Open Access
ARTICLE
Brief Note : Hydrogen peroxide in micropropagation of Lilium. A comparison with a traditional methodology
NÉSTOR CURVETTO11,2, PABLO MARINANGELI1,2, GABRIELA MOCKEL2
1 Departamento de Agronomía, Universidad Nacional del Sur, (8000) Bahía Blanca, Argentina.
2 CERZOS (CONICET), C.C. 738, (8000) Bahía Blanca, Argentina.
Address correspondence to: Dr. Néstor Curvetto. Fax: (+54-291) 486 1527. E-mail: micouns@criba.edu.ar
BIOCELL 2006, 30(3), 497-500. https://doi.org/10.32604/biocell.2006.30.497
Abstract
The micropropagation of
Lilium longiflorum requires adequate equipment which may not be afforded by small laboratories or producers. In this work we compared traditional methodology with a protocol that included easily available elements to sterilize materials and culture media, together with addition of hydrogen peroxide (H
2O
2 ) into the nutrient media as chemical sterilizer. A series of H
2O
2 concentrations (0.005, 0.010, 0.015 and 0.020% p/v) was used to control contamination during
in vitro establishment and subsequent cultivation; the explant organogenic response was also examined and compared to the traditional micropropagation technique. The level of culture contamination was within acceptable limits in all treatments, though it was higher in the H
2O
2 treatments (40%) compared to the traditional methodology (20%). There were not significant differences in the number of bulblets per explant, and at the end of the multiplication phase, bulblets from 0.02% H
2O
2 treatment had greater biomass than from other treatments, indicating a beneficial effect. These bulblets also had a higher relative growth ratio with respect to the traditional method when cultivated for an additional period and showed the highest average bulblet fresh weight. It is expected that this higher bulblet mass would result in better performance during
ex vitro cultivation.
Keywords
Cite This Article
CURVETTO1, N., MARINANGELI, P., MOCKEL, G. (2006). Brief Note : Hydrogen peroxide in micropropagation of
Lilium. A comparison with a traditional methodology.
BIOCELL, 30(3), 497–500.
Citations