Effects of Explant Source and Orientation on Secondary Somatic Embryogenesis in Hevea brasiliensis

TL;DR

This study explores how the position of plant tissue fragments affects the growth of new embryos in rubber trees, aiming to improve propagation efficiency.

Contribution

The study reveals that explant orientation significantly impacts secondary somatic embryogenesis in Hevea brasiliensis.

Findings

Orienting the abaxial side of explants first yields the highest secondary somatic embryos.

Embryos are induced from epidermal and adjacent cells on the adaxial side.

Biochemical changes correlate with morphological shifts during embryogenesis.

Abstract

Propagation of rubber tree (Hevea brasiliensis) via secondary somatic embryogenesis (SSEis) is a reliable method. However, its efficiency is relatively low. The aim of this study was to understand more about the factors related to SSEis in rubber trees, trying to improve the efficiency of somatic embryo (SE) yield. Our study showed that the orientations of explants, i.e., the fragments of primary SE (PSE), on the medium affected secondary SE (SSE) yield significantly. Among five experimental tests, the highest yield was 2.6 ± 0.9 secondary somatic embryos (SSEs) per explant, which was achieved by orienting the abaxial side of the explant in contact with the medium and then the adaxial side after a period of culture time. Based on histological evidence, SSEis was induced from the epidermal cells and adjacent cells on the adaxial side of the explants. A remarkable difference in embryogenic capacity difference existed among individual PSE. The concentrations of soluble proteins, starch, soluble sugars, and the superoxide dismutase activity (SOD) levels in the explants were measured during a 25-day long SSEis induction treatment and compared between explants of high and low embryogenic capacity. This study proves that the explant orientation toward the culture medium plays a crucial role in SSEis, while the concentration changes of these biochemical compounds correlate to morphological changes in the explants during induction, as do the changes in SOD activity. Furthermore, the trend of the dynamic changes in the explants reflected a process of de-differentiation and re-differentiation, which started from mature SE tissues during SSE induction.

Figures