Premium
Characterization and mapping of a gene controlling shoot regeneration in tomato
Author(s) -
Koornneef Maarten,
Bade Jacob,
Hanhart Corrie,
Horsman Karin,
Schel Jan,
Soppe Wim,
Verkerk Ruud,
Zabel Pim
Publication year - 1993
Publication title -
the plant journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.058
H-Index - 269
eISSN - 1365-313X
pISSN - 0960-7412
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-313x.1993.tb00016.x
Subject(s) - lycopersicon , biology , backcrossing , locus (genetics) , shoot , explant culture , callus , restriction fragment length polymorphism , quantitative trait locus , genotype , botany , genetics , gene , in vitro
Summary The superior regeneration capacity of Lycopersicon peruvianum was introduced into the cultivated tomato Lycopersicon esculentum by backcrossing hybrid material with the tomato genotype VF11. In segregating material derived from these backcrosses, the ability to regenerate shoots on root explants cultured on a zeatin‐containing medium, was highly correlated with the ability to regenerate shoots on established callus cultures. The efficient shoot‐regenerating root explant system permitted us to study the genetics of this trait and to locate the genes involved, using a set of morphological markers defining all 12 tomato chromosomes. Depending on the tomato genotype, mono, ‐di‐ or trigenic ratios were observed. It is concluded that a dominant L. peruvianum allele at a locus ( Rg‐1 ) near the middle of chromosome 3 determines efficient shoot regeneration on root explants in tomato in combination with dominant alleles at one or two other loci of either L. peruvianum or L. esculentum origin. The map location of the Rg‐1 locus was refined further using a number of chromosome‐3‐specific RFLPs. The addition of new classical and RFLP linkage data to existing literature data and subsequent processing resulted in a revised and integrated map of tomato chromosome 3. From a morphological and physiological analysis of genotypes differing in Rg phenotype, it is concluded that the genetic component associated with regeneration determines the maintenance of morphogenetic competence and not the sensitivity to hormones.