treatment
regeneration media 11e0
Outcome
plantlet regeneratione0
Direction
Higheste0
Value
98.9%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Highest plantlet regeneration (98.9%) capacity was observed in regeneration media 11”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 924–1008 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 55–88 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Rooting media 4 produced maximum shoot elongation of 12.13 cm.

Taxon
Sugarcanet0
Treatment
rooting media 4e0
Outcome
shoot elongatione0
Direction
maximume0
Value
12.13 cme0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“maximum shoot elongation (12.13 cm) and root induction (8.32) were observed in rooting media 4.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1017–1112 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 55–88 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Rooting media 4 produced maximum root induction of 8.32.

Taxon
Sugarcanet0
Treatment
rooting media 4e0
Outcome
root inductione0
Direction
maximume0
Value
8.32e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“maximum shoot elongation (12.13 cm) and root induction (8.32) were observed in rooting media 4.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1017–1112 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 55–88 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

G1 gave the best response across traits.

Taxon
Sugarcanet0
Material
G1e0
Outcome
best response for all traitse0
Comparator
G4e0

Verbatim

e0

“G1 showed best response for all traits and vice versa for G4.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1113–1174 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 55–88 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors identified G1 and media 5, 11 and 4 as best conditions for propagation.

Taxon
sugarcanee0
Outcome
best conditions for in vitro propagatione0

Verbatim

e0

“Hence it was concluded that G1, callus induction media 5, regeneration media 11, and rooting media 4 are the best conditions for in vitro propagation of sugarcane.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1175–1338 · show in text ↑

in vitro · growth · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results

67 papers: 59 positive, 8 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

63 papers more in this group

See all 67 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.