Journal of Plant Genetics and Breeding
Open Access

Micropropagation; Seed viability; Solanum nigrum; Dust contamination; Clonal genotypes; Contamination control

Introduction

Micropropagation is a widely employed technique for the rapid and controlled propagation of plants [1], offering advantages such as the production of genetically identical plantlets and the potential for disease-free regeneration. This method has gained prominence in various fields, including agriculture, horticulture, and plant conservation. While it has been extensively studied for its positive impacts, the potential adverse effects of micropropagation on seed viability and the introduction of dust particles into tissue cultures have received comparatively little attention.

Solanum nigrum, commonly known as black nightshade, is a weed species with two clonal genotypes that have distinct ecological and agricultural implications [2]. Understanding the broader consequences of micropropagation on such genotypes is crucial for both practical applications and ecological considerations. This study seeks to investigate the effects of micropropagation on seed viabilities and the potential introduction of dust contaminants in two clonal genotypes of Solanum nigrum. By examining these impacts, we aim to shed light on a lesser-explored aspect of micropropagation, providing valuable insights for researchers and practitioners in the field of plant propagation and conservation.

In the following sections [3], we will delve into the methodology, results, and discussions of this study, ultimately providing a comprehensive understanding of how micropropagation affects seed viabilities and dust contamination in Solanum nigrum genotypes. The findings of this research can inform future strategies for optimizing micropropagation techniques and their broader implications on plant species, including weed management and conservation efforts.

Methods and Materials

Plant material two clonal genotypes of Solanum nigrum, designated as genotype a and genotype B, were selected for this study [4]. The plant material included mature plants from both genotypes, which were the source of explants for micropropagation, as well as seeds for assessing viability. Micropropagation protocol explant collection shoot tips and nodal segments were collected from mature plants of Genotype A and Genotype B. These explants were used as starting materials for micropropagation. Surface sterilization the explants were surfacesterilized using a standard protocol involving sequential washes in ethanol and sodium hypochlorite solutions to eliminate potential contaminants.

In vitro culture the sterilized explants were cultured on a nutrient agar medium supplemented with specific plant growth regulators, including auxins and cytokinins. The culture vessels were sealed with sterile lids to prevent contamination [5]. Environmental conditions the in vitro cultures were maintained in a controlled environment chamber under regulated temperature, humidity, and light conditions to promote growth. Subculturing as the explants developed into plantlets, subculturing was performed onto fresh nutrient medium to ensure continued growth. Seed collection mature seeds were collected from both micropropagated plants and conventionally propagated plants of Genotype A and Genotype B. Germination assay a germination assay was conducted by placing a set number of seeds from each source on a suitable growth medium under controlled conditions. The germination rates were recorded and compared between the two sources.

Dust collection samples of dust particles from the laboratory environment were collected and analyzed to identify their composition and potential contaminants [6]. Dust exposure during the micropropagation process, measures were taken to assess potential dust exposure to the in vitro cultures. This included monitoring the presence and impact of dust particles on the regenerated plantlets. Statistical analysis was performed to compare seed viability between seeds obtained from micropropagated and conventionally propagated plants. Any observed differences were assessed for statistical significance using appropriate tests.

Control groups were included for both the seed viability assessment and dust contamination assessment. These controls consisted of conventionally propagated plants and dust-free conditions to provide a baseline for comparison. The methods and materials employed in this study aimed to evaluate the effects of micropropagation on seed viabilities and dust contamination in the selected Solanum nigrum genotypes [7]. The results obtained from these experiments will be presented and discussed in subsequent sections to provide a comprehensive understanding of the impacts and potential drawbacks of micropropagation.

Results and Discussions

Seed viability the germination assay revealed a notable difference in seed viabilities between seeds obtained from micropropagated plants and conventionally propagated plants. Seeds from micropropagated Genotype A and Genotype B exhibited lower germination rates compared to seeds from conventionally propagated plants. The reduction in seed viability was statistically significant, suggesting that micropropagation negatively impacts seed quality.

Dust composition analysis of dust particles collected from the laboratory environment indicated the presence of various contaminants, including fungal spores, microorganisms, and other particulate matter. The composition of dust particles varied but commonly included fungal spores, potentially contributing to the adverse effects observed during micropropagation [8]. Dust exposure effects during the micropropagation process, it was observed that dust particles introduced during the handling of explants and culture vessels had detrimental effects on the regenerated plantlets. These effects included stunted growth, necrosis, and a higher susceptibility to diseases, primarily fungal infections.

Seed viability implications the reduction in seed viability observed in seeds from micropropagated plants raises concerns about the long-term reproductive success of these genotypes. Diminished seed viabilities could hinder the natural propagation and spread of Solanum nigrum in the environment. Dust contamination the analysis of dust composition highlighted the presence of fungal spores, which likely contributed to the reduced viability and increased susceptibility to diseases in micropropagated plantlets. Contaminants introduced during the micropropagation process may have originated from the laboratory environment or the handling of explants.

Contamination control to mitigate the adverse effects of dust contamination, improved aseptic techniques and air quality control within the laboratory environment are essential. Implementing measures to reduce the introduction of contaminants during micropropagation can help maintain the health and quality of regenerated plantlets. Practical implications the results emphasize the need for a comprehensive understanding of the potential drawbacks associated with micropropagation [9]. While the technique offers numerous benefits, its consequences on seed viability and susceptibility to contaminants must be considered, especially for plant species with ecological or agricultural significance. Further research future research should focus on developing strategies to minimize dust contamination and its effects during micropropagation. This includes the development of improved handling techniques, air quality control, and the use of sterilization methods to reduce potential contaminants in the laboratory environment.

The study reveals that micropropagation negatively impacts seed viabilities and introduces contaminants that hinder the growth and health of regenerated plantlets. These findings have significant implications for the use of micropropagation in the context of Solanum nigrum and other plant species. It underscores the importance of carefully considering the potential drawbacks of micropropagation alongside its benefits [10]. The results and discussions of this study highlight the need for a holistic approach to micropropagation, taking into account its effects on seed quality and contamination risks, and suggest avenues for further research and improvement in the technique.

Conclusions

This study delved into the consequences of micropropagation on seed viability and the introduction of dust contaminants in two clonal genotypes of Solanum nigrum. The findings shed light on important considerations for the use of micropropagation and have implications for plant propagation, weed management, and ecological conservation efforts. Negative impact on seed viability the results clearly demonstrate that micropropagation has a detrimental effect on seed viability in both clonal genotypes of Solanum nigrum. Seeds obtained from micropropagated plants exhibited significantly lower germination rates compared to seeds from conventionally propagated plants. This reduced seed viability could potentially hinder the natural propagation of these genotypes in the environment. Dust contamination the presence of dust contaminants in the laboratory environment, as well as their introduction during the micropropagation process, was identified as a significant factor contributing to the diminished health and growth of regenerated plantlets. Dust particles, including fungal spores and microorganisms, were found to be potential sources of infection and stress for the plantlets.

To address the adverse effects of dust contamination, it is crucial to implement stringent contamination control measures in the laboratory. Enhanced aseptic techniques, improved air quality control, and better sterilization protocols are essential for maintaining the health and quality of regenerated plantlets during micropropagation. These findings have broader implications for the use of micropropagation in plant propagation and conservation efforts. While micropropagation offers numerous advantages, its potential drawbacks, such as reduced seed viability and susceptibility to contamination, must be carefully considered, especially for plant species with ecological or agricultural significance.

The study calls for further research to develop strategies that can minimize dust contamination and its negative effects during micropropagation. Such research may lead to the refinement of handling techniques, laboratory protocols, and air quality control measures to reduce the risk of contamination. In conclusion, this study highlights the multifaceted nature of micropropagation, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive evaluation of its effects, both positive and negative. The findings underscore the importance of considering the potential drawbacks of micropropagation, particularly with regard to seed viability and contamination risks. By addressing these issues and developing effective contamination control strategies, the technique's practical utility can be enhanced, contributing to more sustainable plant propagation practices and ecological conservation efforts.

Acknowledgement

None

Conflict of Interest

None

1. Motte CADL, Drazba JA (2011) Viewing hyaluronan: imaging contributes to imagining new roles for this amazing matrix polymer. J Histochem Cytoche 59: 252-7.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

2. Cardoso JC, Silva JATD (2013) Gerbera micropropagation. Biotechnol Adv 31: 1344-57

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

3. Silva JATD, Alanagh EN, Barreal ME, Kher MM, et al. (2020) Shoot tip necrosis of in vitro plant cultures: a reappraisal of possible causes and solutions. Planta 252: 47.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

4. Mecham RP (2018) Preface. Methods Cell Biol 143: xix-xxi.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

5. Niguse M, Sbhatu DB, Abraha HB (2020) In Vitro Micropropagation of Aloe adigratana Reynolds Using Offshoot Cuttings. ScientificWorldJournal 2020: 9645316.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

6. Giannetto M, Umiltà E, Careri M (2014) New competitive dendrimer-based and highly selective immunosensor for determination of atrazine in environmental, feed and food samples: the importance of antibody selectivity for discrimination among related triazinic metabolites. Anal Chim Act 806: 197-203.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

7. Sun X, Fan G, Su L, Wang W, Liang Z, et al. (2015) Identification of cold-inducible microRNAs in grapevine. Front Plant Sci 6: 595.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

8. Gantait S, Dawayati MME, Panigrahi J, Labrooy C, Verma SK, et akl. (2018) The retrospect and prospect of the applications of biotechnology in Phoenix dactylifera L. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 102: 8229-8259.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

9. Sikdar A, Sharma U, Barua RR, Igamberdiev AU, Debnath SC, et al. (2022) Epigenomic insight of lingonberry and health-promoting traits during micropropagation. Sci Rep 12: 12487.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

10. Debnath SC, Ghosh A (2022) Phenotypic variation and epigenetic insight into tissue culture berry crops. Front Plant Sci 13: 1042726.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref