Efficiency of a Double-Phase Medium in Micropropagation of Serviceberry (Amelanchier sp.)
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Multiplication Stage (Application of 1F and 2F Media)
2.2. Rooting and Acclimation Stages (Aftermath of 1F and 2F Media)
2.3. Statistical Analyses
3. Results
3.1. Culture Proliferation
3.2. Rooting of Shoots In Vitro and Acclimation of Plantlets
3.3. Relationship Between Media and Culture Traits
3.4. Total Efficiency of the Three Micropropagation Stages
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Zatylny, A.M.; St-Pierre, R.G. Revised International Registry of Cultivars and Germplasm of the Genus Amelanchier. Small Fruits Rev. 2003, 2, 51–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, F.; Du, B.G. In vitro proliferation of Saskatoon berry (Amelanchier alnifolia Nutt.) is affected by plant growth regulators and their concentrations but less by carbon source. Indian J. Biotechnol. 2017, 16, 648–654. [Google Scholar]
- Pruski, K.; Nowak, J.; Grainger, G. Micropropagation of four cultivars of Saskatoon berry (Amelanchier alnifolia Nutt.). Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 1990, 21, 103–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Żurawicz, E.; Pluta, S.; Kucharska, D. Amelanchier—A new berry crop in Poland with good potential for commercial cultivation. Acta Hortic. 2014, 1017, 251–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lineberger, R.D. Shoot tip culture of Amelanchier laevis. Ohio Agric. Res. Dev. Cent. Res. Circ. 1981, 263, 17. [Google Scholar]
- Harris, R.E.; Mason, E.B. Two machines for in vitro propagation of plants in liquid media. Can. J. Plant Sci. 1983, 63, 311–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krueger, S.; Robacker, C.; Simonton, W. Culture of Amelanchier × grandiflora in a programmable micropropagation apparatus. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 1991, 27, 219–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brand, M.H. Agar and ammonium nitrate influence hyperhydricity, tissue nitrate and total nitrogen content of serviceberry (Amelanchier arborea) shoots in vitro. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult 1993, 35, 203–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pinker, I.; Wagner, T. Stem development of Amelanchier lamarckii (FG Schroeder) in vitro and its importance for in vitro rooting. Prop. Orn Plants 2004, 4, 53–57. [Google Scholar]
- Du, B.G.; Yang, T.X.; Wei, A.Z.; Yang, F. Tissue culture of Amelanchier alnifolia. Acta Bot. Bor. Sin. 2005, 25, 400–404. [Google Scholar]
- Du, B.G.; Yang, F.L.; Yang, T.X.; Wei, A.Z. Experiment of rooting culture and transplantation of Amelanchier alnifolia Nutt. N. Hortic. 2011, 16, 56. [Google Scholar]
- Clapa, D.; Fira, A.; Joshee, N. An efficient ex vitro rooting and acclimatization method for horticultural plants using float hydroculture. Hortscience 2013, 48, 1159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fira, A.; Magyar-Tábori, K.; Hudák, I.; Clapa, D.; Dobránszki, J. Effect of gelling agents on in vitro development of Amelanchier canadensis ‘Rainbow Pillar’. Int. J. Hortic. Sci. 2013, 19, 76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alosaimi, A.A.; Tripepi, R.R. Micropropagation of a selected clone of Amelanchier alnifolia. Acta Hortic. 2016, 1140, 297–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hunková, J.; Libiaková, G.; Fejér, J.; Gajdošová, A. Improved Amelanchier alnifolia (Nutt.) Nutt. Ex M. Roem shoot proliferation by manipulating iron source. Prop. Orn Plants 2017, 17, 103–107. [Google Scholar]
- Raeva-Bogoslovskaya, E.N.; Molkanova, O.I. Some features of clonal micropropagation of decorative cultivars of Amelanchier Medik. Bull. State Nikitsky Bot. Gard. 2020, 135, 97–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Debergh, P.C. Acclimatization techniques of plants from in vitro. Acta Hortic. 1981, 289, 291–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maene, L.J.; Debergh, P.C. Liquid medium additions to established tissue cultures to improve elongation and rooting in vivo. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 1985, 5, 23–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Molnar, G.Y. A new patented method for mass propagation of shoot cultures. Acta Hortic. 1987, 212, 125–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Viseur, J. Micropropagation of pear, Pyrus communis L., in a double-phase culture medium. Acta Hortic. 1987, 212, 117–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zimmerman, R.H. Micropropagation of woody plants: Post tissue culture aspects. Acta Hortic. 1988, 227, 489–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Diaz-Sala, C.; Rey, M.; Rodriguez, R. In vitro establishment of a cycloclonal chain from nodal segments and apical buds of adult hazel (Corylus avellana L.). Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 1990, 23, 151–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Q. Shoot multiplication of pear in double-phase medium culture. Acta Hortic. 1991, 289, 349–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Romano, A.; Noronha, C.; Martins-Loucao, M.A. Influence of growth regulators on shoot proliferation in Quercus suber L. Ann. Bot. 1992, 70, 531–536. [Google Scholar]
- Vinterhalter, B.; Neskovic, M. Factors affecting in vitro propagation of quince (Cydonia oblonga Mill). J. Hortic. Sci. 1992, 67, 39–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodriguez, R.; Diaz-Sala, C.; Cuozzo, L.; Ancora, G. Pear in vitro propagation using a double-phase culture system. HortScience 1991, 26, 62–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Litwińczuk, W. Efficiency of a double-phase medium in micropropagation of semi-dwarf apple rootstocks M.26, MM.106 and P.14. J. Fruit. Ornam. Plant Res. 2000, VIII, 97–106. [Google Scholar]
- Litwińczuk, W. Propagation of black chokeberry (Aronia melanocarpa Elliot) through in vitro culture. Electron. J. Pol. Agric. Univ. Hortic. 2002, 5. Available online: http://www.ejpau.media.pl/volume5/issue2/horticulture/art-06.html (accessed on 20 November 2025).
- Scherwinski-Pereira, J.E.; Lima, E.C.A.; Da Silva, T.L.; Mesquita, A.G.G.; Maciel, S.A.; Costa, F.H.S. Double—Phase culture system for large scale production of pineapple. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2012, 109, 263–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lopez, C.; Suarez, I. In vitro arrow cane (Gynerium sagitatum Aubl.) multiplication in double phase médium. Rev. Cienc. Agrícolas. 2018, 35, 513. [Google Scholar]
- Senapati, S.K. A double phase culture system: An economic and time saving protocol for in vitro propagation of plant. SAJ Biotechnol. 2015, 2, 101. [Google Scholar]
- Sota, V.; Benelli, C.; Çuko, B.; Kongjika, E. Effect of a double phase culture system and activated charcoal on in vitro propagation of Malus sylvestris (L.) Mill. Adv. Hortic. Sci. 2021, 35, 361–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Litwińczuk, W. Micropropagation of chokeberry by in vitro axillary shoot proliferation. In Protocols for Micropropagation of Selected Economically-Important Horticultural Plants; Lambardi, M., Ozudogru, E.A., Jain, S.M., Eds.; Methods in Molecular Biology 11013; Springer Protocols; Humana Press: Totowa, NJ, USA, 2013; pp. 179–186. [Google Scholar]
- Murashige, T.; Skoog, F. A revised medium for the rapid growth and bioassays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol. Plant. 1962, 15, 473–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lloyd, G.; McCown, B. Commercially-feasible micropropagation of mountain laurel, Kalmia latifolia, by use of shoot-tip culture. Comb. Proc. Int. Plant Propagators Soc. 1981, 30, 421–427. [Google Scholar]
- Damiano, C.; Frattarelli, A.; Giorgioni, M. Micropropagation of pear through temporary immersion. Acta Hortic. 2002, 596, 425–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Litwińczuk, W.; Borkowska, B.; Szczerba, J. Morwy (Morus sp.)—Zastosowanie, rozmnażanie w kulturach in vitro. [Mulberries (Morus sp.)—Utilisation, propagation through in vitro cultures]. Zesz. Probl. Postępów Nauk. Rol. 1999, 468, 359–370. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]


| Media Constituents | Multiplication Stage | Rooting Stage |
|---|---|---|
| Macronutrients | 25% MS | |
| N salts | 100% MS 1 | |
| K salts | 100% MS | |
| P salts | 100% MS | |
| Ca salts | 125% MS | |
| Mg salts | 125% MS | |
| Micronutrients + FeEDDHA | 100% MS 10 mg L−1 | 50% MS 5 mg L−1 |
| Vitamins | 100% WPM 2 | 100% WPM |
| Myo-inositol | 100 mg L−1 | 100 mg L−1 |
| Sucrose | 30 g L−1 | 15 g L−1 |
| BA | 1.0 mg L−1 | - |
| AdS | 10 mg L−1 | - |
| NAA | 0.1 mg L−1 | - |
| IBA | - | 2 mg L−1 |
| Agar | 7 g L−1 | 7 g L−1 |
| pH | 5.8 | 5.8 |
| Clone: | AtBr | Ball | SnCl | SL 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total number (no.) of shoots (>5 mm) | 7.5 ± 0.62 b 1 | 5.6 ± 0.50 a | 8.9 ± 0.40 c | *** |
| No. of short shoots (5–14 mm) | 1.1 ± 0.19 b | 0.5 ± 0.12 a | 1.4 ± 0.20 b | *** |
| No. of long shoots (>15 mm) incl.: | 6.4 ± 0.52 ab | 5.2 ± 0.48 a | 7.5 ± 0.35 b | ** |
| (15–30 mm) | 2.7 ± 0.31 ab | 2.2 ± 0.28 a | 3.2 ± 0.25 b | * |
| (31–44 mm) | 3.2 ± 0.30 ab | 2.8 ± 0.33 a | 4.1 ± 0.28 b | ** |
| (>45 mm) | 0.2 ± 0.06 a | 0.2 ± 0.06 a | 0.1 ± 0.05 a | ns |
| Total shoot length [mm] | 22.0 ± 1.83 ab | 18.3 ± 1.72 a | 25.8 ± 1.36 b | ** |
| Mean shoot length [mm] | 3.5 ± 0.10 a | 3.5 ± 0.12 a | 3.4 ± 0.07 a | ns |
| Callus size [mm] | 3.4 ± 0.24 a | 3.4 ± 0.13 a | 4.7 ± 0.13 b | *** |
| Percentage of cultures with vitrified shoots [%] | 19.7 b | 0 a | 15.6 b | AF 3: ** |
| Percentage of cultures with shoot tip necrosis [%] | 1.6 a | 0 a | 4.7 a | AF: ns |
| Medium Parameters | Unused Medium | Clone | SL 2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AtBr | Ball | SnCl | |||
| pH | 5.0 ± 0.05 | 4.6 ± 0.32 b 1 | 3.8 ± 0.13 a | 5.0 ± 0.17 b | ** |
| conductance [mS] | 5.3 ± 0.13 | 1.6 ± 0.31 a | 2.8 ± 0.34 b | 0.9 ± 0.07 a | *** |
| refractive index [%] | 4.5 ± 0.10 | 1.3 ± 0.29 a | 2.5 ± 0.34 b | 1.2 ± 0.15 a | ** |
| dry mass content [%] | 4.0 ± 0.18 | 0.6 ± 0.16 a | 2.2 ± 0.23 b | 0.7 ± 0.11 a | *** |
| Medium: | 1F | 2F | SL 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total number (no.) of shoots (>5 mm) | 6.2 ± 0.39 a 1 | 8.7± 0.45 b | *** |
| No. of short shoots (5–14 mm) | 1.0 ± 0.14 a | 1.0 ± 0.17 a | ns |
| No. of long shoots (>15 mm) incl.: | 5.2 ± 0.32 a | 7.7 ± 0.40 b | *** |
| (15–30 mm) | 2.5 ± 0.20 a | 2.9 ± 0.26 a | ns |
| (31–44 mm) | 2.4 ± 0.21 a | 4.5 ± 0.25 b | *** |
| (>45 mm) | 0.1 ± 0.04 a | 0.2 ± 0.05 a | ns |
| Total shoot length [mm] | 16.9 ± 1.06 a | 27.8 ± 1.43 b | *** |
| Mean shoot length [mm] | 3.3 ± 0.08 a | 3.7 ± 0.07 b | *** |
| Callus size [mm] | 3.6 ± 0.15 a | 4.2 ± 0.16 b | ** |
| Percentage of cultures with vitrified shoots [%] | 9.7 a | 14.8 a | AF 3: ns |
| Percentage of cultures with shoot tip necrosis [%] | 4.3 b | 0.0 a | AF: * |
| Medium Parameters | Unused Medium | Medium (Treatment) | SL 2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1F | 2F | 1F | 2F | ||
| pH | 5.1 ± 0.09 | 5.0 ± 0.04 | 4.4 ± 0.18 a 1 | 4.7 ± 0.28 a | ns |
| conductance [mS] | 5.6 ± 0.08 | 5.0 ± 0.05 | 1.9 ± 0.33 a | 1.5 ± 0.27 a | ns |
| refractive index [%] | 4.5 ± 0.21 | 4.4 ± 0.00 | 1.7 ± 0.27 a 1 | 1.4 ± 0.27 a | ns |
| dry mass content [%] | 4.3 ± 0.21 | 3.6 ± 0.11 | 1.2 ± 0.28 a | 1.0 ± 0.22 a | ns |
| Clone: | AtBr | Ball | SnCl | SL 2 | SLint 3 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Medium: | 1F | 2F | 1F | 2F | 1F | 2F | ||
| Total number (no.) of shoots (>5 mm) | 7.1 ± 0.74 b 1 | 7.9 ± 0.97 b | 3.7 ± 0.48 a | 8.3 ± 0.68 bc | 8.1 ± 0.52 bc | 9.8 ± 0.57 c | *** | * |
| No. of short shoots (5–14 mm) | 1.2 ± 0.26 bc | 1.0 ± 0.28 abc | 0.4 ± 0.12 a | 0.5 ± 0.24 ab | 1.5 ± 0.27 c | 1.4 ± 0.30 c | * | ns |
| No. of long shoots (>15 mm) incl.: | 5.8 ± 0.62 b | 6.9 ± 0.81 bcd | 3.3 ± 0.45 a | 7.7 ± 0.67 cd | 6.6 ± 0.39 bc | 8.4 ± 0.55 d | *** | * |
| (15–30 mm) | 2.9 ± 0.41 b | 2.8 ± 0.48 ab | 1.8 ± 0.29 a | 2.8 ± 0.51 ab | 3.1 ± 0.30 b | 3.2 ± 0.39 b | * | ns |
| (31–44 mm) | 2.7 ± 0.39 b | 3.8 ± 0.43 cd | 1.4 ± 0.29 a | 4.6 ± 0.45 de | 3.2 ± 0.34 bc | 5.0 ± 0.40 e | *** | * |
| (>45 mm) | 0.2 ± 0.09 a | 0.2 ± 0.08 a | 0.1 ± 0.04 a | 0.3 ± 0.11 a | 0.1 ± 0.04 a | 0.2 ± 0.09 a | ns | ns |
| Total shoot length [mm] | 19.0 ± 2.03 b | 24.7 ± 2.91 bc | 10.6 ± 1.53 a | 28.6 ± 2.01 c | 21.3 ± 1.40 b | 30.2 ± 2.07 c | *** | * |
| Mean shoot length [mm] | 3.3 ± 0.16 ab | 3.6 ± 0.12 bc | 3.2 ± 0.18 a | 3.9 ± 0.13 c | 3.2 ± 0.09 a | 3.6 ± 0.09 bc | ** | ns |
| Callus size [mm] | 3.2 ± 0.32 ab | 3.7 ± 0.34 ab | 3.1 ± 0.17 a | 3.8 ± 0.19 bc | 4.4 ± 0.22 cd | 5.0 ± 0.14 d | *** | ns |
| Percentage of cultures with vitrified shoots [%] | 13.8 b | 25.0 b | 0 a | 0 a | 15.6 b | 15.6 b | AF 4: * | - |
| Percentage of cultures with shoot tip necrosis [%] | 3.4 a | 0 a | 0 a | 0 a | 9.4 a | 0 a | AF: ns | - |
| Medium Parameters | Unused Medium | Combination | SL 2 | SLint 3 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AtBr | Ball | SnCl | ||||||||
| 1F | 2F | 1F | 2F | 1F | 2F | 1F | 2F | |||
| pH | 5.1 ± 0.09 | 5.0 ± 0.04 | 4.5 ± 0.66 abc 1 | 4.7 ± 0.15 bc | 3.6 ± 0.09 a | 4.1 ± 0.18 ab | 4.8 ± 0.23 bc | 5.3 ± 0.21 c | * | ns |
| conductance [mS] | 5.6 ± 0.08 | 5.0 ± 0.05 | 1.6 ± 0.44 ab | 1.7 ± 0.52 ab | 3.1 ± 0.42 c | 2.4 ± 0.55 bc | 1.0 ± 0.10 a | 0.8 ± 0.05 a | ** | ns |
| refractive index [%] | 4.5 ± 0.21 | 4.4 ± 0.00 | 1.3 ± 0.51 ab | 1.3 ± 0.34 ab | 2.7 ± 0.41 c | 2.2 ± 0.61 bc | 1.3 ± 0.30 ab | 1.0 ± 0.04 a | * | ns |
| dry mass content [%] | 4.3 ± 0.21 | 3.6 ± 0.11 | 0.6 ± 0.13 a | 0.6 ± 0.31 a | 2.4 ± 0.35 b | 2.0 ± 0.29 b | 0.8 ± 0.16 a | 0.6 ± 0.16 a | *** | ns |
| Clone: | AtBr | Ball | SnCl | SL 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean shoot length [mm] | 2.8 ± 0.06 b 1 | 3.3 ± 0.05 c | 2.3 ± 0.05 a | *** |
| Callus size [mm] | 3.7 ± 0.41 a | 4.6 ± 0.13 b | 6.1 ± 0.20 c | *** |
| No. of roots | 6.4 ± 0.41 b | 6.9 ± 0.33 b | 4.5 ± 0.33 a | *** |
| Mean root length [mm] | 0.9 ± 0.06 a | 1.1 ± 0.06 a | 2.9 ± 0.17 b | *** |
| Percentage of rooted shoots [%] | 95.5 b | 99.2 c | 63.5 a | AF 3: * |
| Percentage of acclimated plantlets [%] | 89.7 b | 90.7 b | 56.7 a | AF: * |
| From Medium: | 1F | 2F | SL 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean shoot length [mm] | 2.9 ± 0.05 b 1 | 2.7 ± 0.06 a | * |
| Callus size [mm] | 5.2 ± 0.14 b | 4.4 ± 0.17 a | * |
| No. of roots | 6.2 ± 0.29 a | 5.9 ± 0.33 a | ns |
| Mean root length [mm] | 1.4 ± 0.09 a | 1.5 ± 0.11 a | ns |
| Percentage of rooted shoots [%] | 88.9 b | 82.5 a | AF 3: * |
| Percentage of acclimated plantlets [%] | 89.3 b | 66.9 a | AF: * |
| Clone: | AtBr | Ball | SnCl | SL 2 | SLint 3 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Medium: | 1F | 2F | 1F | 2F | 1F | 2F | ||
| Mean shoot length [mm] | 2.9 ± 0.07 c 1 | 2.6 ± 0.08 b | 3.3 ± 0.09 d | 3.3 ± 0.06 d | 2.6 ± 0.06 b | 2.0 ± 0.07 a | *** | ** |
| Callus size [mm] | 4.4 ± 0.15 b | 2.8 ± 0.29 a | 4.7 ± 0.21 b | 4.4 ± 0.14 b | 6.5 ± 0.25 c | 5.7 ± 0.30 c | *** | * |
| No. of roots | 6.7 ± 0.56 c | 5.9 ± 0.60 bc | 6.7 ± 0.42 c | 7.1 ± 0.50 c | 4.8 ± 0.46 ab | 4.1 ± 0.48 a | *** | ns |
| Mean root length [mm] | 0.8 ± 0.05 a | 1.1 ± 0.11 ab | 1.2 ± 0.10 b | 1.0 ± 0.07 ab | 2.8 ± 0.20 c | 3.0 ± 0.28 c | *** | ns |
| Percentage of rooted shoots [%] | 98.3 bc | 92.0 b | 100 c | 98.3 bc | 68.3 a | 58.8 a | AF 4: * | - |
| Percentage of acclimated plantlets [%] | 100 d | 76.6 bc | 100 d | 83.1 c | 70.0 b | 43.3 a | AF: * | - |
| Part A | pH | Cond. | RI | DMC | Call.II | Vitr. | Shoot Necr. | Call.III | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| medium pH | x | −0.97 *,1 | −0.93 * | −0.89 * | 0.78 | 0.67 | 0.33 | 0.41 | ||||
| medium conductance (cond.) | −0.97 * | x | 0.95 * | 0.91 * | −0.79 | −0.76 | −0.44 | −0.40 | ||||
| medium refractive index (RI) | −0.93 * | 0.95 * | x | 0.99 * | −0.59 | −0.87 * | −0.33 | −0.14 | ||||
| medium dry mass content (DMC) | −0.89 * | 0.91 * | 0.99 * | x | −0.49 | −0.91 * | −0.36 | −0.07 | ||||
| culture vitrification (vitr.) | 0.67 | −0.76 | −0.87 * | −0.91 * | 0.35 | x | 0.24 | −0.18 | ||||
| callus size II stage (call.II) | 0.78 | −0.79 | −0.59 | −0.49 | x | 0.35 | 0.22 | 0.60 | ||||
| callus size III stage (call.III) | 0.41 | −0.40 | −0.14 | −0.07 | 0.60 | −0.18 | 0.63 | x | ||||
| Part B | stage II | stages III + IV | ||||||||||
| shoot number | shoot length | shoot | root | |||||||||
| length [mm]: | <5 | 15–30 | 31–45 | >45 | total | mean | R% 2 | length | length | number | A% 3 | |
| medium pH | 0.93 * | 0.89 * | 0.60 | 0.03 | 0.62 | 0.08 | −0.81 * | −0.92 * | 0.69 | −0.80 | −0.76 | |
| medium conductance (cond.) | −0.95 * | −0.91 * | −0.58 | 0.05 | −0.61 | −0.05 | 0.83 * | 0.92 * | −0.72 | 0.83 | 0.77 | |
| medium refractive index (RI) | −0.93 * | −0.86 * | −0.51 | −0.07 | −0.55 | −0.07 | 0.64 | 0.87 * | −0.49 | 0.68 | 0.61 | |
| medium dry mass content (DMC) | −0.92 * | −0.81 * | −0.42 | −0.04 | −0.46 | −0.01 | 0.56 | 0.82 * | −0.41 | 0.61 | 0.51 | |
| culture vitrification (vitr.) | 0.76 | 0.60 | 0.29 | −0.08 | 0.33 | −0.01 | −0.43 | −0.74 | 0.29 | −0.55 | −0.44 | |
| callus size II stage (call.II) | 0.62 | 0.73 | 0.73 | −0.09 | 0.72 | 0.25 | −0.95 * | −0.82 * | 0.91 * | −0.90 * | −0.97 * | |
| callus size III stage (call.III) | 0.44 | 0.30 | 0.04 | −0.50 | 0.03 | −0.42 | −0.69 | −0.32 | 0.79 | −0.58 | −0.41 | |
| Clone: | AtBr | Ball | SnCl | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Medium: | 1F (Control) | 2F | 1F (Control) | 2F | 1F (Control) | 2F |
| A. Stage II Number of long shoots (>15 mm) 1 | 5.8 | 6.9 | 3.3 | 7.7 | 6.6 | 8.4 |
| B. Stage III Percentage of rooted shoots [%] | 98.3 | 92.0 | 100 | 98.3 | 68.3 | 58.8 |
| C. Stage IV Percentage of acclimated plantlets [%] | 100 | 76.6 c | 100 | 83.1 | 70.0 | 43.3 |
| B × C [%] | 98.3 | 70.5 | 100 | 81.7 | 47.8 | 25.5 |
| D. Number of obtained plantlets (A × B × C) | 5.7 | 4.9 | 3.3 | 6.3 | 3.2 | 2.1 |
| E. Micropropagation efficiency [%] 2 | 100 | 86 | 100 | 190.9 | 100 | 65.6 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Litwińczuk, W.; Jacek, B.; Siekierzyńska, A. Efficiency of a Double-Phase Medium in Micropropagation of Serviceberry (Amelanchier sp.). Agronomy 2025, 15, 2694. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15122694
Litwińczuk W, Jacek B, Siekierzyńska A. Efficiency of a Double-Phase Medium in Micropropagation of Serviceberry (Amelanchier sp.). Agronomy. 2025; 15(12):2694. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15122694
Chicago/Turabian StyleLitwińczuk, Wojciech, Beata Jacek, and Aleksandra Siekierzyńska. 2025. "Efficiency of a Double-Phase Medium in Micropropagation of Serviceberry (Amelanchier sp.)" Agronomy 15, no. 12: 2694. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15122694
APA StyleLitwińczuk, W., Jacek, B., & Siekierzyńska, A. (2025). Efficiency of a Double-Phase Medium in Micropropagation of Serviceberry (Amelanchier sp.). Agronomy, 15(12), 2694. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15122694

