Next Article in Journal
Analysis of Genetic Diversity and Resistance to Foliar Pathogens Based on Genotyping-by-Sequencing of a Para Rubber Diversity Panel and Progeny of an Interspecific Cross
Next Article in Special Issue
Ecophysiological Differentiation among Two Resurrection Ferns and Their Allopolyploid Derivative
Previous Article in Journal
ACC Deaminase Produced by PGPR Mitigates the Adverse Effect of Osmotic and Salinity Stresses in Pisum sativum through Modulating the Antioxidants Activities
Previous Article in Special Issue
Phylogenomics and Systematics of Overlooked Mesoamerican and South American Polyploid Broad-Leaved Festuca Grasses Differentiate F. sects. Glabricarpae and Ruprechtia and F. subgen. Asperifolia, Erosiflorae, Mallopetalon and Coironhuecu (subgen. nov.)
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Plants
Volume 11
Issue 24
10.3390/plants11243420
plants-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Retention of Mutations in Colchicine-Induced Ornamental Succulent Echeveria ‘Peerless’

by
Raisa Aone M. Cabahug
1,
My Khanh Thi Ha Tran
2,
Yun-Jae Ahn
3 and
Yoon-Jung Hwang
1,2,*
1
Plant Genetics and Breeding Institute, Sahmyook University, Seoul 01795, Republic of Korea
2
Department of Convergence Science, Sahmyook University, Seoul 01795, Republic of Korea
3
Department of Horticultural Science, Kyungpook National University, Daegu 41566, Republic of Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Plants 2022, 11(24), 3420; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11243420
Submission received: 26 October 2022 / Revised: 25 November 2022 / Accepted: 3 December 2022 / Published: 7 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Diversification in Plants through Polyploidization and Hybridization Processes)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Mutation breeding has produced promising results, with exceptional attributes including pest/disease and environmental tolerance and desirable ornamental traits. Among the tools used in mutation breeding, chemical mutation is the most inexpensive way to develop novel plants. Succulents have gained popularity with high market demand because they require minimal watering and have plastic-like visuals. Ornamental succulents with rare leaf morphologies are costly. An LD50 study was conducted beforehand to determine the survival rates of colchicine-treated Echeveria ‘Peerless’. Mutants in the first generation (MV1) were identified and analyzed. Determining whether mutagenic characteristics are carried to the subsequent generation (MV2) is a key component in breeding programs. Additional investigation was performed by producing MV2 plants through vegetative propagation to determine mutagenic retention. For MV2, mutants exhibited shortened leaves, increased leaf width and thickness, and fewer leaves, which significantly differed from the control, indicating compactness, wider leaf apex, and varying leaf color. To confirm the mutations, stomatal analysis was conducted, wherein there was a decrease in density and an increase in stomatal size. Likewise, chromosome counting and flow cytometry analysis confirmed the induction of polyploidization. Colchicine induction to develop new cultivars with novel phenotypic and cytogenetic characters is suitable for ornamental succulents.

1. Introduction

A booming industry with an estimated annual growth rate of USD 500 million, floriculture is an important sector in agriculture, with a high demand to develop new varieties with improved attributes [1]. Growing in hype among millennials, succulent potted plants have been raved about and have increased market demand [2]. This is due to their beautiful geometric shapes, rosette-formed structures, unique leaf shapes, and most importantly, these plants require minimal care and watering, which fits the current lifestyle of busy metropolitan areas [3]. The peculiar leaf shape and color variation of succulents increase their ornamental value, thus demanding a higher selling price [4]. To produce these unique visual characteristics, natural breeding and cultural management practices are implemented; however, the former method requires years to develop, whereas the latter produces changes that may disappear under seasonal or environmental conditions (i.e., lighting conditions, watering, and temperature) [5].
To modify these plant characteristics and retain their unique features, the genetic information of a plant must be stably changed through mutagenesis [6]. Mutation breeding allows the induction of abrupt variations in the heritable DNA of a living cell or any organism without undergoing genetic recombination or natural breeding [7]. Among the tools used in mutation breeding, induced mutations using chemical mutagens are preferred because of their effectiveness (high mutation rates), ease of handling, and few detrimental effects. Additionally, this method produces long-lasting desirable changes compared with physical mutations that require sophisticated facilities [8,9].
Colchicine, an alkaline mitotic inhibitor, is a mutagen that has been reported to effectively induce morphological changes in ornamental plants such as chrysanthemum [10], gladiolus [11], marigolds [12], and orchids [13]. The mechanism by which colchicine induces compactness and change in color, size, and thickness of leaves and floral structure depends on its ability to inhibit microtubule formation and alter the chromosome number [14,15,16]. This process often results in polyploidization, which has also been found to exhibit such plant polymorphisms [17].
Our previous studies on the use of colchicine on leaf cuttings successfully produced putative succulent mutants using colchicine at certain concentrations and dipping durations [18]. This was conducted because there is scant information available regarding the attainable range and degree of effects of chemical mutagenesis on asexually propagated succulent species or cultivars. The results of our previous study suggested that colchicine treatments induced compactness in plants, which exhibited fewer, shorter but thickened leaves compared with those of the control. In addition, stomatal changes were also evident, as less dense stomates were found with increased stomatal size. Genome size evaluation using flow cytometry also revealed mixoploidy in these putative plants. These observed changes were also reported by other researchers using colchicine and have been attributed to polyploidization for both phenotypic and plant organ traits, as well as stomatal characteristics [19,20].
The question remains as to whether the retention of induced mutations brought about by mutagenesis in the first generation (MV1) will be carried on to its subsequent generation (MV2). Hence, this study was conducted to evaluate the mutagenic effects of colchicine on selected Echeveria ‘Peerless’ from MV1 to MV2 at both the phenotypic and cytogenetic levels.

2. Results and Discussion

During screening for mutants, Eng and Ho [21] suggested that the use of indirect (i.e., morphological and physiological traits, including plant measurements and stomatal evaluation) and direct (i.e., chromosome counting and flow cytometry) methods is needed. However, the latter method is preferred because of its accuracy, uninfluenced by environmental conditions, and high reliability. Our study used both direct and indirect methods to evaluate the retention of mutagenic changes in the primary generation of colchicine-treated Echeveria ’Peerless’.

2.1. Phenotypic Traits

To determine phenotypic differences, plant and leaf parameters were evaluated to assess the growth and development of mutant plants. Likewise, lamellae color was measured and analyzed through spectrophotometric color readings using the CIELAB color space.

2.1.1. Plant Growth Parameters

Parameters of plant and leaf measurements are shown in Table 1 for Echeveria ‘Peerless’ for two successive generations. Data on mutant plant growth and development showed varied effects across treatments; however, there was a clear difference between the control plants and the putative mutants.
In both generations, the results indicate that colchicine-treated succulents were generally taller plants with shorter, wider, and thicker leaves and fewer than those of the control (Figure 1).
These developmental differences in leaf measurements reflected equivalent changes in leaf shape and apex. Figure 2 highlights the differences between control and mutant plants, wherein the leaves were altered from being cuneate in the control to being obovate in the mutants with much wider and less prominent tips.
Several studies have reported that colchicine-induced mutants among ornamental crops, such as calendula, chrysanthemums, gladiolus, and petunia [15,19,22,23], exhibited thicker leaves, darker colors in their leaves and flowers, and high compactness, which were attributed to polyploidy plants [17].
Polyploids have been found to possess more advantageous features than their diploid counterparts. They demonstrate superior environmental adaptability, disease resistance, and prominent features [24]. These changes are associated with the application of colchicine as an effective mutagen that prevents the formation of microtubules and spindle fibers, which in turn leads to chromosome doubling and polyploid induction [25,26]. The compactness exhibited in E. ‘Peerless’ may be due to ‘high-ploidy syndrome’, in which the mutants display enhanced cell expansion but reduced cell division or slower growth rates [27].

2.1.2. Leaf Spectrophotometric Color Readings

The color of the lamellae of the plants was also evaluated. Spectrophotometric color readings were obtained using a spectrophotometer that uses the L*a*b* color spaces to indicate lightness, hue, and saturation, respectively. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine significant differences in the mean CIELAB scores (L*, a*, and b*) (Table 2).
Colchicine treatment did not significantly affect the L* and b* values. However, it significantly affected a* values (p < 0.01) in E. ‘Peerless’ MV1 plants. This shows that the control plants had a more dominant red hue than the mutant plants.
In the subsequent generations, all color spaces were found to be significantly affected by colchicine treatment (p < 0.05). Lighter colors were observed in treated plants with a lesser red hue and less saturation than in the control.
These types of color changes in the leaves of colchicine-treated mutants have often been attributed to abnormalities in chlorine production in the gladiolus [19], as this micronutrient is actively involved in photosynthesis [28], turgor regulation [29], and elongation and growth [30]. Conversely, other studies have suggested that reduced chlorophyll content in colchicine-treated plants may be due to structural modification of the lamellar or thylakoid membranes of the chloroplast [31].
The retention of phenotypic traits from MV1 to MV2 may be attributed to the stability of the mutation in the subsequent generation. Similarly, upon induced polyploidy in the first generation, the use of vegetative propagation allows fixation and maintenance of the desired genotype under domestication, which has been commonly used in numerous ornamentals [32].

2.2. Stomata Characteristics

Results show that colchicine treatment significantly affected the stomatal characteristics of E. ‘Peerless’ for both generations (p ≤ 0.001), as shown in Table 3.
For both successive generations, the stomatal density decreased in the colchicine-induced mutants with increased stomatal size, wherein control plants showed the smallest stomatal size. Additionally, higher concentrations (0.6% and 0.8%) resulted in larger stomata (Figure 3).
Manzoor et al. [17,19] emphasized that these changes in stomatal size are commonly observed in mutagen-induced polyploids. Likewise, determining stomatal changes, especially identifying an increase in size, has often been used as an indicator of putative mutants, which is a simple and non-destructive method for mutant screening [33,34].
As polyploids incite cell enlargement, stomatal dimensions are equally affected. Cells carrying larger genomic material ultimately grow to retain a constant ratio between the nuclear and cytoplasmic volume, which then enhances the expression of proteins brought about by the increase in the gene number [35]. Similar results of enlarged stomata and decreased density have been found in colchicine-induced horticultural and agronomic crops, such as Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni [36], Gladiolus grandifloras [19], Glycyrrhiza glabra [33], and African marigolds [37]. Consistent trends for stomatal data for successive generations suggested that mutagenic characteristics were retained from the MV1 stage.

2.3. Chromosome Counting and Nuclear DNA Genome Size Estimation Using Flow Cytometry

The Crassulaceae family possesses very small chromosomes, within which the Echeveria genus has been reported to have a great diversity of larger gametic numbers ranging from n = 12–34 to n = 260 [38,39]. Because of the wide range of chromosome numbers in both n and 2 n, a few species that were identified as diploids could possess chromosome numbers as high as those of polyploids [39,40]. However, there have been no reports of chromosome counting in cultivars circulating in succulent or ornamental markets.
In this study, E. ‘Peerless’ control and putative plants were subjected to chromosome counting (Table 4). However, among the mutant groups, only those with lower concentrations (0.2% and 0.4%) produced young roots for mitotic chromosome counting. This may be due to the slow growth reported for chemically induced polyploids.
Chromosome counts from the control plants yielded 2 n = > 110, while those of the colchicine-treated plants in both generations were almost twice the number at MV1 (2 n = > 204–206) and MV2 (2 n = > 184–202) (Figure 4). In MV1, the chromosome number was found to be a proportionally higher number at higher concentration, given that at 0.4% it had 2 n= > 215, followed by those at 0.2% with 2 n = > 206. Some studies have reported that some Echeveria species possess as high as 6 x–10 x ploidy levels, with about a 2 n = 260~270 chromosome number [39,40,41].
It is probable that there was a slight decrease in the number of chromosomes in MV2. However, based on the retained morphological expression, this had little to no effect on the compactness of the plants. However, other qualitative characteristics such as disease resistance or environmental adaptability may be affected and should be investigated at a later stage. Likewise, several reports have shown that chromosomal instability is recognized in polyploids [42,43]. On the other hand, the study of Pierre et al. [44] reported chromosome losses among chemically induced polyploids, but they became stable over time.
The karyotype indicated in the chromosome count successfully identified chromosome doubling. Chromosome doubling or, as it is often referred to, ‘polyploidization’, is often pointed out as the root cause for the increase in biomass yield [27] and phenotypic changes [17], which play a vital role in cultivar development as well as normal plant growth and development. Zhou et al. [45] reported that the application of colchicine in plants restrains microtubules and inhibits gene expression of cytokinesis, which leads to slow cell activity, which would explain the slow plant growth observed in E. ‘Peerless’.
Flow cytometry (FCM) is a reliable tool for analyzing the genome sizes of various plant species as well as a screening method for putative mutants and cultivars using regenerated young plant tissues [46]. The use of flow cytometry to estimate the DNA genome size of E. ‘Peerless’ significantly shows and supports the chromosome doubling found in the chromosome counting (Table 5). Compared with the control (1.06 pg), plants within the mutant groups for both the subsequent generations had significantly doubled genome sizes.
As seen in the histogram of the FCM (Figure 5), 2 C peaks of the control (A) were found in channel 8, while the mutant group 2 C peaks were found further away in channels 16 to 20, indicating a significant peak difference in the genome size estimates. This includes both results for the succeeding generations. It was also observed that the dip in the chromosome number for MV1 to MV2 was identified using FCM. However, the differences in the chromosome number within the mutant group were not as significant as those in the control group. Similar results of increased nuclear DNA content are found in colchicine-induced plants, such as Platanus acerifolia [47], Gerbera lines [48], and Catharanthus roseus [49], which confirms that the analyzed plants exhibit polyploidy.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Plant Materials

Putative mutants from 3 h of treatment at various colchicine concentrations (0.2%, 0.4%, 0.6%, and 0.8%) from a previous study were evaluated for the retention of mutagenic traits. The E. ‘Peerless’ mutants were grown in a succulent nursery in Goyang City, Gyeonggi-do Province, South Korea.
Surviving mutant plants were considered MV1. Vegetative propagation of leaf cuttings from the three lower whorls (location of the mature leaves) was collected from succulent mutant plants and planted, and the resulting progenies were considered MV2 (Figure 6).

3.2. Plant Management

All the plants were watered once per week. Dead leaf cuttings were removed to avoid possible infection to other growing leaf cuttings from the decaying ones. The average temperature was 24 ± 3 °C, and the relative humidity was 65–70%.

3.3. Data Collection

3.3.1. Phenotypic Evaluation

Plant (height, diameter, and number of leaves) and leaf (length, width, and thickness) growth parameters were measured, and morphological characteristics (leaf shape and apex) were observed. The CIELAB color readings were obtained using a handheld spectrophotometer (CM−2600 d; Konica Minolta Inc., Tokyo, Japan).

3.3.2. Stomatal Characteristics

Putative plants were sampled for stomatal evaluation by collecting leaves near the base whorl. The nail varnish technique was used to evaluate the stomatal size and density [50]. Microscopic observations of stomatal impression slides were performed under a light microscope (Olympus BX53 F, Tokyo, Japan) at 40× and 80× magnifications. To determine the stomatal density, three counts were obtained per leaf at three adjacent locations across the surface. The stomatal size was measured using ImageJ software (v. 1.52 a, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA).

3.3.3. Chromosome Counting

Young roots were harvested from in vivo grown mutant E. ‘Peerless’ under ice-cold water and were treated with 2 mM 8-hydroxyquinoline for 5 h at 25 °C. Carnoy’s solution (3:1 acetic acid–ethanol) was used to fix the roots overnight at room temperature and stored in 70% ethanol at 4 °C to preserve the roots. The fixed root tips were washed with distilled water prior to enzyme treatment (0.3% cellulose, cytohelicase, and pectolyase) at 37 °C for 90 min. The enzyme-treated roots were transferred to a 1.5 mL tube containing Carnoy’s solution and vortexed for 20 s. The homogenized root meristems were placed on ice for 5 min and centrifuged at 13,000 rpm to collect pellets. The supernatant was discarded, and the pellet was immediately resuspended in acetic acid–ethanol (9:1) solution. The final suspension was spread on a 70 °C pre-warmed glass slide using the steam drop method [51].

3.3.4. Flow Cytometry Analysis

Flow cytometry analysis was performed based on the methods of Dolezel et al. [52]. Healthy young leaves (approximately 20 mg) from the putative mutants were chopped using a sharp razor blade and put on a petri dish, and 1 mL of ice-cold nuclei isolation buffer was added. The homogenate was mixed by pipetting up and down the solution to avoid air bubbles. The mixture was then filtered through a 50 µm nylon mesh and further filtered through a 30 µm nylon mesh (CellTrics Filters, Sysmex Asia Pacific, Singapore). The final homogenate was labeled and 50 µL propidium iodide (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA, cat. no. P4170; Molecular Probes; cat. no. P3566) was simultaneously added to 50 µL RNase (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA, cat. no. R5000) and placed in a 1.5 mL Eppendorf tube (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA, T9786-1000EA).
Thereafter, the tube was placed in a CytoFLEX flow cytometer equipped with a 50 mW 488 nm solid-state diode laser (Beckman Coulter Inc., Pasadena, CA, USA). An external method of DNA content analysis was employed, which involved successive analysis of the sample and the standard (Glycine max cv ‘Polanka’) [53]. The peaks of both the standard and sample were compared using CytExpert v2.3 software (Beckman Coulter Inc., Pasadena, CA, USA), and the sample DNA content was computed.

3.3.5. Statistical Analysis

Numerical data obtained from the morpho-anatomical evaluation were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA). Significant differences between means were analyzed using Duncan’s multiple range test (DMRT) at a 5% significance level. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 22 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).

4. Conclusions

Satisfying all methods for confirming polyploidization for both successive generations of colchicine-induced E. ‘Peerless’ was undertaken in this study. Along with the phenotypic and stomatal traits, combined with a more intensive method in chromosome counting and FCM analysis, colchicine-induced E. ‘Peerless’ mutants were found to successfully retain their mutagenic characteristics in the succeeding generation through vegetative propagation. Through chemical mutagenesis, these mutants were found to possess novel genetic and phenotypic variations. This convenient and efficient method of creating new cultivars with high ornamental value will demand higher market prices and increased revenue for succulent breeders, nurseries, and other key players in the ornamental industry, as well as other related plant species.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.A.M.C. and Y.-J.H.; methodology, M.K.T.H.T., Y.-J.A. and R.A.M.C.; formal analysis, R.A.M.C.; writing—original draft preparation, R.A.M.C., M.K.T.H.T. and Y.-J.H.; writing—review and editing, R.A.M.C. and Y.-J.H.; supervision, Y.-J.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant and funded by the Korean government (MSIT) (2020R1F1A1075112).

Data Availability Statement

The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Singh, H.P. Landscape gardening for ecological and aesthetic gains. In Floriculture and Landscape Gardening; Malhotra, S.K., Ram, L., Eds.; Central Institute of Horticulture: Nagaland, India, 2017; pp. 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  2. Millennials & Succulents: What Is All the Hype behind These Plump Plants? Available online: https://extension.illinois.edu/blogs/good-growing/2019-06-19-millennials-succulents-what-all-hype-behind-these-plump-plants (accessed on 10 October 2021).
  3. Edwards, E.J.; Ogburn, R.M. Plant venation: From succulence to succulents. Curr. Biol. 2013, 23, 340–341. [Google Scholar]
  4. Sevik, H.; Karakas, H.; Karaca, U. Color—Chlorophyll relationship of some indoor ornamental plants. Int. J. Eng. Sci. Res. Technol. 2013, 2, 1706–1712. [Google Scholar]
  5. Cabahug, R.A.M.; Khanh, H.T.T.M.; Lim, K.B.; Hwang, J.J. Phenotype and ploidy evaluation of colchicine-induced Echeveria ‘Peerless’. Toxicol. Environ. Health Sci. 2021, 13, 17–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Foster, B.P.; Shu, Q.Y. Plant mutagenesis in crop improvement: Basic terms and applications. In Plant Mutation Breeding and Biotechnology; Shu, Q.Y., Foster, B.P., Nakagawa, H., Eds.; Food and Agriculture Organization: Rome, Italy, 2011; pp. 9–20. [Google Scholar]
  7. van Harten, A.M. Mutation Breeding: Theory and Practical Application. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  8. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Available online: https://www.mvgs.iaea.org/LaboratoryProtocals.aspx (accessed on 9 August 2021).
  9. Pathirana, R. Plant mutation breeding in agriculture. CAB Rev. 2011, 32, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. He, M.; Gao, W.; Gao, Y.; Liu, Y.; Yang, X.; Jiao, H.; Zhou, Y. Polyploidy induced by colchicine in Dendranthema indicum var. aromaticum, a scented chrysanthemum. Eur. J. Hortic. Sci. 2016, 81, 219–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Suzuki, K.; Takatsu, Y.; Ginai, T.; Kasumi, M. Plant regeneration and chromosome doubling of wild gladiolus species. Acta Hortic. 2005, 673, 175–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Sadhukhan, R.; Ganguly, A.; Singh, P.K.; Sarkar, H.K. Study of induced polyploidy in African marigold (Tagetes ecrecta L.). Environ. Ecol. 2014, 32, 1219–1222. [Google Scholar]
  13. Vichiato, M.R.M.; Vichiato, M.; Pasqual, M.; Castro, D.M.D.; Dutra, L.F. Tetraploidy induction and identification in Dendrobium nobile Lindl (Orchidaceae). Rev. Cienc. Agron. 2007, 38, 385–390. [Google Scholar]
  14. Glazunova, A.; Hazieva, F.; Samatadze, T. Effect of Colchicine treatment on the cariology and morphology signs of Polemonium caeruleum L. BIO Web Conf. 2019, 17, 00210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. El-Nashar, Y.I.; Ammar, M.H. Mutagenic influences of colchicine on phenological and molecular diversity of Calendula officinalis L. Genet. Mol. Res. 2016, 15, 15027745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Kumar, M.K.; Rani, M.U. Colchiploidy in fruit breeding. A review. Horticulturae 2013, 2, 325–326. [Google Scholar]
  17. Manzoor, A.; Ahmad, T.; Bashir, M.A.; Hafiz, I.A.; Silvestri, C. Studies on colchicine induced chromosome doubling for enhancement of quality traits in ornamental plants. Plants 2019, 8, 194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  18. Cabahug, R.A.M.; Khanh, H.T.T.M.; Lim, K.B.; Hwang, J.J. Phenotype and Ploidy Analysis of the Colchicine-induced M1 Generation of Echeveria Species. Hortic. Sci. Technol. 2020, 38, 522–537. [Google Scholar]
  19. Manzoor, A.; Ahmad, T.; Bashir, M.A.; Baig, M.M.Q.; Quresh, A.A.; Shah, M.K.N.; Hafiz, I.A. Induction and identification of colchicine induced polyploidy in Gladiolrandiflorasrus ‘White Prosperity’. Folia Hortic. 2018, 30, 307–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Tiwari, A.K.; Mishra, S.K. Effect of colchicine on mitotic polyploidization and morphological characteristics of Phlox drummondi. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 2012, 11, 9336–9342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Eng, W.H.; Ho, W.S. Polyploidization using colchicine in horticultural plants: A review. Sci. Hortic. 2019, 246, 604–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ning, G.G.; Shi, X.P.; Hu, H.R.; Yan, Y.; Bao, M.Z. Development of a range of polyploidy lines and Petunia hybrida and the relationship of ploidy with the single-/double-flower trait. HortScience 2009, 44, 250–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Kushwah, K.S.; Verma, R.C.; Patel, S.; Jain, N.K. Colchicine induced polyploidy in Chrysanthemum carinatum L. J. Phylogenet. Evol. Biol. 2018, 6, 193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Eeckhaut, T.; Van Huylenbroek, J.; De Schepper, S.; Van Labeke, M.C. Breeding for polyploidy in Belgian azalea (Rhododendron simsii hybrids). Acta Hortic. 2006, 714, 113–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Castro, C.M.; Oliveria, A.C.; Calvaho, F.I.F. Changes in allele frequencies in colchicine treated ryegrass population with APD marker. Agrociencia 2003, 9, 107–112. [Google Scholar]
  26. Blakeslee, A.F.; Avery, A.G. Method of inducing doubling of chromosomes in plants by treatment with colchicine. J. Hered. 1937, 28, 393–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Corneillie, S.; De Storme, N.; Van Acker, R.; Fangel, J.U.; De Brunye, M.; De Rycke, R.; Geelen, D.; Willats, W.G.T.; Vanholme, B.; Boerjan, W. Polyploidy affects plant growth and alters cell wall composition. Plant Physiol. 2019, 179, 78–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  28. Kobayashi, M.; Katoh, H.; Ikeuchi, M. Mutations in a putative chloride efflux transporter gene suppress the chloride requirement of photosystem II in the cytochrome c550-deficient mutant. Plant Cell Physiol. 2006, 47, 799–804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  29. Flowers, T.J. Chloride as a nutrient and as an osmoticum. In Advances in Plant Nutrition; Tinker, P.B., Laüchli, A., Eds.; CABI: New York, NY, USA, 1988; Volume 3, pp. 55–78. [Google Scholar]
  30. Franco-Navarro, J.D.; Brumós, J.; Rosales, M.A.; Cubero-Font, P.; Talón, M.; Colmenero-Flores, J.M. Chloride regulates leaf cell size and water relations in tobacco plants. J. Exp. Bot. 2016, 67, 873–891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  31. Xu, L.; Najeeb, U.; Naeem, M.S.; Daud, M.K.; Cao, J.S.; Gong, H.J. Induction of tetraploidy in Juncus effusus by colchicine. Biol. Plantarum 2010, 54, 659–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Zohary, D. Domestication of Crop Plants. In Encyclopedia of Biodiversity; Levin, S.A., Ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2013; pp. 217–227. [Google Scholar]
  33. Moghbel, N.; Borujeni, M.K.; Bernard, F. Colchicine effect on the DNA content and stomata size of Glycyrrhiza glabra var. glandulifera and Carthamus tinctorius L. cultured in vitro. J. Genet. Eng. Biotech. 2015, 13, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Huang, H.; Gao, S.; Wang, D.; Huang, P.; Li, J. Autotetraploidy induced in Nianmaohuangqin (Radix Scutellariae viscidulae) with colchicine in vitro. J. Trad. Chin. Med. 2014, 34, 199–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Chen, Z.J.; Ni, Z. Mechanisms of genomic rearrangements and gene expression changes in plant polyploids. Bioessays 2006, 28, 240–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Azizan, N.I.; Shamsiah, A.; Hasan, N.A.; Hussein, S. Morphological characterization of colchicine-induced mutants in Stevia rebaudiana. IOP Conf. 2020, 757, 012006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Sajjad, Y.; Jaskani, M.J.; Mehmood, A.; Ahmad, I.; Abbas, H. Effect of colchicine on in vitro polyploidy induction in African marigold (Tagetes erecta). Pak. J. Bot. 2013, 45, 1255–1258. [Google Scholar]
  38. Low, J.E. The Echeverias, some facts about this genus, flowers, culture. Int. Crassulaceae Netw. 2007, 2, 1–2. [Google Scholar]
  39. Uhl, C.H. Chromosomes and hybrids of Echeveria X. South American species of Series Nudae. Haseltonia 2006, 12, 31–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Uhl, C.H. Chromosomes and hybrids of Echeveria. 4. Series Urceolatae E. Walther. Haseltonia 1996, 4, 66–88. [Google Scholar]
  41. Palomino, G.; Martínez-Ramón, J.; Cepeda-Cornejo, V.; Ladd-Otero, M.; Romero, P.; Reyes-Santiago, J. Chromosome number, ploidy level, and nuclear DNA content in 23 species of Echeveria (Crassulaceae). Genes 2021, 12, 1950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Comai, L. The advantages and disadvantages of being polyploid. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2005, 6, 836–846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Yant, L.; Bomblies, K. Genome management and mismanagement—Cell-level opportunities and challenges of whole-genome duplication. Genes Dev. 2015, 29, 2405–2419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  44. Pierre, P.M.; Sousa, S.M.; Davide, L.C.; Machado, M.A.; Viccini, L.F. Karyotype analysis, DNA content and molecular screening in Lippia alba (Verbenaceae). An. Acad. Bras. Cien. 2011, 83, 993–1006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Zhou, K.; Fleet, P.; Nevo, E.; Zhang, X.; Sun, G. Transcriptome analysis reveals plant response to colchicine treatment during on chromosome doubling. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 8503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Sattler, M.C.; Carvalho, C.R.; Clarindo, W.R. The polyploidy and its key role in plant breeding. Plants 2016, 243, 281–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Liu, G.; Li, Z.; Bao, M. Colchicine-induced chromosome doubling in Platanus acerifolia and its effect on plant morphology. Euphytica 2007, 157, 145–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Tosca, A.; Pandolfi, R.; Citterio, S.; Fasoli, A.; Sgorbati, S. Determination by flow cytometry of the chromosome doubling capacity of colchicine and oryzalin in gynogenetic haploids of gerbera. Plant Cell Rep. 1995, 14, 455–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Xing, S.H.; Guo, X.; Wang, Q.; Pan, Q.F.; Tian, Y.; Liu, P.; Zhao, J.; Wang, G.; Sun, S.; Tang, K.X. Induction and flow cytometry identification of tetraploids from seed-derived explants through colchicine treatments in Catharanthus roseus (L.) G. Don. BioMed Res. Int. 2011, 2011, 793198. [Google Scholar]
  50. Gitz, G.C.; Baker, J.T. Methods for creating stomatal impressions directly onto achievable slides. Agron. J. 2009, 101, 232–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Kirov, I.; Divashuk, M.; Laere, K.V.; Soloviev, A.; Khrustaleva, L. An easy “SteamDrop” method for high quality plant chromosome preparation. Mol. Cytogenet. 2014, 7, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  52. Dolezel, J.; Greilhuber, J.; Suda, J. Estimation of nuclear DNA content in plants using flow cytometry. Nat. Prot. 2007, 2, 2233–2244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Temsh, E.M.; Kouteckym, P.; Urfus, T.; Smarda, P.; Dolezel, J. Reference standards for flow cytometric estimation of absolute nuclear DNA content in plants. J. Quant. Cell Sci. 2021, 101, 710–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Plants 11 03420 g001 550
Figure 1. Echeveria ‘Peerless’ plants treated with colchicine: (A) control at MV1 (B) 0.2% + 3 h, (C) 0.4% + 3 h, (D) 0.6% + 3 h, and (E) 0.8% + 3 h and at MV2 (F) 0.2% + 3 h, (G) 0.4% + 3 h, (H) 0.6% + 3 h, and (I) 0.8% + 3 h.
Figure 1. Echeveria ‘Peerless’ plants treated with colchicine: (A) control at MV1 (B) 0.2% + 3 h, (C) 0.4% + 3 h, (D) 0.6% + 3 h, and (E) 0.8% + 3 h and at MV2 (F) 0.2% + 3 h, (G) 0.4% + 3 h, (H) 0.6% + 3 h, and (I) 0.8% + 3 h.
Plants 11 03420 g001
Plants 11 03420 g002 550
Figure 2. Effects of colchicine on E. ‘Peerless’ showing the (A) control and (B) mutant whole plant and leaf apex.
Figure 2. Effects of colchicine on E. ‘Peerless’ showing the (A) control and (B) mutant whole plant and leaf apex.
Plants 11 03420 g002
Plants 11 03420 g003 550
Figure 3. Stomata characteristics of colchicine-induced E. ‘Peerless’, showing the (a,f) control at MV1 (b) 0.2% + 3 h; (c) 0.4% + 3 h; (d) 0.6% + 3 h; and (e) 0.8% + 3 h and at MV2 (g) 0.2% + 3 h; (h) 0.4% + 3 h; (i) 0.6% + 3 h; and (j) 0.8% + 3 h. Scale bar = 10 µm.
Figure 3. Stomata characteristics of colchicine-induced E. ‘Peerless’, showing the (a,f) control at MV1 (b) 0.2% + 3 h; (c) 0.4% + 3 h; (d) 0.6% + 3 h; and (e) 0.8% + 3 h and at MV2 (g) 0.2% + 3 h; (h) 0.4% + 3 h; (i) 0.6% + 3 h; and (j) 0.8% + 3 h. Scale bar = 10 µm.
Plants 11 03420 g003
Plants 11 03420 g004 550
Figure 4. Echeveria ‘Peerless’ chromosomes with DAPI staining: (A) control, MV1 (B) 0.2% + 3 h and (C) 0.4% + 3 h and MV2 (D) 0.2% + 3 h and (E) 0.4% + 3 h.
Figure 4. Echeveria ‘Peerless’ chromosomes with DAPI staining: (A) control, MV1 (B) 0.2% + 3 h and (C) 0.4% + 3 h and MV2 (D) 0.2% + 3 h and (E) 0.4% + 3 h.
Plants 11 03420 g004
Plants 11 03420 g005 550
Figure 5. Estimation of the nuclear DNA content of Echeveria ‘Peerless’: (A) control, MV1 (B) 0.2% + 3 h and (C) 0.4% + 3 h and MV2 (D) 0.2% + 3 h and (E) 0.4% + 3 h, showing corresponding peaks to nuclei 2 C and 4 C with an external standard test using Glycine max cv ‘Polanka’. The Y—axis of each figure indicates the count of nuclei, while the X—axis indicates the PE-A or propidium iodide fluorescence intensity.
Figure 5. Estimation of the nuclear DNA content of Echeveria ‘Peerless’: (A) control, MV1 (B) 0.2% + 3 h and (C) 0.4% + 3 h and MV2 (D) 0.2% + 3 h and (E) 0.4% + 3 h, showing corresponding peaks to nuclei 2 C and 4 C with an external standard test using Glycine max cv ‘Polanka’. The Y—axis of each figure indicates the count of nuclei, while the X—axis indicates the PE-A or propidium iodide fluorescence intensity.
Plants 11 03420 g005
Plants 11 03420 g006 550
Figure 6. Diagram showing the procedure for chemical treatment and generation of MV1–MV2 through vegetative propagation.
Figure 6. Diagram showing the procedure for chemical treatment and generation of MV1–MV2 through vegetative propagation.
Plants 11 03420 g006
Table
Table 1. Plant and leaf growth parameters of MV1 and MV2 E. ‘Peerless’ mutants treated with colchicine treatment.
Table 1. Plant and leaf growth parameters of MV1 and MV2 E. ‘Peerless’ mutants treated with colchicine treatment.
TreatmentMV1MV2
Plant (mm)Leaf (mm)Plant (mm)Leaf (mm)
HeightDiameterNo. of LeavesLengthWidthThicknessHeightDiameterNo. of
Leaves		LengthWidthThickness
Control35.53 ± 4.92 197.75 ± 5.1533.67 ± 0.8839.04 ± 7.4421.23 ± 3.955.21 ± 0.9136.32 ± 1.2465.15 ± 1.2049.00 ± 0.8445.05 ± 0.8319.18 ± 0.104.98 ± 0.12
0.2% + 3 h33.58 ± 6.4673.94 ± 3.5318.50 ± 1.5034.67 ± 1.0531.38 ± 1.145.84 ± 4.2148.45 ± 0.0085.88 ± 0.0030.00 ± 0.0041.96 ± 0.0029.97 ± 0.009.82 ± 0.00
0.4% + 3 h42.60 ± 9.2585.43 ± 5.1520.00 ± 2.0837.98 ± 3.5823.70 ± 4.967.55 ± 1.2649.57 ± 1.2083.81 ± 0.8329.00 ± 1.4133.96 ± 2.2326.97 ± 1.369.59 ± 1.14
0.6% + 3 h48.92 ± 4.1186.79 ± 2.6819.67 ± 2.0038.17 ± 3.5923.98 ± 4.358.35 ± 2.1355.95 ± 0.0090.42 ± 0.0039.00 ± 0.0041.56 ± 0.0026.27 ± 0.009.53 ± 0.00
0.8% + 3 h36.64 ± 6.0065.21 ± 2.4622.40 ± 1.8730.43 ± 3.8522.12 ± 1.3923.1 ± 1.1750.62 ± 0.7173.34 ± 2.0725.80 ± 1.3836.26 ± 0.9624.83 ± 0.748.80 ± 0.61
1 Data are presented as Mean ± Standard Error (SE).
Table
Table 2. CIELAB color values of colchicine-induced MV1–MV2 mutant E. ‘Peerless’.
Table 2. CIELAB color values of colchicine-induced MV1–MV2 mutant E. ‘Peerless’.
TreatmentMV1MV2
L*a*b*L*a*b*
Control40.73 ± 1.60 1 6.48 ± 1.08 a 212.19 ± 2.3539.13 ± 1.53 d5.52 ± 2.86 a13.19 ± 2.80 a
0.2% + 3 h47.60 ± 1.482.15 ± 0.48 c6.43 ± 0.6448.84 ± 2.66 c5.07 ± 0.92 a6.72 ± 0.58 b
0.4% + 3 h42.92 ± 3.362.00 ± 0.72 c11.91 ± 1.5949.23 ± 1.12 c3.28 ± 0.68 b7.90 ± 1.07 b
0.6% + 3 h41.18 ± 2.02−0.81 ± 0.44 e11.79 ± 2.9350.32 ± 0.54 b5.09 ± 0.62 a6.45 ± 1.12 b
0.8% + 3 h45.58 ± 2.850.51 ± 1.29 d10.50 ± 1.2753.60 ± 1.54 b2.87 ± 0.24 c7.01 ± 0.77 b
F-test 2NS**NS***
1 Data are presented as Mean ± Std Dev. 2 Columns with the same letters are not significantly different by Duncan’s multiple range test at p = 0.05. NS, *, **, non-significant or significant at p = 0.05, or 0.01, respectively.
Table
Table 3. Stomatal data on the adaxial area of control and MV1–MV2 E. ‘Peerless’ mutants treated with colchicine.
Table 3. Stomatal data on the adaxial area of control and MV1–MV2 E. ‘Peerless’ mutants treated with colchicine.
TreatmentMV1MV2
DensitySize (µm)DensitySize (µm)
Control10.33 ± 0.33 1 a 220.58 ± 0.59 d10.54 ± 0.81 a19.26 ± 0.35 d
0.2% + 3 h9.33 ± 0.88 b25.68 ± 0.74 b7.67 ± 0.67 b24.02 ± 0.14 c
0.4% + 3 h6.33 ± 0.33 c25.92 ± 0.67 b5.67 ± 0.67 c27.31 ± 0.14 b
0.6% + 3 h8.35 ± 0.89 b28.03 ± 0.25 a9.00 ± 0.00 b28.10 ± 0.03 a
0.8% + 3 h8.55 ± 0.67 b22.75 ± 0.15 c8.33 ± 0.33 b28.47 ± 0.12 a
F-test 3********
1 Data are presented as Mean ± Std Dev. 2 Columns with the same letters are not significantly different by Duncan’s multiple range test at p = 0.05. 3 NS, **, non-significant or significant at p = 0.05, or 0.01, respectively.
Table
Table 4. Chromosome number of colchicine-induced E. ‘Peerless’.
Table 4. Chromosome number of colchicine-induced E. ‘Peerless’.
TreatmentsMV1MV2
Control2 n = > 110
0.2% + 3 h2 n = > 2062 n = > 204
0.4% + 3 h2 n = > 2152 n = > 184
Table
Table 5. Nuclear DNA Genome size estimate of E. ‘Peerless’.
Table 5. Nuclear DNA Genome size estimate of E. ‘Peerless’.
Treatments2 C (Mbps) 1CV (%) 21 C (Mbps)1 C (pg) 3
Control2071.630.721035.821.06
MV1
0.2% + 3 h4949.461.042474.732.53
0.4% + 3 h4110.861.672055.432.10
MV2
0.2% + 3 h4604.740.482302.372.35
0.4% + 3 h4618.331.302309.172.36
1 Mbps—megabase pairs. 2 CV = coefficient of variation (%); reliable results should be <5%. 3 pg—picograms.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Cabahug, R.A.M.; Tran, M.K.T.H.; Ahn, Y.-J.; Hwang, Y.-J. Retention of Mutations in Colchicine-Induced Ornamental Succulent Echeveria ‘Peerless’. Plants 2022, 11, 3420. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11243420

AMA Style

Cabahug RAM, Tran MKTH, Ahn Y-J, Hwang Y-J. Retention of Mutations in Colchicine-Induced Ornamental Succulent Echeveria ‘Peerless’. Plants. 2022; 11(24):3420. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11243420

Chicago/Turabian Style

Cabahug, Raisa Aone M., My Khanh Thi Ha Tran, Yun-Jae Ahn, and Yoon-Jung Hwang. 2022. "Retention of Mutations in Colchicine-Induced Ornamental Succulent Echeveria ‘Peerless’" Plants 11, no. 24: 3420. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11243420

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