Next Article in Journal
Estimation of Fruit Load in Australian Mango Orchards Using Machine Vision
Next Article in Special Issue
Genetic Variation and Phylogeny of Wabisuke Camellias by Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphism (AFLP) Analysis
Previous Article in Journal
Mineral-Ecological Cropping Systems—A New Approach to Improve Ecosystem Services by Farming without Chemical Synthetic Plant Protection
Previous Article in Special Issue
In Vitro Rooting Response of Yellow-Flowered Magnolia in Relation to the Phenolic Acids Content
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Breeding Aspects of Selected Ornamental Bulbous Crops

by
Agnieszka Marasek-Ciolakowska
1,*,†,
Dariusz Sochacki
2,*,† and
Przemysław Marciniak
2
1
The National Institute of Horticultural Research, 1/3 Konstytucji 3 Maja Street, 96-100 Skierniewice, Poland
2
Department of Ornamental Plants, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, 166 Nowoursynowska Street, 02-787 Warsaw, Poland
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Agronomy 2021, 11(9), 1709; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11091709
Submission received: 29 July 2021 / Revised: 12 August 2021 / Accepted: 25 August 2021 / Published: 27 August 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Cultivated Ornamental Plants: Breeding Aspects)

Abstract

:
This article provides an overview of the origin, genetic diversity and methods and trends in breeding of selected ornamental geophytes (Lilium, Tulipa, Narcissus and Hippeastrum). The role of interspecific hybridisation and polyploidisation in assortment development is reviewed. A great variety of cultivars with traits of interest have been generated over the last century by using classical breeding. Geophyte breeders have been interested in a diversity of traits, including resistance to diseases, flower colour and shape, long lasting flowering and a long vase life. Shortening the long breeding process of many geophytes by reducing the juvenile phase and using in vitro techniques are reviewed. Currently, the breeding process has been enhanced by using modern molecular cytogenetic techniques. Genomic in situ hybridisation is frequently used, among other techniques, for genome differentiation in interspecific hybrids, and for assessment of the extent of intergenomic recombination in backcross progenies. Furthermore, several molecular marker techniques are used for verification of hybrid status, identification of genetic diversity, confirmation of the genetic fidelity of in vitro propagated plants and construction of high-density linkage maps. Recently, a myriad of new plant breeding technologies, such as cisgenetics and genome editing technologies have been used to improve the traits of ornamental geophytes, an endeavour that is discussed here. Breeding trends, cultivar novelties as well a new cultivars registered by international authorities during the last five years are presented in detail.

1. Introduction

The huge group of geophyte plants was classified by Raunkiaer (1934) after [1] cryptophytes. They are plants with annually renewable buds located in special storage organs: bulbs, tubers and rhizomes, and include over 800 botanical genera [2], although not all are economically important. The dozen with high economic importance includes lilies (Lilium L.), narcissi (Narcissus L.), tulips (Tulipa L.) and hippeastrum (Hippeastrum), all of which are the focus of this review. The genera are popular worldwide as cut flowers, bedding and border plants as well as potted plants. They are grown in the field and in greenhouses. Many of these plants are forced. Globally, the value of production has been estimated at over $1 billion [3], with the total area of nearly 21,400 ha dedicated for bulb, corm and tuber production in the Netherlands, the leading producer of flowers [4,5,6,7]. Tulips and lilies have been among the top five cut flowers sold on the Dutch flower auctions for many years, with sales of 243 million euros (third highest position) and 144 million euros (fourth highest position) in 2020, respectively [8]. The United Kingdom is the world leader in the commercial production of narcissi (daffodils), with over 4000 ha grown. The narcissus industry is estimated to have an annual output value of around GBP 45 million [9]. Hippeastrum—commonly known as amaryllis on the global market—occupied the eleventh highest position in 2016 among the cut flowers sold on the Dutch flower auctions [10]. However, the dominance of the Netherlands on the flower bulb market is decreasing, as new countries such as Chile and New Zealand (from the southern hemisphere) and China [11] have recently joined the group of significant producers of ornamental geophytes. Production is also expanding in other Latin American and Asian countries and in southern Africa [12].
Although geophytes include hundreds of botanical genera and species, and the cultivars of the economically most important ones number in thousands, their diversity continues to increase because of the purposeful breeding of new cultivars. This phenomenon is related both to changing growing conditions and new threats and to the constant market demand for original and surprising decorative features of flowers.
Geophyte breeding is not easy, especially because of the long juvenile phase of seedlings and the often low natural vegetative propagation rates of bulbs and tubers. This makes the process of developing a new cultivar and bringing it to market as long as 20–25 years in the case of tulips [13,14,15] and 15–25 years in the case of narcissi [16]. It is known that the juvenile phase to first flowering can take as long as 3–8 years for Narcissus [17,18,19], 4–7 years for tulips [18] and 2–3 years for lilies [20]. However, hybrids of Lilium × formolongi flower in the year of sowing was reported by Mynett [21] and by Anderson et al. [22]. Hippeastrum spp. propagated by seeds flower for the first time after 2–3 years [23], while the genus Amaryllis propagated by seeds needs 5–6 years to produce the first flowers [24]. In addition, in our own trials [25], seedling populations of Hippeastrum produced flowers for the first time in the second year after sowing (flowering at 6%) and flowered en masse in the third year (Figure 1a–c).
The initial life cycles for geophytes are essentially connected with annual warm–cold–warm sequences, leading to maximal growth rates until meristem competency for flower initiation occurs [26]. Because speed is crucial for breeding, marketing new cultivars or adapting new species, a great deal of research has been conducted to shorten the juvenile phase of Lilium [27,28], Narcissus [29] and Tulipa [30,31,32]. Most often, shortening this period is primarily associated with accelerating seed germination itself (especially for Narcissus [29]). Moreover, in many but not all species, early seed germination (1–3 weeks after sowing) is highly correlated with leaf unfolding rates and early flowering, a phenomenon that was observed for Lilium × formolongi and was used as selection tool [33]. Conversely, the majority of the above-mentioned studies focused on physiological factors, and relatively limited molecular and genetic studies have been performed until recently. This deficit could be connected to the large genome size of Lilium and Tulipa: 25 and 36 GB, respectively [34]. Most of the current knowledge on the genetic and molecular mechanisms underlying flower initiation has been obtained from model species, mainly Arabidopsis thaliana, and now it can be translated to non-model species, such as geophytes [35]. Therefore, in recent years, studies related to the search for the molecular basis of change of vegetative phase and flowering initiation and regulation of certain geophytes have begun (Lilium [36], Narcissus [37], Lilium and Tulipa [38] and Tulipa [39]).

2. Origin, Natural Occurrence and Genetic Diversity of Selected Geophyte Genera

2.1. Hippeastrum

The present genus Hippeastrum (Amaryllidaceae) was included in the genus Amaryllis until the 14th International Botanical Congress in 1987, and they are now two separate botanical genera. Hippeastrum spp. often assume many names depending on the colour and shape of the perianth, the species or where it occurs. ‘Butterfly Amaryllis’, ‘Green Amaryllis’, ‘Lily of the Palace’ or ‘Mexican Lily’ are several names by which these plants are known [24]. The proper name—Hippeastrum–derives from two Greek words: hippe meaning horse and aster meaning star [40]. In horticultural production, there is Hippeastrum hybridum hort. [41,42,43], which was obtained by crossing several species (H. vittatum, H. leopoldii, H. reginae, H. aulicum and H. pardinum) [44]. The genus includes 50–60 [45] or 55–75 [42,46] taxa, which occur naturally in the Americas, mostly in tropical areas, Argentina and Chile. The natural habitat of Hippeastrum is steppe or wooded regions with a distinct dry season, a factor that has had a great impact on the physiology and morphology of this genus [40]. The first species of Hippeastrum that was imported to Europe in 1689 was H. puniceum (Lam) O. Kuntze, followed by H. reginae (L.) Herb. in 1725 and H. vittatum (L’Herti.) in 1769. In 1799, a cross between H. vittatum and H. reginae resulted in the first hybrid species, namely H. × johnsonii [24,44,47].

2.2. Lilium

The genus Lilium (Liliaceae) is considered to have originated in eastern Asia, similarly to the genera Fritillaria, Nomocharis, Cardiocrinum and Notholirion [48]. According to a study by Nishikawa et al. [49], lilies are closely related to the genera Fritillaria and Nomocharis. The name Lilium is from the Latin li (white) and lium (flower) and is connected with pure white flowers of L. candidum and L. longiflorum. Lily has also become a girl’s given name in different languages, as Lilian in English, Susan (from the lily Shoshan) in Hebrew and Yuri and Sayuri in Japanese, in which ‘yuri’ means lily [50]. The genus comprises approximately 100 species native predominantly to Asia, but also to North America and Europe.

2.3. Narcissus

Narcissus (Amaryllidaceae) is used both as the name of a botanical genus written in italics and as a common English name (non-italics) [50]. ‘Daffodil’ is also generally used interchangeably with ‘narcissus’, but Rees [51] has suggested that it should be strictly reserved for the yellow trumpet narcissus (N. pseudonarcissus). ‘Jonquil’ and ‘Paperwhites’ are used for N. jonquilla and N. tazetta, respectively. In popular British usage, the term ‘daffodil’ is used for trumpet or large-cup Narcissus, and ‘narcissus’ is used for smaller flowered types [16]. The name of the genus comes from Narcissus, a son of the river god Cepheus and a forest nymph in Greek mythology [52]. The centre of density and diversity of the genus Narcissus is concentrated in the Iberian Peninsula, the Southern Alps and the Mediterranean. N. pseudonarcissus is only narcissus native to the United Kingdom, where it is known as the ‘Lent Lily’ or the ‘Old English Daffodil’ [53]. N. tazetta var. tazetta (chinensis), known as ‘Chinese Sacred Lily’, originated also from the Mediterranean, but was transported to China by trade in ancient times [11]. The genus Narcissus presents great taxonomic problems, and there have been numerous attempts at its classification. The number of species varies from 26 [54] to 60 [55].

2.4. Tulipa

The number of species in the genus Tulipa (Liliaceae) varies depending on the author: 50–60 [56,57], 76 [58], 87 [59], 100 [60] or 105 [61]. The name for the tulip is derived from the Persian dulband, or Turkish türbent, meaning a turban, and one explanation is that the flower was compared with turbans commonly worn by Ottoman men in the 16th century. In truth, the word lale was used for tulip in the Turkish and also Arabic languages [58]. Tulips occur in nature from Anatolia and Iran in the west to north-eastern China. The centre of biodiversity of the genus is in the Pamir and Hindu Kush mountains and on the steppes of Kazakhstan. In natural locations, tulips also grow in Europe (especially in the south) and northern Africa. However, these are probably species imported by man and naturalised. Tulipa sylvestris is one such European species [58]. Tulips were cultivated as early as the 11th–12th centuries in the gardens of today’s Turkey and modern Iran. In Turkey, species from natural sites were cultivated, also in addition to intensive breeding of new cultivars [60,62]. The tulip with slender, curving petals—of the current lily-flowered tulips—has become a symbol of the Ottoman Empire since the mid-16th century. Probably the first European who saw tulips in Istanbul (Constantinople at that time) was Marquis Ogier Ghiselin de Busbecq, ambassador of emperor Ferdinand I at the court of Suleiman I the Magnificent in 1554. Several years later, he brought the first tulip bulbs to the imperial garden in Vienna and put them under the care of the French botanist Charles de L’Écluse (Latin: Carolus Clusius). The latter took up a chair of botany at the University of Leiden (the Netherlands) in 1593, where he took the gift with him [60,63]. Tulips were rare in the early 1600s and then gained popularity, which led to Dutch ‘Tulipomania’—to this day the most spectacular example of an economic speculative bubble that burst in 1637. In the 18th century, tulips regained popularity in the Netherlands [50] and later in other countries worldwide.

2.5. Basic Chromosome Number and Ploidy Level of Species

Ornamental bulbous crops differ in the basic chromosome number. In the genus Hippeastrum Herb., the species possess x = 11 chromosomes [64,65], whereas Lilium L. and Tulipa L. share the same basic chromosome number (x = 12) [66,67]. In Narcissus, the two subgenera, Narcissus L. and Hermione (Haw) Spach, differ in basic chromosome number. The species of the subgenus Narcissus have a basic chromosome number of x = 7. Conversely, the subgenus Hermione comprises species with different basic chromosome numbers of x = 5, 10 and 11 [66,68].
The majority of native species of bulbous flowers are diploid. In Lilium, the exception is a triploid form of L. tigrinum (2n = 3x = 36). In the subgenus Narcissus, the native species include diploids (2n = 2x = 14) and triploids (2n = 3x = 21) [69], but chromosome numbers rise to the hexaploid level (2n = 6x = 42,43) [70] or to the octoploid level (2n = 8x = 56) [66] in certain species. Subgenus Hermione species include tetraploids (2n = 4x = 20) and hexaploids (2n = 6x = 30), as in N. serotinus [71]. Recently, more polyploids, such as the tetraploid N. papyraceus (2n = 4x = 22) and the hexaploid N. dubius (2n = 6x = 50) [72], have been reported. Marques et al. [73] studied hybridisation and polyploidy frequency in the Mediterranean region, where Narcissus is native, and concluded that both phenomena seem be important for the genus. A remarkable karyological variability with basic chromosome numbers are the result of chromosomal rearrangements, natural hybridisation and polyploidisation, including between species not closely related. High variation in the number of chromosomes occurs in the genus Tulipa, where in addition to the predominant numbers of diploid species, there are also triploid genotypes (2n = 3x = 36) in T. kaufmanniana and T. clusiana [59]; tetraploids (2n = 4x = 48) in T. bifloriformis, T. sylvestris, T. kolpakowskiana and T. tetraphylla; and pentaploids (2n = 5x = 60) in T. clusiana and hexaploids (2n = 6x = 72) in T. polychrome [74]. Similarly, in the genus Hippeastrum, apart from diploids (2n = 2x = 22), there are triploids (2n = 3x = 33) in H. puniceum (from Guyana); tetraploids (2n = 4x = 44) in H. reginae, H. starkii and H. blossfeldiae; pentaploids (2n = 5x = 55) in H. scopulorum and H. cybister; and hexaploids (2n = 6x = 66) in H. puniceum (from Brazil) [65,75,76]. A number of Hippeastrum species are euploids, including H. forgeti (2n = 23) and H. iguazuanum (2n = 24), and aneuploids—H. blumenavia (2n = 20) [75,77,78].

3. Classical Breeding: Cross-Pollination

Most of the new cultivars of ornamental bulbous crops introduced to the floriculture industry were developed via classical breeding strategies such as intra- and interspecific hybridisation, spontaneous mutation, haploid induction and polyploidisation, among other techniques. The breeding strategy varies according to the genus. Although interspecific hybridisation is the primary and most important source of variation in Lilium, Narcissus, Hippeastrum and Tulipa, these crops differ in the origin of polyploidy. Spontaneous polyploidisation has played an essential role in the origins of polyploid cultivars in narcissus [70] and Darwin hybrid (DH) tulips [79]. In the last few decades, polyploidisation in Lilium and Tulipa has been more manipulated by breeders (mitotic chromosome doubling, 2n gamete induction, interpolyploidy crosses, etc.). In tulips, an important source of variation is also spontaneous mutations and mutation breeding [80]. For example, well known sports of the DH tulip ‘Pink Impression’ are: ‘Apricot Impression’, ‘Design Impression’, ‘Red Impression’ and ‘Salmon Impression’ [80].
In species of the Amaryllidaceae family, including Hippeastrum and Narcissus, propagation by artificial pollination is the only method for obtaining viable seeds. Therefore, many breeding programmes focus on cross-pollination of these plants. The use of diploid forms, which have the advantage of being easy to cross, provides the opportunity to introduce traits belonging to the species. The plants thus obtained are characterised by high vigour and a shorter juvenile period with respect to polyploids [81,82]. In classical breeding of Hippeastrum spp., it can be a big problem to obtain receptive maternal forms and pollinating paternal forms at the same time. This is due to flowering of cultivars at different times and the short-lived ability to pollinate and fertilise flowers. Additionally, the flowers of Hippeastrum are proterandrous, and flowering generally occurs once per year [83,84].
The storage capacity of Hippeastrum pollen grains increases with decreasing temperature. Studies by Ye and Shi [85] and Almeida et al. [84] have confirmed this rule. As the temperature decreases to −20 °C, the germination capacity is higher with respect to high temperatures (20 or 25 °C) and the storage time is about 3 months. For other species in the family Amaryllidaceae, such as Narcissus poeticus, pollen can be stored for 72 days, and pollen from Galanthus nivalis can be stored for 42 days [85]. Low temperatures do not harm the individual pollen grains. Instead, they stimulate pollen tube formation, without affecting their ability to fertilise. Conversely, high temperatures reduce the viability and germination of pollen grains. This phenomenon has been confirmed by studies on the degradation of pollen of narcissi grown in greenhouses during hot summers [86]. According to Marciniak et al. [87], the low viability of pollen grains of Hippeastrum may be affected by the high temperature in the greenhouse during the flowering period of the plants. The pollen viability could also be a cultivar feature. In Narcissus, Chwil [88] determined that the pollen grain viability was up to 92% in the cultivar ‘Hardy’ and only 22% in the cultivar ‘The Sun’. Sanders [89] reported that the number of germinated pollen grains from the narcissus samples was 400 for the cultivar ‘Gloriosus’ but only 20 and 23 for ‘Magic Step’ and ‘Silver Bells’, respectively. In Hippeastrum, Khaleel et al. [90] reported the level of pollen viability at 60–80% for nine hybrids and Marcinek et al. [87] found it to be 66–83% for three cultivars. Many cultivars obtained by crossing show reduced pollen viability or sterility. He et al. [91] proved this outcome for nine lily genotypes in which the percentage of germinating pollen 1 day after anthesis was 81% for Lilium sulphureum, 73.4–77.1% for three hybrid cultivars and only 17.8% for the cultivar ‘Tiny Padhye’. The pollen of the cultivar ‘Jinghe’ did not germinate at all.
From the point of view of classical Hippeastrum breeding, improving the storage of pollen grains at low temperatures may be helpful in crossing this genus with other species with different flowering dates. This eventuality is especially important for creating new cultivars by crossing genotypes with unique traits, then selecting and evaluating interesting duels. Hybrids selected in this way may differ in the timing and number of annual flowering cycles compared to the initial forms [84].

4. In Vitro Techniques for Breeding

Tissue culture techniques are used to overcome sexual barriers in intersectional or intergeneric crosses. The cut-style method and in vitro pollination are used to overcome pre-fertilisation limitation, while the post-fertilisation barriers focus on preventing embryo abortion, including embryo rescue, ovary slicing and ovule culture [92,93,94]. Recently, in vitro pollination combined with embryo rescue has been applied successfully in Lilium to obtain hybrids from crosses allotriploid Oriental × Trumpet (OTO) lilies with Oriental lily (OTO × OO) [95], L. auratum × L. henryi [96] and interploidy crosses of F1 hybrids Longiflorum × Asiatic with autotetraploid Asiatic lily (LA × AAAA) [97]. Moreover, embryo and ovule cultures have been applied in tulips to overcome crossing barriers in interspecific hybrid resulted from crosses Tulipa gesneriana × T. fosteriana ‘Red Emperor’, T. gesneriana × T. eichleri ‘Excelsa’ and T. gesneriana × T. greigii [98].
The long process of vegetative propagation of new breeding clones or new cultivars of geophytes can be sped up by using the in vitro propagation method. Currently, efficient in vitro techniques are available for most flower bulbs. At the beginning of the 21st century, a new method of tulip micropropagation based on cyclic multiplication of adventitious shoots was developed, enabling the production of approximately 1000 microbulbs from a few bulbs over 2–3 years [14,99,100,101]. In this method, regeneration is obtained on fragments of flower stems isolated from bulbs. The method is based on cyclic shoot multiplication performed by using thidiazuron (TDZ) instead of other cytokinins, such as 6-benzylaminopurine (BAP) and N6-(-isopentyl)adenine (2iP), with sub-culture every 8 weeks. The shoots are induced by low-temperature treatment to form bulbs, which finally develop on a sucrose-rich medium at 20 °C. Bulbs are then dried for 6 weeks and rooted in vivo. The number of multiplication subcultures should be limited to 5–10 cycles to lower the risk of mutation [14]. In other studies, Maślanka and Bach attempted to regenerate tulip plants through organogenesis from vegetative bud explants–isolated from uncooled bulbs [102] and from seed-derived explants [103]. The initial results of further studies on tulip regeneration on fragments of flower stem isolated from cooled bulbs showed the possibility of using the aromatic cytokinin meta-topolin (mT), both at regeneration and shoot multiplication stages, instead of the commonly used TDZ and 2-iP [104].
The regeneration efficiency of tulips has been improved further using systems based on somatic embryogenesis (SE) [105,106,107,108]. Recently, Podwyszyńska and Marasek-Ciolakowska [109] described efficient in vitro regeneration systems of tulips based on the cyclic multiplication of the embryogenic callus. This method enabled the researcher to obtain on average 30–55 embryos able to form bulbs per 100 mg callus on a medium containing 0.01 mg L−1 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) and TDZ or BAP alone or in combination, enriched with 100 mg L−1 proline.
Micropropagation is also a rapid and efficient method of propagation of Hippeastrum spp. In vitro propagation of this genus was started in the late 1970s [110] and has developed during the last two decades [111,112,113]. Many studies have been performed on Hippeastrum × chmielii, bred at Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Poland [114,115,116,117]. Because of environmental trends, it seems interesting to evaluate the addition of biostimulator Goteo to the media during micropropagation of Hippeastrum as an alternative to traditional plant growth regulators. The positive effect of Goteo on the increased number of regenerated bulblets as well as the increased root number and plantlet weight were observed during the bulb formation stage in H. hybridum ‘Double Roma’ and H. × chmielii clone no. 18 [117]. In vitro tissue culture techniques have also found application in breeding to obtain and to improve cultivars [118]. In triploid plants, which may be self-sterile, fertilisation may not occur despite fully formed generative organs. Sometimes, however, an embryo can be artificially induced. However, it will not be capable of further development due to the presence of postzygotic barriers. For genotypes derived from triploid forms crossed with diploids, it is possible to sustain developing embryos by using an in vitro embryo culture, an approach that has also been confirmed for Hippeastrum [24,82,119].
Propagation of lilies by tissue cultures has been well reviewed by Kim and De Hertogh [120], Langens-Gerrits [121] and Bakhshaie et al. [94]. A myriad of studies concerning micropropagation of this genus have been performed. Currently, Lilium is the only bulbous taxon that is micropropagated on a significant production scale. Lilies are commonly propagated in Dutch and Polish labs [50]. Different plant fragments can be used as initial explants, but the bulb scales have been found to be the most responsive explants for direct and indirect organogenesis, plant regeneration and SE in Lilium [94]. The main disadvantage of bulb scales compared with the other explants is that they are difficult to decontaminate and to obtain aseptic cultures. Therefore, Bakhshaie et al. [94] suggested a two-step protocol: regenerating in vitro plantlets first from bulb scales or leaf segments and then using microscales of these aseptic bulblets (the transverse thin cell layer [tTCL] technique) for further multiplication. A crucial factor for improving the in vitro bulbils yield of lilies (and many other geophytes) is a high level of sucrose in the media, as high as 9% [122,123]. In the case of lilies propagated in vitro, Gabryszewska and Sochacki [124] probably published the first report concerning the effect of nitrogen salts and their interaction with sugar on the formation and growth of bulblets. They showed clearly that a high sucrose level and the nitrogen salts in the medium strongly promoted bulblet fresh weight of lilies. By contrast, a medium with a high sucrose-to-nitrogen ratio had an inhibitory effect on leaf formation. It is clear that also in Lilium, in vitro methods have been successfully developed for shortening breeding programmes (SE [125] and liquid media in bioreactors [126]). Bakhshaie et al. [125] succeeded in plant regeneration via SE from both roots and bulblet microscales derived from bulblets of Lilium ledebourii using the tTCL technique. Tang et al. [127] established a protocol for optimum callus induction and plant regeneration of L. leucanthum by using in vitro cultured leaves, petioles and small scales. There have been successful outcomes in genetic transformation studies using meristematic nodular callus (NOD) [128,129,130,131]. The main advantage of the NOD system is its high and continuous growth and regeneration efficiency.
The first work on micropropagation of narcissus was conducted independently in several research centres in the 1970s and early 1980s in the United Kingdom, Canada, Japan, and Israel. Preparation of bulbs from which initial explants will be taken involves obtaining an aseptic and regenerable explant. To increase the multiplication rate of shoots, Chow et al. [132] developed a method of ‘severe cutting’, and other authors have employed the mini-twin-scales method, which is based on re-planting mini-twin scales obtained from bulbs in vitro onto the initiation medium [133]. A significant increase in propagation rate was obtained by extending the culture initiation period to 24 weeks and successively cutting off regenerating shoots from the initial explant [134]. To obtain bulblets, shoots are transferred to a new medium without growth regulators (or with a low concentration), with the addition of activated carbon and increased sucrose levels [135]. A positive effect of cold treatment of bulbs on growth initiation after planting from in vitro conditions has also been shown. Sochacki [136] performed additional research on Narcissus micropropagation. The experiments showed a positive effect of supplementation of medium with organic substances on the number of shoots in several cultivars tested. In recent years, increasing research has been performed on the intensification of the multiplication factor by propagating narcissi on liquid media and in bioreactors [137,138,139,140]. Large-scale liquid cultures in bioreactors can be used for micropropagation via both organogenesis or SE; however, the problem of malformed tissues and organs in liquid culture often hinders ex vitro transplanting [141]. Using the temporary immersion technique, which protects the culture from oxidative stress, has proved to be efficient for commercial micropropagation of Narcissus via organogenesis or proliferation of the embryogenic tissue [138,139,142]. During the last two decades, SE has also been developed for Narcissus [143,144,145,146]. Sage et al. [143] produced somatic embryos from bulb and shoot culture leaf explants of N. pseudonarcissus ‘Golden Harvest’ and ‘St. Keverne’ on media with a range of 2,4-D and BAP concentrations. ‘Golden Harvest’ callus has been transformed with an engineered Agrobacterium tumefaciens strain with a binary vector containing the green fluorescent protein (GFP) gene, and ‘St. Keverne’ scapes have been transformed with a wild type A. tumefaciens strain [144]. Transformation may be used for the introduction of desirable genes to Narcissus cultivars, but this approach is ethically and legislatively problematic in many countries.

5. Polyploidisation for Crop Improvement

In the breeding and development of ornamental geophytes, polyploidisation plays a remarkable role because it can affect the emergence of new distinctive characteristics [147,148]. Currently, the major ornamental bulbous crops include polyploids in their commercial assortment [149]. According to Ramanna et al. [66], among ornamental geophytes, there is a tendency to replace diploids with polyploid cultivars. This trend has been especially visible in Narcissus and Lilium. At present, nearly 75% of Narcissus cultivars are tetraploids while the diploids and triploids amount to only about 12% each [69]. Similarly, in Lilium, most of the modern inter-sectional cultivars are triploids, but also several commercial cultivars are aneuploids [150,151,152]. In Hippeastrum, most of the cultivars with single and double flowers available on the market are tetraploid genotypes characterised by large flowers–for example, ‘Pink Surprise’, ‘Rapido’, ‘Apple Blossom’ and ‘Cherry Nymph’ [153]. Tulips are an exception from this group of ornamentals: diploid cultivars maintain a leading position on the market. The triploid (2n = 3x = 36) and tetraploid (2n = 4x = 48) tulips mostly belong to the DH cultivars and have yielded a significant percentage of the market assortment of the late last millennium [154].
Many neopolyploids originated spontaneously among ornamental bulbous crops through the functioning of numerically unreduced (2n) gametes (meiotic doubling). For example, in Tulipa, the triploid DH cultivars such as ‘Apeldoorn’, ‘Pink Impression’, ‘Yellow Dover’, ‘Kouki’ and the tetraploid ‘Tender Beauty’ were the result of spontaneous polyploidisation [79,155,156,157].
The occurrence of 2n gametes has been reported in species of Narcissus, [69] cultivars and interspecific hybrids of Tulipa [79,158,159] and in Lilium distant F1 hybrids such as Longiflorum × Asiatic (LA) and Oriental × Asiatic (OA) [96,160,161,162,163,164]. The selection of the parents producing 2n gametes allows manipulation of ploidy level of the offspring. In Lilium and Tulipa, most of the progenies that have resulted from the use of unreduced gametes are triploid. According to Zhang et al. [152], allotriploid breeding may be a future trend for new cultivars in Lilium. For example, the triploid sexual progenies (AOA) were obtained from backcrossing F1 OA hybrids producing 2n gametes with an Asiatic cultivar [163,165], whereas allotriploid and allotetraploids were produced as a result of unilateral and bilateral sexual polyploidisation by backcrossing F1 hybrids of LA and OA to Asiatic parents (AA) [166]. Odd-allotetraploid lilies representing the LAAA genome can breed from LA × AAAA interploidy crossing [97] in which the maternal form provides 2n eggs. Similarly, Marasek-Ciolakowska et al. has reported a low yield of polyploid tulips in 2x × 2x crosses involving 2n pollen [149,159,167]. Cytological analysis of sexual polyploid progenies has shown that the use of 2n gametes can induce intergenomic recombination in interspecific hybrids [164,165,166,168,169,170,171,172], which plays an essential role in introgression of desired traits [173]. For example, in Lilium triploid progenies with intergenomic recombination were produced when OA hybrids producing functional 2n gametes were backcrossed with diploid Asiatic cultivar [165].
The ploidy level of the progeny can be manipulated depending upon the ploidy level of the parental forms. For example, polyploids of tulips and lilies were obtained as a result of interploidy crosses (4x × 2x or 4x × 2x [150,174]). Triploid tulip cultivars such as ‘Lady Margot’ and ‘Sunny Child’ resulted from crossing diploid cultivars with tetraploids [155]. Autotriploid (AAA) and allotriploid (AOA, LAA, LLO) lilies and triploid DH tulips could be used as a maternal parent [95,149,150,159,167,175,176].
In tulips produced by crossing triploid DH with diploids producing 2n pollen, Marasek-Ciolakowska et al. [149] received aneuploids, tetraploids and a few pentaploid genotypes. Similarly, in Lilium, Zhou et al. [95] successfully crossed allotriploid OTO lilies with OO lilies to produce aneuploid progenies. There are also examples of the use of triploids as a pollen donor. It has been demonstrated cytogenetically that certain triploid hybrids can produce aneuploid and euploid (x, 2x and 3x) gametes [169,170,177]. In DH tulips, most progenies resulted from 2x × 3x hybridisation were triploid with the exception of a few aneuploids (3x + 1 and 3x − 1) [159], whereas Okazaki and Nishimura [174] reported that, in the 2x × 3x crosses, over 90% of the progenies were diploids and rare genotypes (7.4%) were aneuploids. In Lilium, crosses of the triploids with diploids and tetraploids produced aneuploid or near diploid and pentaploid progenies, respectively [178]. Aneuploid lily cultivars obtained from interploidy crosses (3x × 2x or 3x × 4x) may be a good source of variation in morphological, ecological and physiological characteristics [175].

5.1. Induction of 2n Gamete Formation

Because the spontaneous production of 2n gametes by species and distant hybrids is usually low, numerous attempts have been made recently to induce the formation of these gametes (Table 1). Lokker et al. [179] successfully stimulated the production of 2n pollen in 2% of the sterile Lilium OA hybrids using heat-shock treatment. Wu et al. [180] induced diploid female gametes by treating young flower buds of Oriental cultivars ‘Con Amore’ and ‘Acapulco’ with different concentrations of colchicine. When treated plants with diploid eggs were used in crosses with n pollen, the triploid F1 progenies were obtained. Caffeine (0.3%) injection to the flower bud has successfully induced fertile 2n gametes in F1 interspecific OA hybrids [168]. They were subsequently crossed both as male and female parents to Asiatic hybrids and all of the obtained BC1 progenies were triploids. The formation of 2n gametes has also been induced by nitrous oxide (N2O) gas treatment for 24–48 h at 6 atm pressure of the flower buds in tulips [147,181,182] and lilies [183,184,185,186,187]. The optimal meiotic stage of gametogenesis at which to induce 2n pollen by N2O treatment is metaphase I [147,185,187]. Kitamura et al. [188] showed that N2O gas acts as a meiotic doubling agent by inhibiting microtubule polymerisation, a phenomenon that stops chromosome movement towards both poles during anaphase. Certain polyploids have been obtained in Lilium and Tulipa using 2n gametes induced by N2O treatment [181,182,183,184,185,189]. Triploid and tetraploid progenies were obtained from the crosses of N2O-treated OA hybrids to Asiatic parent [184]. N2O treated plants can be used for hybridisation both as male and female parents [184]. In lilies, treatment with N2O has been also applied to overcome sterility of OA and Oriental × Trumpet (OF) F1 hybrids [184,187,189]. Sato et al. [186] demonstrated that treatment of L. × formolongi hort. plants with N2O gas for 2 h at 6 atm 13 days after pollination can induce 4n zygotic embryo.

5.2. In Vitro Ploidy Manipulation

Another strategy for producing polyploids is chromosome doubling using an antimitotic agent inhibiting spindle formation and chromosome division during mitosis. The most frequently used antimitotic agents in bulbous ornamentals is colchicine [148,180,193,194,195,196], oryzalin [148,194,196,197,198,199,200], surflan [201] or trifluralin [148]. Chromosome doubling is predominately used to avoid crossing barriers [202], to restore the fertility of F1 hybrids [203] and to improve the characteristics of ornamental plants [194,204,205,206]. Successful chromosome doubling has been achieved in species and interspecific hybrids mainly in Lilium and Tulipa, and in limited cases in Narcissus. In Lilium, both autotetraploids, such as LLLL, AAAA and TTTT, and allotetraploids, such as LALA, OAOA, LOLO, LLTT and OTOT, have been induced [154,207,208,209,210]. Table 2 shows an overview of the application of mitotic polyploidisation in the last decade in selected bulbous flowers. Induced chromosome doubling could enhance quality characteristics. In Lilium, for example, induced tetraploids had stronger stems [211], more leaves and more branches, greater plant height and stem length, and produced a wider bulb scale [194], larger flowers and thicker leaves [212]. The whole genome duplication may significantly affect gene expression, which can lead to increased production of secondary metabolites and change the tolerance to environmental stresses and the crop development, but the effect varies among species and the method of polyploidy induction [213]. Cao et al. [214] studied the effects of polyploidisation with colchicine on cellular, photochemical and photosynthetic characteristic of Lilium Formolongi × Oriental (FO) hybrids. The leaves of tetraploid plants had a thicker epidermis and spongy mesophyll tissue and showed more and thicker thylakoid lamellae and higher chlorophyll and carotenoid contents compared with diploid progenitors. The doubling of the cell genome may also have disadvantages. Several negative effects of polyploidy were observed in Tulipa: tetraploids had smaller flowers and leaves, lower pollen fertility and were characterised by higher fragility of the scape compared with their diploid progenitors [148]. Tetraploid genotypes of L. rosthornii Diels induced by colchicine (0.05% for 36 h) and oryzalin (0.01% for 24 h) had similar morphology and growth traits as diploid progenitors [196]. The major drawback of mitotic polyploidisation is the absence of intergenomic recombination due to autosynthetic chromosome pairing [163]. The absence of intergenomic recombination was observed in BC1 and BC2 progenies derived from allotetraploid Longiflorum × Rubellum hybrid (LLRR) [161]. This has also been observed in progenies from crossing an allotriploid Longiflorum × Oriental hybrid (LLO) with an allotetraploid Longiflorum × Trumpet hybrid (LLTT), both derived from somatic chromosome doubling [171]. Rhodophiala montana, a species that is closely related to Hippeastrum spp., succeeded in achieving chromosome duplication on the medium with colchicine [193], but this treatment reduced the survival rate of microbulbs by 20% and their ability to produce shoots and roots by 73% and 30%, respectively, compared with the medium without colchicine.

6. Modern Molecular Cytogenetic Techniques

The breeding process of Lilium, Tulipa and Narcissus has been strongly facilitated by using cytogenetic techniques based on DNA–DNA hybridisation. Genomic in situ hybridisation (GISH) has been used to clarify how many cultivars form and the genome composition of the allopolyploid species [219,220,221]. An excellent example of this are studies in Narcissus in which GISH was used to elucidate the origin of the hybrid species N. obsoletus (2n = 4x = 30). This analysis confirmed that N. serotinus L. and N. elegans (Haw.) Spach are the parents of this allopolyploid species [68]. GISH and molecular markers (nucleotide binding site [NBS] profiling) have also been used to clarify the origin of allotriploid narcissus cultivar ‘Tête-à-Tête’ (2n = 3x = 24 + B) [222]. It was possible to prove that ‘Tête-á-Tête’ comprises two genomes of N. cyclamineus (2n = 2x = 14) and one genome of N. tazetta (2n = 2x = 20) together with a B chromosome [222]. GISH has been used to clarify the origin of triploid DH tulips that were spontaneously obtained by interspecific crosses between Darwin tulips and T. fosteriana [79,156]. Using GISH, researchers have demonstrated that the triploid DH have two copies of the T. gesneriana genome and one copy of the T. fosteriana genome, indicating that T. gesneriana has supplied unreduced gametes during triploid cultivar formation [79,156]. This molecular cytogenetic technique has played an important role in introgression breeding, enabling researchers to detect the presence of translocations between parental genomes and to monitor the inheritance of recombinant chromosomes to backcross progenies [149,157,167].
GISH has been used extensively to recognise the three genomes of Lilium viz., Asiatic (A), Longiflorum (L) and Oriental (O), and to study the recombinant chromosomes in the backcross progenies of LA and OA interspecific hybrids [95,162,163,164,165,166,169,170,172,178]. For example, Khan et al. [169,170] showed the presence of extensive intergenomic recombination among the chromosomes of diploid and triploid BC progenies of LA hybrids. Similarly, GISH has been used to assess the extent of intergenomic recombination in backcross progenies of DH tulips [149,157,167]. It was revealed that most BC1 and BC2 DH hybrids with the recombinant chromosomes were diploids, which proved that introgression in tulips is possible at the diploid level [149,157,167]. Moreover, several F1 DH hybrids were found to produce both n and 2n gametes. This finding provided unique opportunities to generate polyploid as well as diploid BC1 progenies from backcrossing F1 DH hybrids to T. gesneriana parents. In these studies, GISH analysis enabled the researchers to trace the mode of origin of polyploid tulips and the role of 2n gametes in polyploidisation [79,157].
Fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) is another cytomolecular technique applied in ornamental geophytes; it enables mapping of specific repetitive or single-copy sequences on chromosomes. FISH with the 5S and 45S ribosomal DNA (rDNA) sequences provided chromosomal markers, which has improved chromosome identification [160,223,224,225]. This method has been successfully used for verification of hybrids in Lilium [226,227] and Tulipa [157,223]. FISH mapping ribosomal RNA genes has been used to study genetic variation among species of Lilium [111,228,229,230,231,232] and to study the presence of karyotype rearrangements in long term micro-propagated tulips in the presence of TDZ [233]. FISH with the 5S and 45S rDNA sequences has been also used to clarify the process of triploid and tetraploid cultivars formation in Narcissus [225]. Zeng et al. [225] identified five genomes—A, B, C, D and E—among the Narcissus cultivars based on the number and localisation of rDNA loci on chromosomes. Their investigation confirmed that most of the analysed tetraploid Narcissus cultivars (including ‘Queen’s Day’, ‘Pink Charm’, ‘Stadium’, ‘Mount Hood’, ‘Eline’, ‘Accent’, ‘Dutch Master’, ‘Flower Parade’, ‘Replete’, ‘Las Vegas’, ‘Flower Surprise’, ‘Ice Follies’ and ‘Easter Born’) are autotetraploid (2n = 4x = 28 = EEEE) obtained from chromosome doubling, whereas ‘Pink Parasol’ is allotetraploid (2n = 4x = 30 = CCDD) [225]. The triploid cultivar Chinese Narcissus ‘Jinzhanyintai’ is autotriploid (2n = 3x = 30 = AAA) caused by unilateral sexual polyploidisation. The results will be valuable to explain the crossing-compatibility to guide breeding of narcissus. In Hippeastrum, to the best of our knowledge, no molecular cytogenetic work based on DNA–DNA hybridisation has been reported.

7. Molecular Breeding

In conventional breeding, polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based markers have become extremely useful tools enabling the fast verification of interspecific hybrids at the early stage of development. Random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) and inter-simple sequence repeat (ISSR) have been applied to confirm hybrid status in Lilium and Narcissus [234,235]. These markers have also been used successfully to assess the genetic fidelity of in vitro propagated tulips regenerated from somatic tissues of the ‘Blue Parrot’ cultivar [236]. In Lilium, the genetic stability of regenerants of the Oriental hybrid ‘Siberia’ was confirmed with amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLP) and ISSR markers [237]. In Narcissus, several molecular marker technologies, such as RAPD, short sequence repeats (SSR), AFLP and NBS markers, have been used to identify genetic diversity, population genetics and cultivars [222,238,239,240]. Tang et al. [241] used single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers to assess the genetic diversity of 72 tulip accession numbers. The authors showed clear separation of the genomes representing T. gesneriana and T. fosteriana, but there was a relatively small variation in SNPs among cultivars representing the T. gesneriana genome.
Due to progress in the development of molecular technologies for mapping and sequencing DNA, molecular data including different coding and intergenic regions in the chloroplast genome have become available for phylogenetic studies. Chloroplast DNA (cpDNA) and nuclear DNA (ribosomal gene spacers) have been used successfully for plant systematic studies in Lilium and Tulipa [242,243,244]. Yanagisawa et al. [244] reported the relatedness of many species and cultivated tulips using coding regions of trnL and matK and intergenic spacer (IGS) region of trnT-L in chloroplast. Pourkhaloee et al. [245] used expressed sequence tag–simple sequence repeats (EST-SSRs), which are genic microsatellite markers, to study the genetic diversity and relationships among 280 individuals of 36 wild and cultivated tulip accession numbers from Iran and the Netherlands. Recently, researchers used plastid genome sequences of four Tulip species for comparative genomics and to study phylogenetic of 23 Liliaceae plastid genomes [246].
The breeding and the introgression of traits of interest from wild species to the assortment can be enhanced by molecular-assisted breeding (MAB), which can facilitate both the selection of parental forms for breeding and selection in progeny. For MAB, high-density linkage maps can be constructed using several molecular marker techniques [247,248]. In Lilium, well-saturated linkage maps that cover 89% of the lily genome were developed using AFLP, diversity arrays technology (DArT) markers and NBS profiling for two lily populations [249]. These genetic maps were used for mapping major genes and quantitative trait loci for several ornamental traits (flower colour, flower spots, antherless phenotype and flower direction) and resistances to Fusarium oxysporum and Lily mottle virus (LMoV). Six putative quantitative trait loci (QTLs) were identified for Fusarium resistance [249]. Moreover, the maps were saturated with SNP markers and EST-SSRs [34,250]. Recently, comprehensive linkage maps using SSR, SNP, AFLP and NBS profiling were constructed in Tulipa and six putative Fusarium-resistance QTLs were identified [251].

Genome Editing to Improve Ornamental Plants

In recent years, new plant breeding techniques (NPBTs) such as cisgenesis and genome editing technologies have been developed to assist breeders to improve important characteristic that are difficult to change via classical breeding techniques [252,253,254]. Genome editing technologies, particularly clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR), allow researchers to modify DNA at precisely specified points in the plant genome. Thus far, NPBTs have been used in ornamental plants to increase resistance and to modify morphological and physiological traits such as flowering induction, flower colour, size and fragrance [254,255,256]. More recently, Yan et al. [257] reported the first application of CRISPR-associated protein 9 (CRISPR/Cas9) technology to Lilium. Transforming L. pumilum and L. longiflorum with a CRISPR/Cas9 construct targeting gene encoding phytoene desaturase (PDS) resulted in an albino phenotype. Leeggangers et al. [36] studied the role of phosphatidyl ethanolamine-binding protein (PEBP) genes and their role in flowering time control in T. gesneriana and L. longiflorum. Advances in the field of genome editing have great potential for further genetic improvement of ornamental bulbous crops and to shorten breeding programmes.

8. Breeding Strategies and Trends and Cultivar News

8.1. Hippeastrum

Breeding programmes of the genus Hippeastrum are dictated by market demand for original flowers. The resulting cultivars are divided into nine horticultural classification groups based on flower diversity, shape and size [258]. From the registration data of new cultivars provided by the Dutch Royal General Bulb Growers’ Association (KAVB) and analysis of the years 2015–2019, in which 113 new cultivars were registered, we can conclude that this is a response to market demand. In Hippeastrum breeding, a great emphasis is placed on obtaining cultivars with large flowers [44,259]. That is why the largest number of registered cultivars (43) belongs to the Galaxy group (Figure 2a), the flowers of which are more than 16 cm in diameter, followed by the Diamond group (Figure 2b), characterised by medium-sized, single flowers of 12–16 cm in diameter; 28 cultivars were registered in this group. Small, single flowers with a diameter of less than 12 cm comprise the Colibri group. Only 10 cultivars were registered in this group between 2015 and 2019. The detailed number of registered cultivars from each group are shown in Figure 3a. Not only single flowers, but also full flowered cultivars are popular. The group Double Galaxy (Figure 2c) has large, double flowers, with a diameter of more than 16 cm. Twenty-three cultivars were registered in this group. In the remaining groups, only single cultivars were registered. Most cultivars are from the Netherlands and the United States, but there are also cultivars from India, China and Japan [260,261,262,263,264]. Selected cultivar novelties from each group are: Galaxy group, ‘Red Reality’, ‘White Queen’; Diamond group, ‘Shazam’, ‘Tierra’; Colibri group, ‘Sleeping Beauty’, ‘Caetano’; Double Galaxy group, ‘Canton Lady’, ‘Gypsy Girl’; Double Diamond group, ‘Pink Lotus’; Butterfly group, ‘Wild Amazone’, ‘Summer Breeze’; Trumpet group, ‘Antoinette’, ‘Cygnet’ [262,263,264]. Novelties of Hippeastrum presented on the International Plant Fair (Internationale Pflanzenmesse [IMP]) Essen 2020, Germany, are shown in Figure 2d.

8.2. Lilium

Lily cultivars are classified in nine divisions, according to the international horticultural classification [265]. Lily divisions of great economic importance are the Asiatic hybrids (Division I) and Oriental hybrids (Division VII), but they have been bred and grown less and less, and their place has been taken by the LA and LO interdivisional hybrids (Division VIII), respectively. In Division VIII, we find also: AT (Asiapets) hybrids, which have resulted from the crossing of Asiatic and trumpet hybrids; LT (Longipet) hybrids, which have resulted from longiflorum and trumpet hybrids; OA hybrids, which have resulted from oriental and Asiatic hybrids; and OT (Orienpet) hybrids, which have resulted from oriental and trumpet hybrids [265]. The number of registered OT cultivars (122 of all 693, almost 18%) in the last 5 years (mid-2014 to mid-2018) in the Royal Horticultural Society (RHS) (London, United Kingdom) register [266,267] supports the suggestions of van Tuyl et al. [80] from 10 years ago that Oriental hybrids will be partially replaced by OTs. As far as decorative values are concerned, lily breeding trends are directed—apart from attractive and unusual colours and the size of individual flowers—towards cultivars with a delicate scent dedicated to cut flower production (Asiatics and LA) and towards tall cultivars (so-called tree lilies; OT) for garden cultivation. OT lilies reach a height of over 2 m and have the best features of their parents: increased resistance to spring frosts and drought, thick and rigid stems and showy flowers (15–25 cm in diameter), often with a rather strong sweet scent. Most OT hybrids are triploid and have been developed by backcrossing with one of the parents, comprising a genome composition of OOT, which has been confirmed by GISH for tetraploid OT hybrid ‘Stentor’, resulting in 36 Oriental and 12 Trumpet lily chromosomes with two genomic recombinations [221]. Examples of new OT and LA hybrids with a duplicated number of chromosomes from either parent are: ‘Hongxing’ VIII (LAA), bred at the Beijing University of Agriculture in 2015, and ‘Pink App’ VIII (OOT), bred at Testcentrum voor Siergewassen B.V., the Netherlands [266]. A strong trend in lily breeding is to create cultivars with double flowers (Figure 4a,b) and cultivars dedicated for pot cultivation (Figure 4c,d). A detailed number of registered cultivars from each group are shown in Figure 3b. New lily cultivars have been bred predominantly by Dutch companies (481 cultivars during the period mid-2014 to mid-2018), followed by Chinese companies (95). Cultivars have also been bred in Canada (26), Poland (20), Australia (16) and Russia (16) [266,267].

8.3. Narcissus

For a large number of narcissi (daffodils) cultivars and botanical forms, the international horticultural classification has been elaborated. The newest, established by the RHS, consists of 13 groups, and the last International Daffodil Register & Classified List of the RHS contains 26,000 names of genotypes [268]. At present, almost all cultivars are triploid and tetraploid [268], which explains the lack of need for artificial polyploidisation of narcissus cultivars. According to analysis of the RHS register of daffodils, 857 new cultivars were registered during the last 5 years (mid-2015 to mid-2020) [269,270,271,272,273], predominantly large-cupped daffodil cultivars (293, 34.2%), followed by Trumpet cultivars (134, i.e., almost 16%). The third and fourth positions belong to small-cupped cultivars (96, 11.2%) and double daffodil cultivars (76, 8.9%). The final new cultivar division in the top five include the closed by split corona daffodil cultivars, with 66 novelties (7.7%). Detailed number of registered cultivars from each group are shown in Figure 3c. Most narcissus have white or yellow flowers, but the most sought-after colours are pink and red. This is also the direction in which the breeding of new cultivars is heading. During the last 5 years, 96 and 167 new cultivars, with red or pink mid-zone or rim of the corona, respectively, were registered. In addition, two cultivars with both colours of the corona—‘Retro Rose’ (2W-PPR) and ‘Valley Secret’ (2 W-PRR), bred by Collin Crotty from New Zealand—were registered in 2015 and 2017, respectively [274]. An important breeding goal in Narcissus is to achieve disease and pest resistance. Based on a British programme investigating the genetic basis of resistance to basal rot caused by F. oxysporum f. sp. narcissi [275], new lines and cultivars have been obtained [276,277]. The leading country in narcissus breeding is the United Kingdom, but many cultivars have also come from New Zealand, the Netherlands and the United States. According to the Database of the American Daffodil Society [278], 402 cultivars were bred in the United Kingdom, 218 in New Zealand, 144 in the United States, 123 in the Netherlands and 58 in Australia during the last 5 years (2016–2020). Narcissus breeding has also been conducted in Poland, resulting in six cultivars, but they have only been registered only in this country. Several breeding clones crossed in the National Institute of Horticultural Research in Skierniewice, Poland, are currently propagated in vitro to obtain more bulbs for further evaluation (Figure 5a–d). One hundred ninety-eight cultivars were bred in Latvia at the end of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century, but none after 2010 [279].

8.4. Tulipa

Each year, many new tulip cultivars are created around the world. Over the past 5 years (2015–2019), between 123 and 155 new cultivars have been added annually to the international tulip cultivar register maintained by the KAVB [260,261,262,263,264]. In total, this register has been enriched by more than 700 cultivars during that period. Most were produced by Dutch breeding companies. However, tulip breeding is performed on a smaller scale in other countries. For example, in 2015, six cultivars bred in France and two in Latvia were registered; in 2016, four in France, two in Latvia, two in China and one in Japan were registered; and in 2019, three in China and three in Latvia were registered. Due to the variety of tulip forms and the huge number of cultivars, an international horticultural classification has been introduced. The latest classification divides tulips into 15 groups [155]. However, progress in breeding required the creation of a new group, coronet tulips, in 2018 (Figure 6a) [280,281]. The first cultivar entered in the Dutch KAVB register classified in the Crown group was ‘Crown of Negrita’ [279], although as early as 1949 G. Baltus registered the cultivar ‘Picture’, with laterally compressed petals creating the spout at their tip [280]. Beginning in 1992, more cultivars with the ‘Picture’ type flower shape began to emerge, but until 2017, they had been registered as Single Late or Triumph. The newly registered cultivars belong predominantly to the Triumph Group (358 cultivars during the past 5 years, or 50.6%), which embraces cultivars perfect for forcing and with a long vase life. However, increasing numbers of new cultivars from the Double Early Group (Figure 6b), the Double Late Group (101 and 68, respectively) and the Fringed Group (61) have been noticed. Cultivars of the Double Fringed Group are also more popular (Figure 6c). Conversely, only 17 cultivars of DH—popular at the end of the last century—have been registered during the last 5 years [260,261,262,263,264]. The number of registered cultivars from each group is shown in Figure 3d. Since the Dutch tulipomania in the mid-1700s to the present day, it has been every breeder’s dream to create a cultivar with black flowers. In 2012, the Polish cultivar ‘Fringed Black’, which is one of the darkest cultivars available in the entire world to date, was registered by the KAVB [15]. Further breeding with the objective of unusual flower shape has led to create more elongated flowers, similar in shape to Curcuma or artichoke flowers (Figure 6d) or green malformed flowers as cultivar ‘Little Queen’ (Figure 6e). Apart from decorative values of flowers, suitability for forcing and long vase life, resistance breeding has become important in tulips. Tulip breaking virus (TBV), Fusarium and Botrytis are the most important disease-causing agents and, therefore, are the main targets for resistance breeding [281]. For these purposes, both interspecific crossing supported by cytogenetic studies and gene mapping studies are used, an endeavour that has allowed the detection of six different QTL loci for resistance to Fusarium and single locus for resistance to TBV [281].

9. Concluding Remarks and Future Prospects

The breeding of ornamental geophytes cannot progress without the support of scientific research. Research is focused on shortening the breeding period, including shortening the juvenile phase and improving in vitro propagation methods. There has been notable development in techniques for early selection of desirable traits among seedlings, which has also led to the acceleration of breeding work. The last two decades have seen further progress in resistance breeding based on increasingly broader and deeper cytogenetic and molecular studies. Not only ex situ gene banks, but the natural genetic resources of ornamental geophytes are increasingly appreciated. Hence, there is a continuous search for new traits, including resistance, in wild species.
We see the further progress in breeding of new cultivars of geophytes in using NPBTs such as cisgenesis and genome editing technologies. Rapidly advancing climate change necessitates the breeding of cultivars resistant to biotic and abiotic stresses, especially those better adapted to production in regions with warm climates. Because we are talking about ornamental plants, features such as a long vase life, new flower shapes and colours or new inflorescence structure will always remain the most important features of new cultivars. Conversely, for the medicinal use of geophytes (such as Narcissus), breeding for characteristics such as alkaloid or essential oil content will be required.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, D.S. and A.M.-C.; writing—original draft, A.M.-C., D.S. and P.M.; writing—review and editing, A.M.-C., D.S. and P.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was partly supported by the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education from the statutory funds of The National Institute of Horticultural Research, Skierniewice, Poland (Grant ZBS/7/2021) and partly by statutory funds of Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Warsaw, Poland.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Kamenetsky, R. Biodiversity of geophytes: Phytogeography, morphology, and survival strategies. In Ornamental Geophytes. From Basic Science to Sustainable Production, 1st ed.; Kamenetsky, R., Okubo, H., Eds.; CRS Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA; Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2012; pp. 57–76. [Google Scholar]
  2. Bryan, J.E. Manual of Bulbs, 1st ed.; Timber Press: Portland, OR, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  3. Benschop, M.; Kamenetsky, R.; Le Nard, M.; Okubo, H.; De Hertogh, A.A. The global flower bulb industry: Production, utilization and research. Hortic. Rev. 2010, 36, 1–115. [Google Scholar]
  4. BKD. Bloembollenkultuurdienst. Voorlopige Statistiek Lilium. 2020. Available online: https://www.bkd.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/voorlopige-statistiek-lilium-2020-versie-3-17-08-2020-website.pdf (accessed on 16 June 2021).
  5. BKD. Bloembollenkultuurdienst. Voorlopige Statistiek Lilium. 2020. Available online: https://www.bkd.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/voorlopige-statistiek-gladiolus-2020-versie-2-17-08-2020-website.pdf (accessed on 16 June 2021).
  6. BKD. Bloembollenkultuurdienst. Voorlopige Statistiek Lilium. 2020. Available online: https://www.bkd.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/voorlopige-statistiek-zantedeschia-2020-versie-3-30-09-2020-website.pdf (accessed on 16 June 2021).
  7. BKD. Bloembollenkultuurdienst. Voorlopige Statistiek Voorjaarsbloeiers. 2021. Available online: https://www.bkd.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/voorlopige-statistiek-voorjaarsbloeiers-2020-2021-versie-3-04-03-2021-website.pdf (accessed on 16 June 2021).
  8. Royal Flora Holland. Facts and Figures. 2021. Available online: https://www.royalfloraholland.com/media/15219125/royal-floraholland-facts-and-figures-2020.pdf (accessed on 16 June 2021).
  9. Warwick Crop Centre. Narcissus (Daffodil). 2017. Available online: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/lifesci/wcc/research/narcissus/ (accessed on 16 June 2021).
  10. CBI Market Intelligence. CBI Trade Statistics: Cut Flowers and Foliage; CBI Market Intelligence and Ministry of Foreign Affairs: The Hague, The Netherlands, 2016; pp. 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  11. De Hertogh, A.A.; Van Scheepen, J.; Le Nard, M.; Okubo, H.; Kamenetsky, R. Globalization of the flower bulb industry. In Ornamental Geophytes. From Basic Science to Sustainable Production, 1st ed.; Kamenetsky, R., Okubo, H., Eds.; CRS Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA; Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2012; pp. 1–16. [Google Scholar]
  12. Kamenetsky, R. Development and utilization of ornamental geophytes: Research challenges and sustainable production. Acta Hortic. 2017, 1171, 9–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Le Nard, M.; De Hertogh, A.A. Tulipa. In The Physiology of Flower Bulbs, 1st ed.; De Hertogh, A.A., Le Nard, M., Eds.; Elsevier: New York, NY, USA, 1993; pp. 617–682. [Google Scholar]
  14. Podwyszyńska, M.; Sochacki, D. Micropropagation of tulip: Production of virus-free stock plants. In Protocols for in Vitro Propagation of Ornamental Plants, Methods in Molecular Biology; Jain, S.M., Ochatt, S.J., Eds.; Humana Press: Totowa, NJ, USA; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2010; pp. 243–256. [Google Scholar]
  15. Orlikowska, T.; Podwyszyńska, M.; Marasek-Ciołakowska, A.; Sochacki, D.; Szymański, R. Tulip. In Ornamental Crops; Van Huylenbroeck, J., Ed.; Springer: Cham, Germany, 2018; pp. 769–802. [Google Scholar]
  16. Hanks, G.R. Narcissus and daffodil—The genus Narcissus. In Medicinal and Aromatic Plants—Industrial Profiles 21, 1st ed.; Hanks, G.R., Ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA; Taylor & Francis: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2002; p. 428. [Google Scholar]
  17. Chan, T.T. The development of the Narcissus plant. In Daffodil Tulip Year Book; Royal Hoticultural Society: London, UK, 1952; Volume 17, pp. 72–100. [Google Scholar]
  18. Rees, A.R. The Growth of Bulbs, Applied Aspects of the Physiology of Ornamental Bulbous Crop Plants, 1st ed.; Academic Press: London, UK, 1972; p. 311. [Google Scholar]
  19. Erhardt, W. Narcissen, Osternglocken, Jonquillen, Tazzeten, 1st ed.; Ulmer: Stuttgart, Germany, 1993; pp. 36–41. [Google Scholar]
  20. Fortanier, E.J. Reviewing the length of the generation period and its shortening, particularly in tulips. Sci. Hortic. 1973, 1, 107–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Mynett, K. Obserwacje mieszańca Lilium × formolongi kwitnącego z nasion w roku wysiewu. Rocz. Akad. Rol. Pozn. 2000, 29, 139–140. [Google Scholar]
  22. Anderson, N.O.; Berghauer, E.; Harris, D.; Johnson, K.; Lönnroos, J.; Morey, M. Discovery of novel traits in seed-propagated Lilium: Non-vernalization-requiring, day-neutral, reflowering, frost-tolerant, winter-hardy L. × formolongi. I. Characterization. Flor. Orn. Biotech. 2013, 6, 63–72. [Google Scholar]
  23. Tombolato, A.; Matthes, L. Collection of Hippeastrum spp., Alstroemeria spp. and other Brazilian bulbous species. Acta Hortic. 1998, 454, 91–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Okubo, H. Hippeastrum (Amaryllis). In The Physiology of Flower Bulbs, 1st ed.; De Hertogh, A., Le Nard, M., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1993; pp. 321–334. [Google Scholar]
  25. Marciniak, P.; (Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Warsaw, Poland); Sochacki, D.; (Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Warsaw, Poland). Personal communication, 2021.
  26. Khodorova, N.V.; Boitel-Conti, M. The role of temperature in the growth and flowering of geophytes. Plants 2013, 2, 699–711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Anderson, N.O. Novel traits in the genus Lilium: Their discovery & breeding potential. N. Am. Lily Yearb. 2005, 58, 97–104. [Google Scholar]
  28. Anderson, N.O.; Younis, A.; Opitz, E. Development of colored, non-vernalization-requiring seed-propagated lilies. Acta Hortic. 2009, 836, 193–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Sochacki, D.; Orlikowska, T. Application of in vitro culture in breeding of new cultivars of narcissus. In Proceedings of the Abstracts of International Workshop “Application of Biotechnology in Breeding Cultivars Suitable for Sustainable Fruit Production”, Skierniewice, Poland, 12–14 May 2005; p. 55. [Google Scholar]
  30. Sisa, M.; Higuchi, H. Studies on the shortening the juvenile phase of tulip under the controlled environment. II. On the thermoperiodicity of juvenile tulip. J. Jpn. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 1967, 36, 315–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Fortanier, E.J. Shortening the period from seed to a flowering bulb in tulip. Acta Hortic. 1971, 23, 413–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Van Eijk, J.P.; Toxopeus, S.J.; Eikelboom, W.; Sparnaaij, L.D. Early selection for forcing ability in tulip (Tulipa L.) breeding. Euphytica 1983, 32, 75–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Anderson, N.O. Selection tools for reducing generation time of geophytic herbaceous perennials. Acta Hortic. 2019, 1237, 53–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Shahin, A.; van Kaauwen, M.; Esselink, D.; Bargsten, J.; van Tuyl, J.; Visser, R.G.; Arens, P. Generation and analysis of expressed sequence tags in the extreme large genomes Lilium and Tulipa. BMC Genom. 2012, 13, 640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Kamenetsky, R.; Zaccai, M.; Flaishman, M.A. Florogenesis. In Ornamental Geophytes. From Basic Science to Sustainable Production, 1st ed.; Kamenetsky, R., Okubo, H., Eds.; CRS Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA; Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2012; pp. 197–232. [Google Scholar]
  36. Leeggangers, H.A.C.F.; Rosilio-Brami, T.; Bigas-Nadal, J.; Rubin, N.; van Dijk, A.D.J.; Nunez de Caceres Gonzalez, F.F.; Saadon-Shitrit, S.; Nijveen, H.; Hilhorst, H.W.M.; Immink, R.G.H.; et al. Tulipa gesneriana and Lilium longiflorum PEBP genes and their putative roles in flowering time control. Plant. Cell Physiol. 2018, 59, 90–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Noy-Porat, T.R.; Kamenetsky, R.; Eshel, A.; Flaishman, M. Temporal and spatial expression patterns of the LEAFY homologue NLF during florogenesis in Narcissus tazetta. Plant. Sci. 2010, 178, 105–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Leeggangers, H.A.C.F.; Nijven, H.; Bigas, J.N.; Hilhorst, H.W.M.; Immink, R.G.H. Molecular regulation of temperature-dependent floral induction in Tulipa gesneriana. Plant. Physiol. 2017, 173, 1904–1919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Bolano, M.A.; Proveniers, M. Life cycle shortening of tulip: Unravelling the molecular basis of vegetative phase change in T. gesneriana. In Proceedings of the Abstract Book of the XIII International Symposium on Flower Bulbs and Herbaceous Perennials, Seoul, Korea, 1–3 May 2019; p. 109. [Google Scholar]
  40. Bryan, J.E. Bulbs, 2nd ed.; Timber Press: Portland, OR, USA, 2002; pp. 281–283. [Google Scholar]
  41. Ockenga, S. Amaryllis, 1st ed.; Random House: New York, NY, USA, 2002; p. 96. [Google Scholar]
  42. Wang, Y.; Chen, D.; He, X.; Shen, J.; Xiong, M.; Wang, X.; Wei, Z. Revealing the complex genetic structure of cultivated amaryllis (Hippeastrum hybridum) using transcriptome-derived microsatellite markers. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 10645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. García, N.; Meerow, A.W.; Arroyo-Leuenberger, S.; Oliveira, R.S.; Dutilh, J.H.; Soltis, P.S.; Judd, W.S. Generic classification of Amaryllidaceae tribe Hippeastreae. Taxon 2019, 68, 481–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Traub, H.P. The Amaryllis Manual, 1st ed.; Macmillan: New York, NY, USA, 1958; p. 338. [Google Scholar]
  45. Meerow, A.W.; Snijman, D.A. Amaryllidaceae. In Families and Genera of Vascular Plants; Kubitzki, K., Ed.; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 1998; pp. 83–110. [Google Scholar]
  46. Tombolato, A.F.C.; Uzzo, R.P.; Junqueira, A.H.; Peetz, M.S.; Stancato, G.C. Geophyte research and production in Brazil. In Ornamental Geophytes: From Basic Science to Sustainable Production, 1st ed.; Kamenetsky, R., Okubo, H., Eds.; CRC Press: New York, NY, USA, 2012; pp. 435–447. [Google Scholar]
  47. Van Dijk, H.; Kurpershoek, M. Geillustreerde Bloembollen Encyclopedie; Rebo International, B.V.: Lisse, The Netherlands, 2002; pp. 159–161. [Google Scholar]
  48. Wu, Z.; Raven, P. Flora of China, Flagellariaceae through Marantaceae, 1st ed.; Science Press: Beijing, China; Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis, MO, USA, 2000; p. 431. [Google Scholar]
  49. Nishikawa, T.; Okazaki, K.; Arakawa, K.; Nagamine, T. Phylogenetic analysis of section sinomartagon in genus Lilium using sequences of the internal transcribed spacer region in nuclear ribosomal DNA. Breed. Sci. 2001, 51, 39–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Okubo, H.; Sochacki, D. Botanical and horticultural aspects of major ornamental geophytes. In Ornamental Geophytes. From Basic Science to Sustainable Production, 1st ed.; Kamenetsky, R., Okubo, H., Eds.; CRS Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA; Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2012; pp. 77–121. [Google Scholar]
  51. Rees, A.R. Narcissus. In CRC Handbook of Flowering; Halevy, A.H., Ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA; Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 1985; Volume 1, pp. 268–271. [Google Scholar]
  52. Margaris, N.S. Flowers in Greek mythology. Acta Hortic. 2000, 541, 23–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Tompsett, A. Golden Harvest. In The Story of Daffodil Growing in Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly; Alison Hodge: Penzance, UK, 2006; p. 144. [Google Scholar]
  54. Webb, D.A. Narcissus. In Flora Europaea, 1st ed.; Tutin, T.G., Heywood, V.H., Burges, N.A., Moore, D.M., Valentine, D.H., Walters, S.M., Webb, D.A., Chater, A.O., Richardson, I.B.K., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1980; pp. 78–84. [Google Scholar]
  55. Fernandes, A. Contribution to the knowledge of the biosystematics of some species of genus Narcissus L. In Trabajos y Comunicaciones; 5 Simposio de Flora Europaea: Sevilla, Spain, 1969; pp. 245–284. [Google Scholar]
  56. Van Raamsdonk, L.W.D.; De Vries, T. Biosystematic studies in Tulipa sect. Eriostemones (Liliaceae). Plant. Syst. Evol. 1992, 179, 27–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Van Raamsdonk, L.W.D.; De Vries, T. Species relationships and taxonomy in Tulipa subg. Tulipa (Liliaceae). Plant. Syst. Evol. 1995, 195, 13–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Christenhusz, M.J.M.; Govaerts, R.; David, J.C.; Hall, T.; Borland, K.; Roberts, P.S.; Tuomisto, A.; Buerki, S.; Chase, M.W.; Fay, M.F. Tiptoe through the tulips—Cultural history, molecular phylogenetics and classification of Tulipa (Liliaceae). Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 2013, 172, 280–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Zonneveld, B.J.M. The systematic value of nuclear genome size for ’all’ species of Tulipa L. Plant. Syst. Evol. 2009, 281, 217–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Hall, A.D. The Genus Tulipa, 1st ed.; The Royal Horticultural Society: London, UK, 1940; p. 171. [Google Scholar]
  61. WCSP. World Checklist of Selected Plant Families 2021. Facilitated by the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Available online: http://wcsp.science.kew.org/ (accessed on 12 July 2021).
  62. Pavord, A. The Tulip, 1st ed.; Bloomsbury Publishing: London, UK, 1999; p. 439. [Google Scholar]
  63. Stork, A.L. Tulipes Sauvages et Cultivees, 1st ed.; Conservatoire et Jardin Botaniques de la Ville de Geneve: Geneve, Switzerland, 1984; p. 185. [Google Scholar]
  64. Poggio, L.; González, G.; Naranjo, C.A. Chromosome studies in Hippeastrum (Amaryllidaceae): Variation in genome size. Bot. J. Lin. Soc. 2007, 155, 171–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Poggio, L.; Realini, M.F.; Fourastié, M.F.; García, A.M.; González, G.E. Genome downsizing and karyotype constancy in diploid and polyploid congeners: A model of genome size variation. AoB Plants 2014, 6, plu029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Ramanna, M.S.; Marasek-Ciolakowska, A.; Xie, S.; Khan, N.; van Tuyl, J.M. The Significance of Polyploidy for Bulbous Ornamentals: A Molecular Cytogenetic Assessment. In Floriculture and Ornamental Biotechnology. Special Issue: Bulbous Ornamentals; Van Tuyl, J., Arens, P., Eds.; Global Science Books Ltd.: London, UK, 2012; Volume 1, pp. 116–121. [Google Scholar]
  67. Marasek-Ciolakowska, A.; Arens, P.; Van Tuyl, J.M. The Role of Polyploidization and Interspecific Hybridization in the Breeding of Ornamental Crops. In The Breeding of Ornamentals, 1st ed.; Mason, A., Ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA; Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2016; pp. 159–181. [Google Scholar]
  68. Diaz Lifante, Z.; Camacho, C.A.; Viruel, J.; Caballero, A.C. The allopolyploid origin of Narcissus obsoletus (Amaryllidaceae): Identification of parental genomes by karyotype characterization and genomic in situ hybridization. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 2009, 159, 477–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Brandham, P.E. Evolution of polyploidy in cultivated Narcissus subgenus Narcissus. Genetica 1986, 68, 161–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Brandham, P.E.; Kirton, P.R. The Chromosomes of species, hybrids and cultivars of Narcissus L. (Amaryllidaceae). Kew Bull. 1987, 42, 65–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Moore, D.M. Flora Europaea Check-List and Chromosome Index; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1982; p. 436. [Google Scholar]
  72. Zonneveld, B.J.M. The systematic value of nuclear DNA content for all species of Narcissus L. (Amaryllidaceae). Plant. Syst. Evol. 2008, 275, 109–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  73. Marques, I.; Loureiro, J.; Draper, D.; Castro, M.; Castro, S. How much do we know about the frequency of hybridization and polyploidy in the Mediterranean region? Plant. Biol. 2018, 20, 21–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Kroon, G.H.; Jongerius, M.C. Chromosome numbers of Tulipa species and the occurrence of hexaploidy. Euphytica 1986, 35, 73–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Arroyo, S. The chromosomes of Hippeastrum, Amaryllis and Phycella (Amaryllidaceae). Kew Bull. 1982, 372, 211–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Naranjo, C.A.; Poggio, L.A. Comparison of Karyotype, Ag–NOR Bands and DNA Content in Amaryllis and Hippeastrum (Amaryllidaceae). Kew Bull. 1988, 43, 317–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Williams, M.; Dudley, T.R. Chromosome Count for Hippeastrum iguazuanum. Taxon 1984, 33, 271–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. García, N.; Folk, R.A.; Meerow, A.W.; Chamala, S.; Gitzendanner, M.A.; Oliveira, R.S.; Soltis, D.E.; Soltis, P.S. Deep reticulation and incomplete lineage sorting obscure the diploid phylogeny of rain-lilies and allies (Amaryllidaceae tribe Hippeastreae). Molec. Phylogen. Evol. 2017, 11, 231–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  79. Marasek, A.; Mizuochi, H.; Okazaki, K. The origin of Darwin hybrid tulips analyzed by flow cytometry, karyotype analyses and genomic in situ hybridization. Euphytica 2006, 151, 279–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Van Tuyl, J.M.; Arens, P.; Marasek-Ciolakowska, A. Breeding and Genetics of Ornamental Geophytes. In Ornamental Geophytes: From Basic Science to Sustainable Horticultural Production, 1st ed.; Kamenetsky, R., Okubo, H., Eds.; CRC: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2012; pp. 131–158. [Google Scholar]
  81. Takayama, S.; Isogai, A. Self-incompatibility in plants. Annu. Rev. Plant. Biol. 2005, 5, 467–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  82. Meerow, A.W. Tilting at windmills: 20 years of Hippeastrum breeding. Isr. J. Plant. Sci. 2009, 57, 303–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  83. Karihaloo, J.L. Chromosome number and pollen viability in some Hippeastrum cultivars. Indian J. Hort. 1989, 46, 100–102. [Google Scholar]
  84. Almeida, N.V.D.; Saziki, C.Y.N.; Cardoso, J.C. Characterization of cultivars and low-temperature pollen grain storage in amaryllis (Hippeastrum sp.). Rev. Ceres 2019, 66, 451–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  85. Ye, L.; Shi, Y.M. Research on pollen germination and pollen preservation characteristic of Hippeastrum. J. Shanghai Jiaotong Univ. 2008, 1, 3. [Google Scholar]
  86. Wóycicki, S. Zarys Hodowli Roślin Ozdobnych, 2nd ed.; Państwowe Wydawnictwo Rolnicze i Leśne: Warsaw, Poland, 1966. [Google Scholar]
  87. Marciniak, P.; Jędrzejuk, A.; Sochacki, D. Evaluation of the possibility of obtaining viable seeds from the cross-breeding Hippeastrum × chmielii Chm. with selected cultivars of Hippeastrum hybridum Hort. Folia Hort. 2021, 33, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  88. Chwil, M. Ecology of flowers and morphology of pollen grains of selected Narcissus cultivars (Narcissus pseudonarcissus L. × Narcissus poeticus L.). Acta Agrobot. 2006, 59, 107–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  89. Sanders, T. Pollen Volume and Chromosome Content of Daffodils. Possibilities for Hybridizing. 2014. Available online: https://www.theo-sanders-daffodils.de/ (accessed on 5 March 2021).
  90. Khaleel, T.F.; Haven, S.; Gilg, T. Karyomorphology of Amaryllis hybrids. Cytologia 1991, 56, 31–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  91. He, G.; Hu, F.; Ming, J.; Liu, C.; Yuan, S. Pollen viability and stigma receptivity in Lilium during anthesis. Euphytica 2017, 213, 231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Van Tuyl, J.M.; De Jeu, M.J. Methods for overcoming interspecific crossing barriers. In Pollen Biotechnology for Crop Production and Improvement; Sawhney, V.K., Shivanna, K.R., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1997; pp. 273–293. [Google Scholar]
  93. Lim, K.B.; Van Tuyl, J.M. Lilium hybrids. In Flower Breeding and Genetics: Issues, Challenges and Opportunities for the 21st Century, 1st ed.; Anderson, N.O., Ed.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2006; pp. 517–537. [Google Scholar]
  94. Bakhshaie, M.; Khosravi, S.; Azadi, P.; Bagheri, H.; van Tuyl, J.M. Biotechnological advances in Lilium. Plant. Cell Rep. 2016, 35, 1799–1826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Zhou, S.; Yuan, G.; Xu, P.; Gong, H. Study on lily introgression breeding using allotriploids as maternal parents in interploid hybridizations. Breed. Sci. 2014, 64, 97–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  96. Chung, M.Y.; Chung, J.D.; Ramanna, M.; Van Tuyl, J.M.; Lim, K.B. Production of polyploids and unreduced gametes in Lilium auratum × L. henryi hybrids. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 2013, 9, 693–701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  97. Xiao, K.; Cui, L.; Wan, L.; Zhong, J.; Liu, Y.; Sun, Y.; Zhou, S. A new way to produce odd-allotetraploid lily (Lilium) trough 2n gametes. Plant. Breed. 2021, 140, 711–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Okazaki, K. New aspects of tulip breeding: Embryo culture and polyploid. Acta Hortic. 2005, 673, 127–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Podwyszyńska, M.; Marasek, A. Effect of thidiazuron and paclobutrazol on regeneration potential of flower stalk explants in vitro and subsequent shoot multiplication. Acta Soc. Bot. Pol. 2003, 72, 181–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Podwyszyńska, M. Improvement of bulb formation in micropropagated tulips by treatment with NAA and paclobutrazol or ancymidol. Acta Hortic. 2006, 725, 679–684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Podwyszyńska, M.; Novák, O.; Doležal, K.; Strnad, M. Endogenous cytokinin dynamics in micropropagated tulips during bulb formation process influenced by TDZ and iP pre-treatment. Plant. Cell Tiss. Organ. Cult. 2014, 119, 331–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  102. Maślanka, M.; Bach, A. Tulip propagation in vitro from vegetative bud explants. Ann. Wars. Univ. Life Sci. SGGW Horticult. Landsc. Architect. 2013, 34, 21–26. [Google Scholar]
  103. Maślanka, M.; Bach, A. Induction of bulb organogenesis in in vitro cultures of tarda tulip (Tulipa tarda Stapf.) from seed-derived explants. Vitr. Cell. Dev. Biol. Plant 2014, 50, 712–721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  104. Sochacki, D.; (Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Warsaw, Poland); Marciniak, P.; (Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Warsaw, Poland); Goszcz, A.; (Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Warsaw, Poland); Ciesielska, M.; (Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Warsaw, Poland). Unpublished data. 2021.
  105. Maślanka, M.; Bach, A. Effect of abscisic acid, ethylene and inhibitors of their biosynthesis (fluridone and salicylic acid) on somatic embryos conversion in tulips. Ecol. Chem. Eng. 2010, 17, 1135–1140. [Google Scholar]
  106. Bach, A.; Ptak, A. Somatic embryogenesis and plant regeneration from ovaries of Tulipa gesneriana L. in vitro cultures. Acta Hortic. 2001, 560, 391–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Ptak, A.; Bach, A. Somatic embryogenesis in tulip (Tulipa gesneriana L.) flower stem cultures. Vitr. Cell. Dev. Biol. Plant. 2007, 43, 35–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Maślanka, M.; Bach, A.; Janowiak, F. Endogenous ABA content in relation to maturation of somatic embryos in Tulipa (L.) ‘Apeldoorn’ cultures. Acta Physiol. Plant. 2016, 38, 270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  109. Podwyszyńska, M.; Marasek-Ciolakowska, A. Micropropagation of tulip via somatic embryogenesis. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Seabrook, J.E.A.; Cumming, B.G. The in vitro propagation of amaryllis (Hippeastrum spp. hybrids). Vitro 1977, 13, 831–836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. Sultana, S.; Lee, S.H.; Bang, J.W.; Choi, H.W. Physical mapping of rRNA gene loci and inter-specific relationships in wild Lilium distributed in Korea. J. Plant. Biol. 2010, 53, 433–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Zayed, R.; El-Shamy, H.; Berkov, S.; Batista, J.; Codina, C. In vitro micropropagation and alkaloids of Hippeastrum vittatum. Vitr. Cell. Dev. Biol. Plant 2011, 47, 695–701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Zakizadeh, S.; Kavani, B.; Onsinejad, R. In vitro rooting of amaryllis (Hippeastrum johnsonii), a bulbous plant, via NAA and 2-iP. Ann. Biol. Res. 2013, 4, 69–71. [Google Scholar]
  114. Witomska, M.; Ilczuk, A. Formation of adventitious bulblets in vitro on scale explants in Hippeastrum × chmielii Chm. Biotechnologia 2004, 2, 199–205. [Google Scholar]
  115. Ilczuk, A.; Winkelmann, T.; Richartz, S.; Witomska, M.; Serek, M. In vitro propagation of Hippeastrum × chmielii Chm—Influence of flurprimidol and the culture in solid or liquid medium and in temporary immersion systems. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2005, 83, 339–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Witomska, M.; Łukaszewska, A.; Wojtowicz, M. Micropropagation of Hippeastrum × chmieli Chm. from scale and scape explants. Propag. Ornam. Plants 2008, 8, 158–160. [Google Scholar]
  117. Sochacki, D.; Woźniak, E.; Marciniak, P. The effect of selected factors on micropropagation efficacy and on the first bulb yield in Hippeastrum × chmielii Chm. and H. hybridum ‘Double Roma’. Propag. Ornam. Plants 2018, 18, 87–96. [Google Scholar]
  118. Thorpe, T.A. The current status of plant tissue culture. In Plant Tissue Culture: Applications and Limitations; Bhojwani, S.S., Ed.; Elsevier Science Publisher: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1990; pp. 1–33. [Google Scholar]
  119. Bell, W.D. The role of triploids in Amaryllis hybridization. Plant. Life 1973, 29, 59–61. [Google Scholar]
  120. Kim, K.W.; De Hertogh, A.A. Tissue culture of ornamental flowering bulbs (geophytes). Hort. Rev. 1997, 18, 87–169. [Google Scholar]
  121. Langens-Gerrits, M.M. Phase Change, Bulb Growth and Dormancy Development in Lily. Manipulation of the Propagation Cycle by in Vitro Culture. Ph.D. Thesis, Katholieke Universiteit, Nijmegen, The Netherlands, July 2003. [Google Scholar]
  122. Qi, Y.; Du, L.; Quan, Y.; Tian, F.; Liu, Y.; Wang, Y. Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of embryogenic cell suspension cultures and plant regeneration in Lilium tenuifolium Oriental × trumpet ‘Robina’. Acta Physiol. Plant. 2014, 36, 2047–2057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Chinestra, S.C.; Curvetto, N.R.; Marinangeli, P.A. Production of virus-free plants of Lilium spp. from bulbs obtained in vitro and ex vitro. Sci. Hortic. 2015, 194, 304–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Gabryszewska, E.; Sochacki, D. Effect of various levels of sucrose and nitrogen salts on the growth and development of lily bulblets in vitro. Acta Hortic. 2013, 1002, 139–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Bakhshaie, M.; Babalar, M.; Mirmasoumi, M.; Khalighi, A. Effects of light, sucrose, and cytokinins on somatic embryogenesis in Lilium ledebourii (Baker) Bioss. via transverse thin celllayer cultures of bulblet microscales. J. Hortic. Sci. Biotechnol. 2010, 85, 491–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Mirmasoumi, M.; Bakhshaie, M. Effects of liquid, temporary immersion bioreactor and solid culture systems on micropropagation of Lilium ledebourii via bulblet microscales—An endangered valuable plant with ornamental potential. Prog. Biol. Sci. 2015, 5, 169–180. [Google Scholar]
  127. Tang, Y.P.; Liu, X.Q.; Wahiti Gituru, R.; Chen, L.Q. Callus induction and plant regeneration from in vitro cultured leaves, petioles and scales of Lilium leucanthum (Baker) Baker. Biotechnol. Biotechnol. Equip. 2010, 24, 2071–2076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Ogaki, M.; Furuichi, Y.; Kuroda, K.; Chin, D.P.; Ogawa, Y.; Mii, M. Importance of co-cultivation medium pH for successful Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of Lilium × formolongi. Plant. Cell Rep. 2008, 27, 699–705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Azadi, P.; Chin, D.P.; Kuroda, K.; Khan, R.S.; Mii, M. Macro elements in inoculation and co-cultivation medium strongly affect the efficiency of Agrobacterium-mediated transformation in Lilium. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2010, 101, 201–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Azadi, P.; Otang, N.V.; Chin, D.P.; Nakamura, I.; Fujisawa, M.; Harada, H.; Misawa, N.; Mii, M. Metabolic engineering of Lilium × formolongi using multiple genes of the carotenoid biosynthesis pathway. Plant. Biotechnol. Rep. 2010, 4, 269–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Azadi, P.; Otang, N.V.; Supaporn, H.; Khan, R.S.; Chin, D.P.; Nakamura, I.; Mii, M. Increased resistance to Cucumber mosaic virus (CMV) in Lilium transformed with a defective CMV replicase gene. Biotechnol. Lett. 2011, 33, 1249–1255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Chow, Y.N.; Selby, C.; Harvey, B.M.R. A simple method for maintaining high multiplication of Narcissus shoot cultures in vitro. Plant. Cell. Tiss. Org. Cult. 1992, 30, 227–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Langens-Gerrits, M.M.; Nashimoto, S. Improved protocol for the propagation of Narcissus in vitro. Acta Hortic. 1997, 430, 311–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Sochacki, D.; Orlikowska, T. Factors influencing micropropagation of Narcissus. Acta Hortic. 2005, 673, 669–673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Langens-Gerrits, M.M.; De Klerk, G.J.M. Micropropagation of flower bulbs. Lily and narcissus. In Plant Cell Culture Protocols, 1st ed.; Hall, R.D., Ed.; Humana Press: New York, NY, USA, 2008; pp. 141–147. [Google Scholar]
  136. Sochacki, D. The use of ELISA in the micropropagation of virus-free Narcissus. Acta Hortic. 2011, 886, 253–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Chen, J.; Ziv, M. Carbohydrate, metabolic, and osmotic changes in scaled-up liquid cultures of Narcissus leaves. Vitr. Cell. Dev. Biol. Plant 2003, 39, 645–650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Sage, D.O. Propagation and protection of flower bulbs: Current approaches and future prospects, with special reference to Narcissus. Acta Hortic. 2005, 673, 107–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Malik, M. Comparison of different liquid/solid culture systems in the production of somatic embryos from Narcissus L. ovary explants. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2008, 94, 337–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Malik, M.; Molenda, A. Formowanie zarodków somatycznych narcyza (Narcissus L.) z tkanki kalusowej w systemie okresowego zalewania pożywką RITA oraz na pożywce stałej. Zesz. Probl. Postępów Nauk. Rol. 2008, 525, 237–243. [Google Scholar]
  141. Bach, A.; Sochacki, D. Propagation of ornamental geophytes: Physiology and management systems. In Ornamental Geophytes: From Basic Science to Sustainable Production, 1st ed.; Kamenetsky, R., Okubo, H., Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA; Taylor & Francis: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2012; pp. 261–286. [Google Scholar]
  142. Anbari, S.; Tohidfar, M.; Hosseini, R.; Haddad, R. Somatic embryogenesis induction in Narcissus papyraceus cv. Shirazi. Plant. Tissue Cult. Biotech. 2007, 17, 37–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Sage, D.O.; Lynn, J.; Hammatt, N. Somatic embryogenesis in Narcissus pseudonarcissus cvs. Golden Harvest and St. Keverne. Plant. Sci. 2000, 150, 209–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Sage, D.O.; Hammatt, N. Somatic embryogenesis and transformation in Narcissus pseudonarcissus cultivars. Acta Hortic. 2002, 570, 247–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Malik, M.; Bach, A. Somatic embryogenesis induction and morphogenesis direction in narcissus culture (Narcissus L.) of ‘Carlton’ depending on the initial explants type. Post. Nauk Rol. 2010, 551, 175–181. [Google Scholar]
  146. Malik, M.; Bach, A. High-yielding repetitive somatic embryogenesis in cultures of Narcissus L. ‘Carlton’. Acta Sci. Pol. Hortorum Cultus 2017, 16, 107–112. [Google Scholar]
  147. Okazaki, K.; Nukui, S.; Ootuka, H. Application of nitrous oxide gas a polyploidizing agent in tulip and lily breeding. Floric. Ornam. Biotechnol. 2012, 6, 39–43. [Google Scholar]
  148. Podwyszyńska, M.; Trzewik, A.; Marasek-Ciolakowska, A. In vitro polyploidization of tulips (Tulipa gesneriana L.)—Phenotype assessment of tetraploids. Sci. Hortic. 2018, 242, 155–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Marasek-Ciolakowska, A.; Xie, S.; Ramanna, M.S.; Arens, P.; Van Tuyl, J.M. Meiotic Polyploidization in Darwin Hybrid Tulips. Acta Hortic. 2012, 953, 187–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Zhou, S.; Ramanna, M.S.; Visser, G.F.; Van Tuyl, J.M. Analysis of the meiosis in the F1 hybrids of Longiflorum × Asiatic (LA) of lilies (Lilium) using genomic in situ hybridization. J. Genet. Genom. 2008, 35, 687–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Van Tuyl, J.M.; Arens, P. Lilium: Breeding history of the modern cultivar assortment. Acta Hortic. 2011, 900, 223–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Zhang, X.; Ren, G.; Li, K.; Zhou, G.; Zhou, S. Genomic variation of new cultivars selected from distant hybridization in Lilium. Plant. Breed. 2012, 131, 227–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Li, X.; Zhang, Y.; Jiang, H.; Sun, Y.; Li, Q.; Yang, L. Karyotype analysis and ploidy identification of Hippeastrum. Acta Agric. Shanghai 2018, 34, 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  154. Marasek-Ciolakowska, A.; Nishikawa, T.; Sheaand, D.J.; Okazaki, K. Breeding of lilies and tulips—Interspecific hybridization and genetic background. Breed. Sci. 2018, 68, 35–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  155. Van Scheepen, J. Classified List and International Register of Tulip Names, 1st ed.; Royal General Bulbgrowers’ Association KAVB: Hillegom, The Netherlands, 1996. [Google Scholar]
  156. Marasek, A.; Okazaki, K. GISH analysis of hybrids produced by interspecific hybridization between Tulipa gesneriana and T. Fosteriana. Acta Hortic. 2007, 743, 133–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Marasek, A.; Okazaki, K. Analysis of introgression of the Tulipa fosteriana genome into Tulipa gesneriana using GISH and FISH. Euphytica 2008, 160, 217–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Marasek-Ciolakowska, A.; Ramanna, M.S.; van Tuyl, J.M. Introgression of chromosome segments of Tulipa forsteriana into T. gesneriana detected through GISH and its implications for breeding virus resistant tulips. Acta Hortic. 2011, 886, 175–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Marasek-Ciolakowska, A.; Xie, S.; Arens, P.; Van Tuyl, J.M. Ploidy manipulation and introgression breeding in Darwin hybrid tulips. Euphytica 2014, 189, 389–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Lim, K.B.; Wennekes, J.; de Jong, J.H.; Jacobsen, E.; van Tuyl, J.M. Karyotype analysis of Lilium longiflorum and Lilium rubellum by chromosome banding and fluorescence in situ hybridization. Genome 2001, 44, 911–918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Lim, K.B.; van Tuyl, J.M. A pink Longiflorum lily cultivar, ’Elegant Lady’ suitable for cut flower forcing. Korean J. Breed. 2004, 36, 123–124. [Google Scholar]
  162. Barba-Gonzalez, R.; Lim, K.B.; Ramanna, M.S.; Van Tuyl, J.M. Use of 2n gametes for inducing intergenomic recombination in lily hybrids. Acta Hortic. 2004, 673, 161–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  163. Barba-Gonzalez, R.; Lokker, A.C.; Lim, K.B.; Ramanna, M.S.; Van Tuyl, J.M. Use of 2n gametes for the production of sexual polyploids from sterile Oriental × Asiatic hybrids of lilies (Lilium). Theor. Appl. Genet. 2004, 109, 1125–1132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  164. Barba-Gonzalez, R.; Lim, K.B.; Ramanna, M.S.; Visser, R.G.V.; Van Tuyl, J.M. Occurrence of 2n gametes in F1 hybrids of Oriental × Asiatic lilies (Lilium). Relevance to intergenomic recombination and backcrossing. Euphytica 2005, 143, 67–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Barba-Gonzalez, R.; Ramanna, M.S.; Visser, R.G.F.; Van Tuyl, J.M. Intergenomic recombination in F1 lily hybrids (Lilium) and its significance for genetic variation in the BC1 progenies as revealed by GISH and FISH. Genome 2005, 48, 884–894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  166. Khan, N.; Barba-Gonzalez, R.; Ramanna, M.S.; Arens, P.; Visser, R.G.F.; van Tuyl, J.M. Relevance of unilateral and bilateral sexual polyploidization in relation to intergenomic recombination and introgression in Lilium species hybrids. Euphytica 2010, 171, 157–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  167. Marasek-Ciolakowska, A.; He, H.; Bijman, P.; Ramanna, M.S.; Arens., P.; van Tuyl, J.M. Assessment of intergenomic recombination through GISH analysis of F1, BC1 and BC2 progenies of Tulipa gesneriana and T. fosteriana. Plant. Syst. Evol. 2012, 298, 887–899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  168. Lim, K.B.; Barba-Gonzalez, R.; Zhou, S.; Ramanna, M.S.; van Tuyl, J.M. Meiotic polyploidization with homoeologous recombination induced by caffeine treatment in interspecific lily hybrids. Korean J. Genet. 2005, 27, 219–226. [Google Scholar]
  169. Khan, N.; Barba-Gonzalez, R.; Ramanna, M.S.; Visser, R.G.; van Tuyl, J.M. Construction of chromosomal recombination maps of three genomes of lilies (Lilium) based on GISH analysis. Genome 2009, 52, 238–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Khan, N.; Zhou, S.; Ramanna, M.S.; Arens, P.; Herrera, J.; Visser, R.G.F.; van Tuyl, J.M. Potential for analytic breeding in allopolyploids: An illustration from Longiflorum × Asiatic hybrid lilies (Lilium). Euphytica 2009, 166, 399–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  171. Xie, S.; Khan, N.; Ramanna, M.S.; Niu, L.; Marasek-Ciolakowska, A.; Arens, P.; van Tuyl, J.M. An assessment of chromosomal rearrangements in neopolyploids of Lilium hybrids. Genome 2010, 53, 439–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Xie, S.; Ramanna, M.S.; Visser, R.G.F.; Arens, P.; van Tuyl, J.M. Elucidation of intergenomic recombination and chromosome translocation: Meiotic evidence from interspecific hybrids of Lilium through GISH analysis. Euphytica 2013, 194, 361–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Ramanna, M.S.; Jacobsen, E. Relevance of sexual polyplidization for crop improvement: A review. Euphytica 2003, 133, 3–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Okazaki, K.; Nishimura, M. Ploidy of progenies crossed between diploids, triploids and tetraploids in tulip. Acta Hortic. 2000, 522, 127–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  175. Zhou, S.; Zhou, G.; Li, K. Euploid endosperm of triploid diploid/tetraploid crosses results in aneuploid embryo survival in Lilium. HortScience 2011, 46, 558–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Xi, M.; van Tuyl, J.; Arens, P. GISH analyzed progenies generated from allotriploid lilies as female parent. Sci. Hortic. 2015, 183, 130–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Barba-Gonzalez, R.; Van Silfhout, A.; Visser, R.G.F.; Ramanna, M.S.; van Tuyl, J.M. Progenies of allotriploids of Oriental × Asiatic lilies (Lilium) examined by GISH analysis. Euphytica 2006, 151, 243–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Lim, K.B.; Ramanna, M.S.; Jacobsen, E.; van Tuyl, J.M. Evaluation of BC2 progenies derived from 3x–2x and 3x–4x crosses of Lilium hybrids: A GISH analysis. Appl. Genet. 2003, 106, 568–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Lokker, A.C.; Barba-Gonzalez, R.; Lim, K.B.; Ramanna, M.S.; van Tuyl, J.M. Genotypic and environmental variation in production of 2n-gametes of Oriental × Asiatic lily hybrids. Acta Hortic. 2004, 673, 453–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Wu, H.; Zheng, S.; He, Y.; Yang, G.; Bi, Y.; Zhu, Y. Diploid female gametes induced by colchicines in oriental lilies. Sci. Hortic. 2007, 114, 50–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Okazaki, K.; Kurimoto, K.; Miyajima, I.; Enami, A.; Mizuochi, H.; Matsumoto, Y.; Ohya, H. Induction of 2n pollen in tulips by arresting the meiotic process with nitrous oxide gas. Euphytica 2005, 143, 101–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Qu, L.W.; Zhang, Y.Q.; Xing, G.M.; Cui, Y.H.; Xue, L.; Zhao, J.; Zhang, W.; Qu, L.; Lei, J.J. Inducing 2n pollen to obtain polyploids in tulip. Acta Hortic. 2019, 1237, 93–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Barba-Gonzalez, R.; Mille, C.T.; Ramanna, M.S.; van Tuyl, J.M. Induction of 2n gametes for overcoming F1-sterility in lily and tulip. Acta Hortic. 2006, 714, 99–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  184. Barba-Gonzalez, R.; Miller, C.T.; Ramanna, M.S.; van Tuyl, J.M. Nitrous oxide (N2O) induces 2n gametes in sterile F1 hybrids between Oriental × Asiatic lily (Lilium) hybrids and leads to intergenomic recombination. Euphytica 2006, 148, 303–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Akutsu, M.; Kitamura, S.; Toda, R.; Miyajima, I.; Okazaki, K. Production of 2n pollen of Asiatic hybrid lilies by nitrous oxide treatment. Euphytica 2007, 155, 143–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  186. Sato, T.; Miyoshi, K.; Okazaki, K. Induction of 2n gametes and 4n embryo in Lilium (Lilium × formolongi Hort.) by nitrous oxide gas treatmet. Acta Hortic. 2010, 855, 243–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  187. Luo, J.R.; Ares, P.; Niu, X.; van Tuyl, J.M. Induction of viable 2n pollen in sterile Oriental × Trumpet Lilium hybrids. J. Hortic. Sci. Biotech. 2016, 91, 258–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  188. Kitamura, S.; Akutsu, M.; Okazaki, K. Mechanism of action off nitrous oxide gas applied as a polyploidizing agent during meiosis in lilies. Sex. Plant. Reprod. 2009, 22, 9–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Nukui, S.; Kitmura, S.; Hioki, T.; Ootsuka, H.; Miyoshi, K.; Satou, T.; Takatori, Y.; Oomiya, T.; Okazaki, K. N2O induces mitotic polyploidization in anther somatic cells and restores fertility in sterile interspecific hybrid lilies. Breed. Sci. 2011, 61, 327–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  190. Lim, K.B.; Chung, J.D.; van Krononburg, B.C.E.; Ramanna, M.S.; De Jong, J.H.; van Tuyl, J.M. Introgression of Lilium rubellum Baker chromosomes into L. longiflorum Thunb.: A genome painting study of the F1 hybrid, BC1 and BC2 progenies. Chromosome Res. 2000, 8, 119–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  191. Luo, J.R.; Ramanna, M.S.; Arens, P.; Niu, X.; van Tuyl, J.M. GISH analyses of backcross progenies of two Lilium species hybrids and their relevance to breeding. J. Hortic. Sci. Biotech. 2012, 87, 654–660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  192. Xiao, K.; Zeng, W.; Zeng, J.; Wu, L.; Cui, L.; Liu, Y.; Yng, Y.; Zhou, S. Analysis of abnormal meiosis and progenies of an odd-allotetraploid Lilium ‘Honesty’. Sci. Hortic. 2019, 235, 316–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  193. Jara, G.; Seemann, P.; Muñoz, M.; Riegel, R.; Schiappacasse, F.; Peñailillo, P.; Vico, V. Respuesta in vitro de microbulbillos de Rhodophiala montana sometidos a inducción de poliploidía en presencia de colchicina. Agro. Sur. 2006, 34, 67–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  194. Balode, A. Applying colchicine and oryzaline in Lilium L. polyploidization L. J. Agron. 2008, 11, 22–28. [Google Scholar]
  195. Zhang, X.; Cao, Q.; Jia, G. A protocol for fertility restoration of F1 hybrid derived from Lilium × formolongi ‘Raizan 3′ × oriental hybrid ‘Sorbonne’. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2017, 129, 375–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  196. Wang, L.J.; Zhang, Q.; Cao, Q.Z.; Gao, X.; Jia, G.X. An efficient method or inducing multiple genotypes of tetraploids Lilium rosthornii Diels. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2020, 141, 499–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  197. Van Tuyl, J.M.; Meijer, B.; van Diën, M.P. The use of oryzalin as an alternative for colchicine in in-vitro chromosome doubling of Lilium and Nerine. Acta Hortic. 1992, 352, 625–630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  198. Chauvin, J.E.; Label, A.; Kermarrec, M.P. In vitro chromosome-doubling in tulip (Tulipa gesneriana L.). J. Hort. Sci. Biotech. 2006, 80, 693–698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  199. Chandanie, M.A.; Singh, S.K.; Sindhu, S.S.; Singh, A.; Tomar, S.M.S.; Prasad, K.V. Efficacy of oryzalin as a potent chemical for in vitro induction of polyploids in Asiatic lily (Lilium hybrida L.) var. Polyanna. India. J. Genet. Plant Breed. 2011, 71, 262–268. [Google Scholar]
  200. Podwyszyńska, M. In vitro tetraploid induction in tulip (Tulipa gesneriana L.). Acta Hortic. 2012, 961, 391–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  201. Takamura, T.; Lim, K.B.; van Tuyl, J.M. Effect of a new compound on the mitotic polyploidization of Lilium longiflorum and Oriental hybrid lilies. Acta Hortic. 2002, 572, 37–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  202. Eeckhaut, T.; Van der Veken, J.; Dhooghe, E.; Leus, L.; Van Laere, K.; Van Huylenbroeck, J. Plant Ploidy Breeding in Ornamentals, 1st ed.; Van Huylenbroeck, J., Ed.; Springer: Cham, Germany, 2018; pp. 145–173. [Google Scholar]
  203. Chung, M.Y.; Chung, J.D.; van Tuyl, J.M.; Lim, K.B. Overcoming F1 sterility of intersectional OA lily hybrids by somatic chromosome doubling. Korean J. Chem. Eng. 2004, 31, 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  204. Beers, C.M.; Barba-Gonzalez, R.; van Silfhout, A.A.; Ramanna, M.S.; van Tuyl, J.M. Mitotic and meiotic polyploidization in lily hybrids for transferring Botrytis resistance. Acta Hortic. 2005, 673, 449–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  205. Manzoor, A.; Ahmad, T.; Bashir, M.A.; Hafiz, I.A.; Silvestri, C. Studies on colchicine induced chromosome doubling or enhancement of quality traits in ornamental plants. Plants 2019, 8, 194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  206. Miri, S.M. Artificial polyploidy in the improvement of horticultural crops. J. Plant. Breed. Physiol. 2020, 10, 1–28. [Google Scholar]
  207. Jian, J.; Fang, L.; Tan, X.; Yuan, G.; Xu, P.; Zhou, S. Hybridization and chromosome doubling for potted Asiatic lilies (Lilium). J. Agri. Biotech. 2013, 21, 627–630. [Google Scholar]
  208. Xie, S.; Ramanna, M.S.; van Tuyl, J.M. Simultaneous identification of three different genomes in Lilium hybrids through multicolour GISH. Acta Hortic. 2010, 855, 299–304. [Google Scholar]
  209. Fu, L.; Zhu, Y.; Li, M.; Wang, C.; Sun, H. Autopoliploid induction via somatic embryogenesis in Lilium distichum Nakai and Lilium cernuum Komar. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2019, 139, 237–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  210. Ming, S.; Xiao-fan, L.; Ying, K.; Jin-fang, S.; Qi-xing, Z. Polyploidy induction of three Lilium species endemic to China (Lilium pumilum, L. sargentiae, L. tsingtauense). Acta Hortic. 2012, 935, 83–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  211. Van Tuyl, J.M.; van Holsteijn, H.C.M. Lily breeding research in the Netherlands. Acta Hortic. 1996, 414, 35–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  212. Feng, Y.; Xu, L.; Yang, P.; Xu, H.; Cao, Y.; Tang, Y.; Yuan, S.; Ming, J. Production and identification of a tetraploid germplasm of edible Lilium davidii var. unicolor Salish via chromosome doubling. HortScience 2017, 52, 946–951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  213. Touchell, D.H.; Palmer, I.E.; Ranney, T.G. In vitro ploidy manipulation for crop improvement. Front. Plant Breed. 2020, 11, 722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  214. Cao, Q.; Zhang, X.; Gao, X.; Wang, L.; Ji, G. Effect of ploidy level on the cellular, photochemical and photosynthetic characteristics in Lilium FO hybrids. Plan. Physiol. Biotech. 2018, 133, 50–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  215. Gabryszewska, E.; Podwyszyńska, M.; Sochacki, D. In vitro polyploidization of Lilium martagon. Plant Sci. 2014, 6, 48–51. [Google Scholar]
  216. Jeloudar, N.I.; Chamani, E.; Shokouhian, A.A.; Zakaria, R.A. Induction and identification of polyploidy by colchicine treatment in Lilium regale. Cytologia 2019, 84, 2712–2776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  217. Li, S.; Lin, Y.; Pei, H.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, J.; Luo, J. Variations in colchicine-induced autotetraploid plants of Lilium davidii var. unicolor. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2020, 141, 479–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  218. North, C. Artificial chromosome doubling in Narcissus and its implication for breeding N. tazetta hybrids. Acta Hortic. 1976, 63, 161–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  219. Younis, A.; Ramzan, F.; Hwan, Y.J.; Lim, K.B. FISH and GISH: Molecular cytogenetic tools and their applications in ornamental plants. Plan. Cell Rep. 2015, 34, 1477–1488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  220. Ramzan, F.; Younis, A.; Lim, K.B. Application of Genomic in situ hybridization in horticultural science. Int. J. Genom. 2017, 2017, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  221. Ramzan, F.; Younis, A.; Lim, K.B.; Bae, S.H.; Kwon, M.J.; Ahn, S.M.; Ge, G.; Co, V.T. Analysis of Oriental × Trumpet (OT) Lilium hybrids by genomic in situ hybridization based on ploidy level. Acta Hortic. 2017, 1171, 253–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  222. Wu, H.; Ramanna, M.S.; Arens, P.; van Tuyl, J.M. Genome constitution of Narcissus variety, ‘Tête-à-Tête’, analysed through GISH and NBS profiling. Euphytica 2011, 181, 292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  223. Mizuochi, H.; Marasek, A.; Okazaki, K. Molecular cloning of Tulipa fosteriana rDNA and subsequent FISH analysis yields cytogenetic organization of 5S rDNA and 45S rDNA in T. gesneriana and T. fosteriana. Euphytica 2007, 155, 235–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  224. Hwang, Y.J.; Kim, H.H.; Kim, J.B.; Lim, K.B. Karyotype analysis of Lilium tigrinum by FISH. Hort. Environ. Biotech. 2011, 52, 292–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  225. Zeng, J.; Sun, Y.; Wan, L.; Zhong, J.; Yu, S.; Zou, N.; Cai, J.; Zhou, S. Analyzing Narcissus genome compositions based on rDNA loci on chromosomes and crossing-compatibility of 16 cultivars. Sci. Hortic. 2020, 267, 109359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  226. Marasek, A.; Hasterok, R.; Wiejacha, K.; Orlikowska, T. Determination by GISH and FISH of hybrid status in Lilium. Hereditas 2004, 140, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  227. Wang, Q.; Wang, J.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Xu, S.; Lu, Y. The application of fluorescence in situ hybridization in different ploidy levels cross-breeding of lily. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0126899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  228. Siljak-Yakovlev, S.; Peccenini, S.; Muratović, E.; Zoldoš, V.; Robin, O.; Vallès, J. Chromosomal differentiation and genome size in three European mountain Lilium species. Plant. Syst. Evol. 2003, 236, 165–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  229. Ahn, Y.J.; Hwang, Y.J.; Younis, A.; Sung, M.S.; Ramzan, F.; Kwon, M.J.; Kang, Y.I.; Kim, C.K.; Lim, K.B. Investigation of karyotypic composition and evolution in Lilium species belonging to the section martagon. Plant. Biotechnol. Rep. 2017, 11, 407–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  230. Cao, Q.; Lian, Y.; Wang, L.; Zhang, Q.; Zhao, Y.; Jia, G.; He, H. Physical mapping of 45S rDNA loci in Lilium OT hybrids and interspecific hybrids with Lilium regale. Sci. Hortic. 2019, 253, 48–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  231. Zhou, Y.P.; Wang, Z.X.; Du, Y.P.; Li, J.W.; He, H.B.; Jia, G.X. Fluorescence in situ hybridization of 35S rDNA sites and karyotype of wild Lilium (Liliaceae) species from China: Taxonomic and phylogenetic implications. Genet. Resour. Crop. Evol. 2020, 67, 1601–1617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  232. Choi, Y.H.; Ramzan, R.; Hwang, Y.J.; Younis, A.; Kim, C.H.; Lim, K.B. Using cytogenetic analysis to identify the genetic diversity in Lilium hansonii (Liliaceae), an endemic species of Ulleung Island, Korea. Hortic. Environ. Biotechnol. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  233. Marasek-Ciolakowska, A.; Podwyszynska, M. Somaclonal variation in long-term micropropagated tulips (Tulipa gesneriana L.) determined by FISH analysis. Floric. Ornam. Biotech. 2008, 2, 65–72. [Google Scholar]
  234. Wang, J.; Huang, L.; Bao, M.-Z.; Liu, G.-f. Production of interspecific hybrids between Lilium longiflorum and L. lophophorum var. linearifolium via ovule culture at early stage. Euphytica 2009, 167, 45–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  235. Li, X.; Tang, D.; Shi, Y. Morphological and Molecular Analyses of Reciprocal Hybrids between ‘Slim Whitman’ and ‘Pinza’, two Narcissus pseudonarcissus cultivars. HortScience 2017, 52, 1668–1675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  236. Podwyszyńska, M.; Niedoba, K.; Korbin, M.; Marasek, A. Somaclonal variation in micropropagated tulips determined by phenotype and DNA markers. Acta Hortic. 2006, 714, 211–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  237. Yin, Z.F.; Zhao, B.; Bi, W.L.; Chen, L.; Wang, Q.C. Direct shoot regeneration from basal leaf segments of Lilium and assessment of genetic stability in regenerants by ISSR and AFLP markers. Vitr. Cell. Dev. Biol. Plant 2013, 49, 333–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  238. Lu, G.; Zhang, X.; Zou, Y.; Zou, Q.; Xiang, X.; Cao, J. Effect of radiation on regeneration of Chinese narcissus and analysis of genetic variation with AFLP and RAPD markers. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2007, 88, 319–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  239. Simón, V.I.; Picó, F.X.; Arroyo, J. New microsatellite loci for Narcissus papyraceus (Amarillydaceae) and cross-amplification in other congeneric species. Am. J. Bot. 2010, 97, e10–e13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  240. Rehman, S.I.; Sheikh, M.Q.; Bhat, Z.A.; Khan, M.H. Genetic diversity analysis based on SSR markers in daffodils (Narcissus). Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci. 2017, 8, 2418–2427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  241. Tang, N.; Shahin, A.; Bijman, P.; Liu, J.; van Tuyl, J.M.; Arens, P. Genetic diversity and structure in a collection of tulip cultivars assessed by SNP markers. Sci. Hortic. 2013, 161, 286–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  242. Rešetnik, I.; Liber, Z.; Satovic, Z.; Cigić, P.; Nikolić, T. Molecular phylogeny and systematics of the Lilium carniolicum group (Liliaceae) based on nuclear ITS sequences. Plant. Syst. Evol. 2007, 265, 45–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  243. Muratović, E.; Hidalgo, O.; Garnatje, T.; Siljak-Yakovlev, S. Molecular phylogeny and genome size in European lilies (Genus Lilium, Liliaceae). Adv. Sci. Lett. 2010, 3, 180–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  244. Yanagisawa, R.; Kuhara, T.; Nishikawa, T.; Sochacki, D.; Marasek-Ciolakowska, A.; Okazaki, K. Phylogenetic Analysis of Wild and Garden Tulips Using Sequences of Chloroplast DNA. Acta Hortic. 2012, 953, 103–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  245. Pourkhaloee, A.; Khosh-Khui, M.; Arens, P.; Salehi, H.; Razi, H.; Niazi, A.; Afsharifar, A.; van Tuyl, J.M. Molecular analysis of genetic diversity, population structure, and phylogeny of wild and cultivated tulips (Tulipa L.) by genic microsatellites. Hortic. Environ. Biotechnol. 2018, 59, 875–888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  246. Li, J.; Price, M.; Su, M.D.; Zhang, Z.; Yu, Y.; Xie, D.F.; Zhou, S.D.; He, X.J.; Gao, X.F. Phylogeny and comparative analysis for the plastid genomes of five Tulipa (Liliaceae). BioMed. Res. Int. 2021, 2021, 6648429. [Google Scholar]
  247. Van Heusden, A.W.; Jongerius, M.C.; van Tuyl, J.M.; Straathof, T.H.P.; Mes, J.J. Molecular assisted breeding for disease resistance in lily. Acta Hortic. 2002, 572, 131–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  248. Shahin, A.; Arens, P.; van Heusden, S.; van Tuyl, J.M. Conversion of molecular markers linked to Fusarium and virus resistance in Asiatic lily hybrids. Acta Hortic. 2009, 836, 131–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  249. Shahin, A.; Arens, P.; van Heusden, A.W.; van der Linden, G.; van Kaauwen, M.; Khan, N.; Schouten, H.J.; van de Weg, W.E.; Visser, R.G.V.; van Tuyl, J.M. Genetic mapping in Lilium: Mapping of major genes and quantitative trait loci for several ornamental traits and disease resistances. Plant. Breed. 2011, 130, 372–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  250. Smulders, M.J.M.; Vukosavljev, M.; Shahin, A.; van de Weg, W.; Arens, P. High throughput marker development and application in horticultural crops. Acta Hortic. 2012, 961, 457–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  251. Tang, N.; van der Lee, T.; Shahin, A.; Holdinga, M.; Bijman, P.; Caser, M.; Viesser, R.G.F.; van Tuyl, J.M.; Arens, P. Genetic mapping of resistance to Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. tulipae in tulip. Mol. Breed. 2015, 35, 122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  252. Kishi-Kaboshi, M.; Aida, R.; Sasaki, K. Genome engineering in ornamental plants: Current status and future prospects. Plant. Physiol. Biochem. 2018, 131, 47–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  253. Ahn, C.H.; Ramya, M.; An, H.R.; Park, P.M.; Kim, Y.-J.; Lee, S.Y.; Jang, S. Progress and challenges in the improvement of ornamental plants by genome editing. Plants 2020, 9, 687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  254. Giovannini, A.; Laura, M.; Nesi, B.; Savona, M.; Cardi, T. Genes and genome editing tools for breeding desirable phenotypes in ornamentals. Plant. Cell Rep. 2021, 40, 461–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  255. Song, S.; Yan, R.; Wang, C.; Wang, J.; Sun, H. Improvement of a genetic transformation system and preliminary study on the function of LpABCB21 and LpPILS7 based on somatic embryogenesis in Lilium pumilum DC. Fisch. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 6784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  256. Zhu, H.; Li, C.; Gao, C. Application of CRISPS-Cas in agriculture and plant biotechnology. Mol. Cell Biol. 2020, 21, 661–677. [Google Scholar]
  257. Yan, R.; Wang, Z.; Ren, J.; Li, H.; Liu, N.; Sun, H. Establishment of efficient genetic transformation systems and application of CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing technology in Lilium pumilum DC. Fisch. and Lilium longiflorum White Heaven. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 2920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  258. Van Scheepen, J.; Moerman, A.; Bodegom, S. Hippeastrum cultivars zoals die in teelt en handel zijn. Bloembollenvisie 2007, 125, 29–30. [Google Scholar]
  259. Read, V.M. Hippeastrum, the Gardener’s Amaryllis, 1st ed.; Timber Press: Portland, OR, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  260. Bodegom, S.; van Scheepen, J. KAVB Registraties 2015. In Bijlage Bloembollenvisie; Koninklijke Algemeene Vereeniging voor Bloembollencultuur: Hillegom, The Netherlands, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  261. Bodegom, S.; van Scheepen, J. KAVB Registraties 2016. In Bijlage Bloembollenvisie; Koninklijke Algemeene Vereeniging voor Bloembollencultuur: Hillegom, The Netherlands, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  262. Bodegom, S.; van Scheepen, J. KAVB Registraties 2017. In Bijlage Bloembollenvisie; Koninklijke Algemeene Vereeniging voor Bloembollencultuur: Hillegom, The Netherlands, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  263. Bodegom, S.; van Scheepen, J. KAVB Registraties 2018. In Bijlage Bloembollenvisie; Koninklijke Algemeene Vereeniging voor Bloembollencultuur: Hillegom, The Netherlands, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  264. Bodegom, S.R.; Bouman, R.; van Scheepen, J. KAVB Registraties 2019. In Bijlage Bloembollenvisie; Koninklijke Algemeene Vereeniging voor Bloembollencultuur: Hillegom, The Netherlands, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  265. Matthews, V. The International Lily Register and Checklist 2007; The Royal Horticultural Society: London, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  266. Donald, D. The International Lily Register and Checklist 2007, 6th ed.; The Royal Horticultural Society: London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  267. Donald, D. The International Lily Register and Checklist 2007, 7th ed.; The Royal Horticultural Society: London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  268. Kington, S. The International Daffodil Register Classified List, 1st ed.; Royal Horticultural Society: London, UK, 2008; p. 1414. [Google Scholar]
  269. Underwood, M. The International Daffodil Register and Classified List (2008), 9th ed.; The Royal Horticultural Society: London, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  270. Underwood, M. The International Daffodil Register and Classified List (2008), 10th ed.; The Royal Horticultural Society: London, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  271. Underwood, M. The International Daffodil Register and Classified List (2008), 11th ed.; The Royal Horticultural Society: London, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  272. Underwood, M. The International Daffodil Register and Classified List (2008), 12th ed.; The Royal Horticultural Society: London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  273. Underwood, M. The International Daffodil Register and Classified List (2008), 13th ed.; The Royal Horticultural Society: London, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  274. Underwood, M. Cumulative List of Daffodils Cultivars Names Registered between 1 July 2017 and 30 June 2019; The Royal Horticultural Society: London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  275. Bowes, S.A. Breeding for basal rot resistance in Narcissus. Acta Hortic. 1992, 325, 597–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  276. Bowes, S.A.; Langton, F.A.; Hanks, G.R.; Linfield, C.A. An end in sight for basal rot. Grower 1996, 125, 34–35. [Google Scholar]
  277. Carder, J.H.; Grant, C.L. Breeding for resistance to basal rot in Narcissus. Acta Hortic. 2002, 570, 255–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  278. DaffSeek. Daffodil Database with Photos. 2021. Available online: https://daffseek.org/ (accessed on 29 June 2021).
  279. Van Scheepen, J.; Bodegom, S. Nieuwe groep bij tulpen: Coronet Groep. Greenity 2018, 13, 40–41. [Google Scholar]
  280. Van Scheepen, J.; Bodegom, S. New group for tulips: Coronet Group. Fauna & Flora International. 2019. Available online: https://aiph.org/floraculture/news/bulbs-new-group-for-tulips-coronet-group/ (accessed on 29 June 2021).
  281. Arens, P.; Tang, N.; Marasek-Ciolakowska, A.; Fu, Y.; van Tuyl, J.M. Resistance breeding in ornamentals. In Proceedings of the XII International Symposium on Flower Bulbs and Herbaceous Perennials, Kunming, China, 28 June–2 July 2016. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. A breeding programme of Hippeastrum × chmielii at Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Poland. (a) Seed germination on petri dishes; (b) hybrid seedlings in their juvenile phase under greenhouse conditions; (c) flowering of the seedlings’ population en masse in the third year after sowing.
Figure 1. A breeding programme of Hippeastrum × chmielii at Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Poland. (a) Seed germination on petri dishes; (b) hybrid seedlings in their juvenile phase under greenhouse conditions; (c) flowering of the seedlings’ population en masse in the third year after sowing.
Agronomy 11 01709 g001
Figure 2. Novelties of Hippeastrum cultivars. (a) Cultivar ‘Pierrot’ from the Galaxy Group presented by Dutch Breeding Company Fa. Gebr van Velden at Keukenhof Exhibition, the Netherlands, 2018; (b) breeding clone 0004-5 as result of further crossing of Hippeastrum × chmielii at Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Poland, preliminary classified as the Galaxy type; (c) breeding clone 0021-9 as result of further crossing of Hippeastrum × chmielii at Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Poland, preliminary classified as the Diamond type; (d) cultivar ‘Pink Glory’ belongs to the Double Galaxy Group, presented by Dutch Breeding Company Floralia at the Keukenhof Exhibition 2018; (e) cultivar novelties for 2020 presented by Brasbonitas Amaryllis–Kebol at IPM Essen, Germany, 2020.
Figure 2. Novelties of Hippeastrum cultivars. (a) Cultivar ‘Pierrot’ from the Galaxy Group presented by Dutch Breeding Company Fa. Gebr van Velden at Keukenhof Exhibition, the Netherlands, 2018; (b) breeding clone 0004-5 as result of further crossing of Hippeastrum × chmielii at Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Poland, preliminary classified as the Galaxy type; (c) breeding clone 0021-9 as result of further crossing of Hippeastrum × chmielii at Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Poland, preliminary classified as the Diamond type; (d) cultivar ‘Pink Glory’ belongs to the Double Galaxy Group, presented by Dutch Breeding Company Floralia at the Keukenhof Exhibition 2018; (e) cultivar novelties for 2020 presented by Brasbonitas Amaryllis–Kebol at IPM Essen, Germany, 2020.
Agronomy 11 01709 g002
Figure 3. Number of cultivars in the different groups of the international horticultural classification, specific to each botanical genus, registered in authorised international registers during the last 5 years: (a) Hippeastrum (2015–2019) in the Dutch Royal General Bulb Growers’ Association (KAVB), Hillegom, the Netherlands; (b) Lilium (mid-2014 to mid-2018) in the Royal Horticultural Society (RHS), London, United Kingdom; (c) Narcissus (mid-2015 to mid-2020) in the RHS, London, United Kingdom; (d) Tulipa (2015–2019) in the KAVB, Hillegom, the Netherlands (the pie charts represent the authors’ elaboration).
Figure 3. Number of cultivars in the different groups of the international horticultural classification, specific to each botanical genus, registered in authorised international registers during the last 5 years: (a) Hippeastrum (2015–2019) in the Dutch Royal General Bulb Growers’ Association (KAVB), Hillegom, the Netherlands; (b) Lilium (mid-2014 to mid-2018) in the Royal Horticultural Society (RHS), London, United Kingdom; (c) Narcissus (mid-2015 to mid-2020) in the RHS, London, United Kingdom; (d) Tulipa (2015–2019) in the KAVB, Hillegom, the Netherlands (the pie charts represent the authors’ elaboration).
Agronomy 11 01709 g003
Figure 4. Cultivar novelties of lilies. Double lilies: (a) ‘Polar Star’ and (b) ‘Diantha’ of the Dutch company C. Steenvoorden, presented at IMP Essen, Germany, 2020. Cultivars for pot production: (c) dwarf oriental ‘Magny Course’ and (d) Lily Looks series bred by Mak Breeding B.V., the Netherlands.
Figure 4. Cultivar novelties of lilies. Double lilies: (a) ‘Polar Star’ and (b) ‘Diantha’ of the Dutch company C. Steenvoorden, presented at IMP Essen, Germany, 2020. Cultivars for pot production: (c) dwarf oriental ‘Magny Course’ and (d) Lily Looks series bred by Mak Breeding B.V., the Netherlands.
Agronomy 11 01709 g004
Figure 5. Breeding clones of Narcissus (daffodils) crossed at the Research Institute of Horticulture in Skierniewice, Poland, currently propagated in vitro to obtain more bulbs for further evaluation: (a) 8–97; (b) 7–97; (c) 34–97; (d) 10–97.
Figure 5. Breeding clones of Narcissus (daffodils) crossed at the Research Institute of Horticulture in Skierniewice, Poland, currently propagated in vitro to obtain more bulbs for further evaluation: (a) 8–97; (b) 7–97; (c) 34–97; (d) 10–97.
Agronomy 11 01709 g005
Figure 6. Novelties of Tulipa cultivars presented at the Keukenhof exhibition, the Netherlands, 2018: (a) cultivar ‘Elegant Crown’, an example of the new Coronet Group; (b) ‘Perfect Love’, from the Double Early Group; (c) ‘Brest’, a double fringed cultivar (officially registered in the Fringed Group); (d) cultivar ‘Artichoke’, with a new flower shape, officially registered as Viridiflora; (e) ‘Little Queen’, from the Double Early Group.
Figure 6. Novelties of Tulipa cultivars presented at the Keukenhof exhibition, the Netherlands, 2018: (a) cultivar ‘Elegant Crown’, an example of the new Coronet Group; (b) ‘Perfect Love’, from the Double Early Group; (c) ‘Brest’, a double fringed cultivar (officially registered in the Fringed Group); (d) cultivar ‘Artichoke’, with a new flower shape, officially registered as Viridiflora; (e) ‘Little Queen’, from the Double Early Group.
Agronomy 11 01709 g006
Table 1. Reports on the inducing factor of unreduced gamete formation and their application for meiotic polyploidisation in selected ornamental bulbous crop.
Table 1. Reports on the inducing factor of unreduced gamete formation and their application for meiotic polyploidisation in selected ornamental bulbous crop.
Method of 2n Gamete InductionCropSpecies/CultivarsExplant/Treatment/HybridisationPloidy Level of Progeny PlantsReferences
Nitrous oxide (N2O) gasLiliumOriental × Asiatic (OA) hybridsFlower buds 5–10 mm in length; 6 bars (6 × 105 Pa) *, for 24 and 48 h;
Formation of 2n pollen and 2n egg cells
Crosses both as male and female: AA × OA and OA × AA; triploids, tetraploids plants[183,184]
Asiatic hybridsFlower buds at different meiotic stages; 6 atm (6.08 × 105 Pa); 24 hTetraploid cultivars were pollinated with the N2O-treated pollen; tetraploid offspring[185]
Asiatic hybrid ‘Regata’ and Lilium longiflorum ‘Hinomoto’Flower buds (17–22 mm); 6 atm (6.08 ×105 Pa); 24 h-[188]
Lilium × formolongiInduction of 2n pollen: flower buds (19–23 mm); 6 atm (6.08 × 105 Pa); 24 h
Induction of 4n embryo: plants treated with N2O 13 days after the pollination; 72 h; 6 atm (6.08 × 105 Pa)
Tetraploid seedlings developed from zygotic embryo treated with N2O gas[186]
Asiatic and Oriental hybrids; Longiflorum × Asiatic (LA) hybridsFlower buds (1–10 mm); 6 atm (6.08 × 105 Pa); 48 h;Backcrossing the N2O-treated pollen to Lilium × formolongi; triploid BC1 plants[189]
Oriental × Trumpet (OT) ‘Nymph’, ‘Gluhwein’, ‘Yelloween’ and ‘Shocking’Flower buds; prophase I–metaphase I stage of meiosis; 600 kPa (6 × 105 Pa); 48 h-[187]
TulipaTulipa gesneriana,
and Tulipa fosteriana cultivars
Bulbs 6 atm (6.08 × 105 Pa); 24 or 48 h; treated plants produced a mixture of n, 2n and aneuploid pollenLow triploid formation in crosses with the N2O-treated pollen[181]
ColchicineLiliumOriental cultivars ‘Acapulco’ and ‘Con Amore’Flower buds/0.02–0.2% colchicine injection for 72 hCrosses of mutated cultivars (2n eggs) with n pollen of ‘Acapulco’, ‘Con Amore’; diploid, triploid and aneuploid progenies[187]
CaffeineLiliumOA hybridsFlower buds of 20–23 mm and 34–37 mm in length; 0.3% caffeine injectionF1 OA hybrid backcrossed with Asiatic (A × OA; OA × A); triploid progenies[168]
Interspecific hybridisationLiliumLongiflorum-Rubellum (LR) hybridsBC1 progeny plants were obtained from back-crossing amphidiploid LLRR with L. longiflorum; BC1 plants were pollinated with tetraploid (LLLL) L. longiflorumTriploid BC1 LLR hybrids; aneuploid BC2 LLLR hybrids[190]
OA hybridsSelection of 2n gametes producing genotypes and backcrossing with Asiatic cultivar3x and 4x AOA hybrids[162,163]
LA and OA hybridsBC1 progeny plants were obtained from LA × AA, AA × LA and AA × OA crosses; F2 LA hybrids were obtained from LA × LA crossesAllotriploid BC1 LA and OA hybrids (unilateral sexual polyploidisation); allotetraploid F2 LA progenies, (bilateral sexual polyploidisation)[166]
LA and OA hybridsBC1 progeny plants were obtained from LA × AA and AA × OA crosses.Allotriploid BC1 LA and OA hybrids with numerous recombinant
chromosomes
[171]
Martagon × Asiatic (MA); OT hybridsBC1 progenies were obtained from MA × AA and OT × OO crosses; BC2 progenies of triploid OOT × OO hybridsDiploid, triploid and aneuploid BC1 progenies of the OT hybrids: aneuploid BC2 progenies of triploid OOT hybrids; triploid and aneuploid BC1 progenies of the MA hybrids[191]
Lilium auratum × Lilum henryi (AuH)Selection of 2n gametes producing genotypes and backcrossing with Oriental hybrids3x Oriental–Auratum–Henryi (OAuH) hybrids[96]
LA hybridsInterploidy cross LA × AAAA; in which LA hybrid produced 2n eggsOdd-allotetraploids LAAA hybrid[97,192]
TulipaT. gesneriana × T. fosteriana (Darwin hybrids)F1, BC1 and BC2 progenies of Darwin hybrids obtained by backcrossing to T. gesnerianaDiploid and tetraploid BC1;
diploid and aneuploid BC2 hybrids
[167]
Darwin hybrids2n gamete producing F1 Darwin hybrids were crossed with diploid and triploid T. gesneriana cultivarsDiploids and triploids from 2x × 2x (2n); tetraploid and pentaploids from 3x × 2x (2n) crosses; triploids and aneuploids from 2x × 3x crosses[149,159]
* Conversions to SI units performed by the authors of this review article.
Table 2. Recent reports on mitotic polyploidisation in selected ornamental bulbous crops.
Table 2. Recent reports on mitotic polyploidisation in selected ornamental bulbous crops.
GenusSpecies/CultivarsExplantMethod (Agent, Concentration, Time of Treatment)New CharacteristicsReferences
LiliumAsiatic lily (Lilium hybrida L. ‘Pollyanna’Bulb scales segmentsOryzalin: 30–200 µM for 2–6 h (0.001%, 0.003%, 0.005%, 0.007% or 0.01%) for 2, 4 or 6 hDelayed rooting, shorter roots, shorter leaves[199]
Lilium pumilum, Lilium sargentiae, Lilium tsingtauense Colchicine, 0.02% or 0.04%, and oryzalin, 0.006% or 0.01%, for 24 or 48 hThicker and shorter leaves, fewer stomata per leaf area unit[210]
Lilium martagon var. albumBulb scales segmentsColchicine: 0.5 (0.05%) * or 1.0 (0.1%) g L−1 for 4 h
Oryzalin: 10 and 100 mg L−1 (0.001% and 0.01%, respectively) for 4 h
Oryzalin: 0.5 and 5.0 mg L−1 (0.00005% and 0.0005%, respectively) exposure on medium for 16 weeks
Trifluralin: 0.5 or 5.0 mg L−1 (0.00005% and 0.0005%, respectively) exposure on medium for 16 weeks
-[215]
Lilium davidii var. unicolor SalisbTissue culture bulbColchicine: 0.03%, 0.05% or 0.08% for 32, 40, or 48 h
Oryzalin: 0.002%, 0.005%, 0.008% or 0.01% for 3, 6, 9, 12 or 24 h
Larger flower, thicker leaves, lower stomatal density, larger guard cells[212]
Lilium × formolongi × Oriental hybridBasal scale segmentsColchicine: 1.25 (0.004%) or 2.50 (0.008%) mM for 18, 24 or 36 hThicker epidermal and spongy tissue, more and thicker thylakoid lamellae, higher chlorophyll and carotenoid contents,
Higher net photosynthetic rate (Pn) and maximum net photosynthetic rate (Pmax)
[195] (polyploidy induction)
[214] (polyploid analysis)
Lilium distichum Nakai,
Lilium cernuum Komar
Somatic embryosColchicine: 0.01%, 0.05% or 0.1%; v/v for 24, 48 or 72 hMore leaves, broader leaves, larger stomata, higher chlorophyll content[209]
Lilium regaleBulb scalesColchicine: 0.01%, 0.05% or 0.1%; v/v for 6, 12 or 24 hIncreased length of stomata and chloroplast number of guard cell, lower stomata number per mm2[216]
Asiatic lily (‘Petit Brigitte’, ‘Orange Pixie’, ‘Black Bird’, ‘Pollyanna’)Bulb scalesOryzalin: 0.001%, 0.002%, 0.003% or 0.005% for 4 h-[207]
Lilium rosthorinii ‘Diels’Germinated seedsColchicine: 0.025–01% for 12–36 h
Oryzalin: 0.005–0.02% for 12–36 h
Larger leaves, higher germination rate of bulblets[196]
Lilium davidii var. unicolorBulb scalesColchicine: 0.025%, 0.05% or 0.1% (w/v) for 24 hFewer leaves, greater leaf width, lower stomata density and longer guard cell length[217]
Narcissus12 cultivars of N. × poetazTwin scalesColchicine: 0.1% for 8 h-[218]
Tulipa‘Fringed Black’, breeding clonesFlower stemsOryzalin; amiprophos methyl (AMP): 5 (0.0005%) or 10 (0.001%) mg L−1 7 or 14 days-[200]
‘Victor’, ‘Fringed Black’ and breeding clone Pol-D 32In vitro adventitious shoot culturesColchicine, 200 mg L−1 (0.02%); oryzalin; 5 mg L−1 (0.0005%); amiprophos methyl, 15 mg L−1 (0.0015%); or trifluralin, 100 mg L−1 (0.01%)Smaller flower, shorter flower scapes, reduced leaf width, longer stomata, larger pollen grain diameter, lower pollen fertility[148]
* Conversions to SI units performed by the authors of this review article.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Marasek-Ciolakowska, A.; Sochacki, D.; Marciniak, P. Breeding Aspects of Selected Ornamental Bulbous Crops. Agronomy 2021, 11, 1709. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11091709

AMA Style

Marasek-Ciolakowska A, Sochacki D, Marciniak P. Breeding Aspects of Selected Ornamental Bulbous Crops. Agronomy. 2021; 11(9):1709. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11091709

Chicago/Turabian Style

Marasek-Ciolakowska, Agnieszka, Dariusz Sochacki, and Przemysław Marciniak. 2021. "Breeding Aspects of Selected Ornamental Bulbous Crops" Agronomy 11, no. 9: 1709. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11091709

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop