Paper · 2025 · POMICULTURE & SMALL FRUITS CULTURE IN RUSSIA

Improvement of clonal micropropagation procedure for Rosa L. representatives

E. V. Soboleva

3
claims
5
verbatim quotes
0
citations
4
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

This research is aimed at optimizing the methodology of clonal micropropagation of Rosa L. regenerants with a view to selecting optimal conditions for implementation of their morphogenetic potential on the example of Alan Titchmarsh and Princess Alexandra of Kent varieties. Experiments were conducted using the facilities of the Laboratory of Plant Biotechnology, Main Botanical Garden of the Russian Academy of Sciences, during the period of 2024–2025. Current-year shoot segments with a length of up to 1.5 cm containing vegetative buds were used as primary explants for initiation of growth and development in vitro. We developed an optimal sterilization scheme, allowing up to 91% of viable aseptic explants to be obtained. The conducted experiments revealed specific features of regeneration of Rosa L. explants in vitro, depending on the type and concentration of growth-regulating chemicals. The hormonal composition of nutrient media for cultivation of regenerant plants of different varieties at the micropropagation stage was optimized. The efficiency of using the MS nutrient medium (Murashige and Skoog, 1962) supplemented with 6-benzylaminopurine (BAP) and thidiazuron (TDZ) at concentrations of 0.5 mg/L and 0.1 mg/L, respectively, was established. The reproduction rate was 8.4.

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 3

Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The sterilization scheme yielded up to 91% viable aseptic explants.

Taxon
Rosa L.e1
Outcome
viable aseptic explantse0
Value
up to 91%e0

Verbatim

e0

“We developed an optimal sterilization scheme, allowing up to 91% of viable aseptic explants to be obtained.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 621–728 · show in text ↑
e1

“Rosa L. explants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 801–817 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Rosa explant regeneration depended on growth regulator type and concentration.

Taxon
Rosa L.e0
Treatment
type and concentration of growth-regulating chemicalse0
Outcome
regeneration of Rosa L. explantse0
Setting
in vitroe0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“specific features of regeneration of Rosa L. explants in vitro, depending on the type and concentration of growth-regulating chemicals.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 764–899 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The optimized MS medium with BAP and TDZ supported micropropagation at a reproduction rate of 8.4.

Taxon
Rosa L.e1
Treatment
MS nutrient medium (Murashige and Skoog, 1962) supplemented with 6-benzylaminopurine (BAP) and thidiazuron (TDZ) at concentrations of 0.5 mg/L and 0.1 mg/Le0
Outcome
reproduction ratee0
Value
8.4e0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Verbatim

e0

“The efficiency of using the MS nutrient medium (Murashige and Skoog, 1962) supplemented with 6-benzylaminopurine (BAP) and thidiazuron (TDZ) at concentrations of 0.5 mg/L and 0.1 mg/L, respectively, was established. The reproduction rate was 8.4.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1048–1294 · show in text ↑
e1

“Rosa L. regenerants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 83–102 · show in text ↑

N-benzyladenine · pest · RosaPositive and negative results

6 papers: 4 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

Thidiazuron · pest · RosaResults agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

in vitro · pest · RosaResults agree

4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 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.