BIOTECHNOLOGICAL APPROACHES FOR HIGH SUGARCANE YIELD

REVIEW ARTICLE

101

Plant Sciences Feed 2011 - 1 (7): 101-111

PLANT SCIENCES FEED

ISSN : 2231 - 1971Jounal Homepage : http://psf.lifescifeed.com

BIOTECHNOLOGICAL APPROACHES FOR HIGH SUGARCANE YIELD

RAKESH SINGH SENGAR, KALPANA SENGAR AND SANJAY KUMAR GARG*

A UT H O R A F F I LI A T I O N S A B S T R A C T

Tissue culture Lab, College of Biotechnology, Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel University of Agriculture & Technology, Meerut-250110*Department of plant sciences, M.J.P. Rohil Khand University, Bareilly.U.P. (India)

[email protected]

In sugarcane, biotechnological applications are yielding encouraging results in the areas of genome characterization, mapping for specific traits, molecular variability of pathogens, marker aided selection for insect/disease resistance, transformation, precise detection of plant pathogens etc. Increased sensitivity has generally made the assays for pathogens more reliable and contributes in making the assays more rapid and economical for routine detection and identification. Tissue culture is playing an important role in improving the plant quality and producing pathogen free plants. This can be used to produce clones of phytoplasma infected plants that are healthy. For virus elimination the micropropagation using the shoot apical meristem as the explants is the best way to produce virus free plants. Research efforts need to be made to minimize somaclonal variation for use in clonal propagation and transgenic research. New information on the molecular biology and genetics of selected tropical crop plants need to be generated. Genomics structure should be worked out to identify markers linked to important agronomics traits. Transgene constructs that mitigate potential environmental and biosafety risks of transgenic plants need to be developed so that it can be managed. Regulatory controls over metabolisms need to be identified and characterized to improve yield and quality of sugarcane.

© 2011 LifeSciFeed Ventures

KEYWORDS

Sugarcane,micropropagation, meristem, somaclonal variation and transgenic.

INTRODUCTION

Sugarcane occupies a distinct position as an agro-industrial crop of India, covering around 5.15 million hectares area (over 3% of the total cultivated area) with an annual cane production of 355.52 million tons (2006-2007), contributing about 9.5% to the gross value of the agricultural production in the country. About 50 million farmers and equal number of agricultural laborers depend on sugarcane for their livelihood. Half a million skilled workers are also engaged in the sugar industry. A total of 453 sugar factories crushed 194.4 million tons of cane (69% of

total cane production) producing 20.14 million tons of sugar. Average yield of sugarcane in India is about 69 tons per hectare. India ranks second in world sugar production next to Brazil. The crop sustains the second largest agro-industry next to cotton and textile industry in the country. In addition sugarcane also supports a large number of open pan sugar (Khandsari) and Jaggery (Gur) units in unorganized sector.

The commercially cultivated crops of sugarcane have two geographic centers of origin viz. New Guinea and Northern India. The large erected tropical species of sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum) was perhaps

Sengar et al. (2011) Biotechnological approaches ….

Plant Sciences Feed Vol 1 Issue 7

102

10

2

originated from the wild species Saccharum robustum in New Guinea region and included certain important commercial noble canes such as Bourbon, Cheribon, Tonna or Caledonia. The north Indian sugarcane, such as S. sinense and S. barberi are believed to have originated from natural hybridization between migrating forms of S. officinarum and S. spontaneum [1]. These noble canes were characterized by thick stems, soft rind, high tonnage, low fibre and high sugar contents. These canes subsequently got modified through interspecific natural hybridization. Taxonomically, sugarcane belongs to major grass family Gramineae (now called Poaceae), sub-family Panicoideae, super tribe Andropogoneae, sub-tribe Saccharineae and genus Saccharum [2].

Among the four domesticated cane species, viz. S. officinarum, S. barberi, S. sinense and S. edule, the S. officinarum L. is a noble cane with thick stalks and often colorful longitudinal stripes on the stalk, 3-4 metres in height with few tillers, a high sucrose content and soft rind. This species was the original, soft sweet tasting chewing cane. Noble cane is now grown for commercial sugar production all over the country.

Sugarcane occupies a distinct position as an agro-industrial crop of India, covering around 5.15 million hectares area (over 3% of the total cultivated area) with an annual cane production of 355.52 million tonnes (2006-2007), contributing about 9.5% to the gross value of the agricultural production in the country. About 50 million farmers and equal number of agricultural laborers depend on sugarcane for their livelihood. Half a million skilled workers are also engaged in the sugar industry. A total of 453 sugar factories crushed 194.4 million tonnes of cane (69% of total cane production) producing 20.14 million tonnes of sugar. Average yield of sugarcane in India is about 69 tonnes per hectare. India ranks second in world sugar production next to Brazil. The crop sustains the second largest agro-industry next to cotton and textile industry in the country. In addition sugarcane also supports a large number of open pan sugar (Khandsari) and Jaggery (Gur) units in unorganized sector.

In India sugarcane is cultivated under a wide range of agro-climatic conditions, both in tropical and subtropical regions between 0-10 and 10-30 latitudes respectively. In tropical climate the cultivation of

sugarcane is more successful in terms of cane yield and sugar recovery throughout the year. Among the subtropical states, Uttar Pradesh is a major sugarcane growing state. The total area under sugarcane cultivation is about 22.47 Lakh hectares with an average yield of about 59.6 tonnes per hectare and sugar production of about 84.75 Lakh Tonnes [3]. However, the average yield per hectare and sugar recovery are lower than the national average. Thus, sugarcane production offers continuing challenge to the development of high yielding, high sugared and disease resistant clones in Uttar Pradesh. Attempts to evolve productive varieties of sugarcane are being made by conventional breeding methods for last several decades.

PROBLEM AREAS AND CHALLENGES

There is increasing pressure worldwide to enhance the productivity of sugarcane in order to sustain profitable sugar industries [4]. The conventional breeding programmes are being run successfully at different sugarcane research institutes to develop new hybrid varieties with high yielding potential and high sugar contents. A series of backcrosses to S. officinarumresulted in cultivars with higher yields, improved ratooning ability and disease resistance. However, conventional breeding requires a very longer period of time (8-10 years) to develop and release an elite sugarcane variety. It also allows the perpetuation of diseases from generation to generation. Thus, new approaches in plant biotechnology have opened numerous opportunities that can be applied for precision breeding to improve varieties for specific targeted objectives and also for quick multiplication of new varieties. Major biotechnological challenges and opportunities are to improve sugarcane productivity. Recent advances in biotechnology offer several opportunities to address issues related to the development of novel, high-yielding cultivars. Attempts are being made to use recent biotechnological innovations to tackle the challenges facing the current plant improvement programs.

Slow multiplication rate and rapid spread of newly released sugarcane varieties is another major constraint. Due to limited availability of seed cane of a new variety at the time of its release, it further takes about 8-10 years to cover the desired area for commercial cultivation, by the time the variety starts



10

3

deteriorating due to biotic and abiotic stresses. It has been realized that the growing demand of seed cane material of newly released varieties could not be fulfilled in time only by the conventional methods of plant multiplication. Therefore, the use and exploitation of biotechnologies are quite essential for fast multiplication of newly released varieties.

DISEASES OF SUGARCANE

There are a number of diseases and pests which affect sugarcane yield and sugar recovery. Bacterial diseases include gumming disease caused by Xanthomonas vasculorum Dows., and leaf scald, Xanthomonas albilineans Dows. Fungal diseases such as red rot (Colletotrichum falcatum Went), root rot (Pythium graminicolum Subr.), pineapple disease (Thielaviopsis parodoxa (de Seynes) C. Moreau), downy mildew (Sclerospora sacchari Miy), and smut (Ustilago scitaminea Syd.) cause severe losses to the crop. Red rot causes the setts to be seriously damaged at low temperatures. Pineapple disease attacks the setts causing the center to turn black and smell like overripe pineapples. Downy mildew is responsible for severe losses until rigorous controls are initiated. Smut causes black whip like organs to emerge from the center of the leaf-roll and is prevalent in south east Asia and South Africa. Some important diseases of sugarcane have been categorized as under.

FUNGAL DISEASES

Under field condition occurrence of new pathogenic strains of the fungus has been reported from time to time. The red rot pathogen Colletotrichum falcatum is a facultative parasite, which keeps on mutating in nature and as a result new races of the pathogen frequently emerge out. Polyclonal antiserum has been raised against a specific polypeptides of C. falcatum mycelium which is common to a majority of pathotypes of C. falcatum. This has resulted in more specific detection of the red rot pathogen in the host irrespective of the pathogen strain infected. Existence of several pathogenic races of smut pathogen has been reported thought out the world. For the first time smut has been reported from Australia. The research efforts are being made to identify different races of smut pathogen through molecular fingerprinting.

BACTERIAL DISEASES

Serological variability of Xanthomonas albilineanposes a serious constraint in using serological techniques for the diagnosis of the pathogen. PCR probes have been developed to distinguish the serotypes of the bacterium in Mauritius. Differentation of X. albilineans strains with monoclonal antibody reaction patterns of DNA fingerprints was established.

VIRAL DISEASES

There are several known sugarcane viruses in India. Mosaic, being an important viral disease, was first recognized in Java in 1892. Mosaic disease of sugarcane occurs throughout the world except few countries and was first reported from India [5] This disease was attributed to a single Potyvirus called Sugarcane mosaic virus (SCMV) with numerous strains [6,7]. Currently, SCMV subgroup in the genus Potyvirus consists of seven different species viz. Sugarcane mosaic virus (SCMV), Sorghum mosaic virus (SrMV), Maize dwarf mosaic virus (MDMV), Johnson Grass mosaic virus (JGMV) [8,9] Zea mosaic virus (ZeMV) [10] Cocksfoot streak virus (CSV) [11] and Pennisetum mosaic virus (Pen MV) [12] Among these species, only SCMV and SrMV are known to infect sugarcane under natural conditions and are considered as the causal agents of sugarcane mosaic [13] The current classification has the original SCMV grouping consisting of four distinct potyviruses viz. SCMV, sorghum mosaic virus, Johnson grass mosaic virus, and maize dwarf mosaic virus [14]. These findings were further confirmed by coat protein sequencing peptide mapping, cytoplasmic inclusion morphology, 3-noncoading region sequence identity and molecular hybridization studies [15,16] Rao et al[16]grouped 16 isolates of potyviruses from sugarcane, maize and sorghum into two groups based on differential host reaction and serological assays. Sequence relationships among different strains of SCMV and development of RT-PCR based RFLP’S were demonstrated for strains discrimination [17]. The use of virus free planting material is the best way to limit the effect of these viruses on varietal degeneration, as it is being clonally propagated.

Phytoplasmal diseases

Sugarcane Phytoplasma is alarming in India. Grassy shoot disease (GSD), White leaf disease (WLD), Green grassy shoot disease (GGS) and Sugarcane yellow leaf



104

10

4

phytoplasma (SCYLP) is affecting sugarcane. Molecular detection is the best way to identify the Phytoplasmal diseases of sugarcane. RFLP and sequencing have been used to elucidate the relationship between Phytoplasmas that cause white leaf disease (WLD) and GSD in sugarcane and WLD in graminaceous weeds found in the cane growing areas. Phytoplasma can be eliminated by using heat therapy.

Multiplex or duplex PCR is useful in plant pathology because different bacteria and/or RNA viruses frequently infect a single host and consequently sensitive detection is needed for the propagation of pathogen free plant material [19] Further, it allows the simultaneous and sensitive detection of different DNA or RNA virus targets in a single reaction [20] Similarly, biological control measures such as the use of natural parasites, is the most effective control for most of the destructive insects of sugarcane like stem-borers and the larvae of several genera of moths.

Applications and opportunities in sugarcane biotechnology

Researches on sugarcane biotechnology began in the 1960s with in vitro culture of mature parenchyma of internodal tissues for some physiological studies [21]. Later, after demonstration of totipotency in callus cultures of sugarcane [22, 23] a rapid progress was made in cell and tissue culture of this crop and it was found that cultures could be raised from any part of the plant. Since it is now well established that the in vitromorphogenetic responses of different tissues are under the hormonal influences and are cultivar dependant, today’s need for evolving efficient and specific protocols for creating improved and stable variants is obvious. In the past few years, many laboratories around the world where sugarcane research programmes are in progress have utilized tissue culture techniques in sugarcane improvement. The major potential areas identified in in vitro culture of sugarcane include i) somaclonal variation for crop improvement, ii) micropropagation for seed cane multiplication, iii) rejuvenation of older elite varieties, iv) development of interspecific and intergeneric hybrids, v) disease resistance, vi) selection for biotic and abiotic stresses, vii) protoplast culture, viii) molecular biology, ix) genetic transformation, x) in vitro germplasm conservation, xi) artificial seed etc. Considerable progress has been made in almost all the

above areas in India [25]

Serious efforts to improve sugarcane and other crops by molecular approaches have commenced only in the past two decades. Establishment of an efficient transformation system by Bower and Birch [26] was the first major achievement towards developing an integrated molecular/conventional breeding system for sugarcane. Following this development, substantial effort has been directed to engineer agronomically useful traits into various cultivated genotypes [27, 28, 29,30,31]. Also, considerable attention has been given to the development of molecular marker technologies for sugarcane breeding and variety identification [32,33, 34] and structural and functional genomics [35,36].

Important developments that have occurred in sugarcane biotechnology to overcome the constraints in developing more productive and useful cultivars have been discussed. Biotechnology offers excellent opportunities for sugarcane crop improvement. Commercial sugarcane, mainly the interspecific hybrids of S. officinarum and S. spontaneum [37] would be greatly benefited from biotechnological improvements due to its complex polyploid–aneuploid genome, narrow genetic base, poor fertility, susceptibility to various diseases and pests. More importantly, there is an ongoing need to provide durable disease and pest resistance in combination with superior agronomic performance in the commercially exploited clones. This led to considerable research in different areas of biotechnology pertinent to sugarcane breeding and disease control. Thus the biotechnological approaches for sugarcane improvement have been applied in the areas of: (1) cell and tissue culture for rapid propagation, molecular breeding and genetic transformation; (2) engineering novel genes into commercial cultivars; (3) molecular diagnostics for sugarcane pathogens to improve exchange of Saccharum germplasm and the related genera; (4) developing genetic maps using molecular marker technology; (5) understanding the molecular basis of sucrose accumulation in the stem; (6) molecular testing of plants for clonal fidelity; (7) variety identification and (8) molecular characterization of various traits. Remarkable progress has been made in the first three areas and significant advancements are being made in the other areas in recent years.



10

5

GENETIC ENGINEERING

Besides being an important food and energy crop, there are several other reasons that make sugarcane a suitable candidate for crop improvement via genetic engineering. Genetic improvement of elite sugarcane clones by conventional breeding is difficult of its highly complex polyploid–aneuploid nature, poor fertility, and the long period (over 10 yr) required for creating new cultivars by conventional breeding. Thus traditional back-crossing to recover elite genotypes with desired agronomic traits is very time-consuming process in sugarcane. In this context genetic engineering is a very valuable tool to introduce commercially important traits into elite commercial cultivars.

Practically useful transformation systems are available for sugarcane [38, 39, 40 ] and useful transgenic lines can be maintained indefinitely by vegetative propagation. In the past decade, substantial research effort has been expended to develop efficient genetic transformation systems for sugarcane. Consequently, different transformation techniques like electroporation [41] polyethylene glycol treatment [42] particle bombardment [43] and Agrobacteriummediated genetic transformation [44,45] were used to introduce marker genes in sugarcane cells and callus. Most commercial varieties of sugarcane are vegetatively propagated and are hybrids of unknown origin that have been selected by growers and essentially cannotbe improved by traditional breeding due to their high heterozygosity. Genetic engineering would allow the insertion of specific genes into the unknown genetic background of current varieties.

IN VITRO CULTURE OF SUGARCANE

Since the pioneering work on induction of callus at the Hawaiian Sugar Planters’ Association Experiment Station by Nickell [46], cell and tissue culture of sugarcane has emerged as a valuable tool for various research activities. A few years later, the first report of sugarcane plant regeneration from callus cultures was published independently by Heinz and Mee [47] and Barba and Nickell [48]. Later, Heinz and Mee [49] demonstrated the occurrence of large variations in both chromosome number and morphological characters in the plants regenerated from callus. These initial but important findings led to the exploitation of in vitro cell and tissue culture for various applications

such as micropropagation [50] breeding [51] germplasm conservation [52], the elimination of systemic pathogens [53, 54] and genetic engineering [55, 56] in sugarcane.

SOMACLONAL VARIATION IN SUGARCANE

Sugarcane callus cultures show a considerable variation from cell to cell and among differentiated plantlets. Larkin and Scowcroft [57] have discussed in detail, various factors responsible for somaclonal variation which include karyotype changes, cryptic changes associated with chromosome rearrangement, transposable elements, somatic gene rearrangements, gene amplification and depletion, somatic crossing over and sister-chromatoid exchanges. Researchersconducted in Hawaii, Fiji, Taiwan, Australia and India clearly demonstrated that somaclonal variation is enormous and provides an opportunity for improvement of highly adapted elite sugarcane varieties with one or two defect(s) by affecting many important agronomic characters. Besides variations observed in morphological characters such as stalk height, girth, stalk colour, leaf colour, foliar characters, auricle length, bud groove, bud missing, bud shape and size, flowering etc, variations were also observed in tillering, high silicate deposits on leaf surface and differences in growth habits [58].

Significant variations were recorded in characters like cane yield, sugar yield, stalk number, length, diameter, volume, density and weight, percent fibre, auricle length, dewlap shape, hair group etc. among subclones from 8 sugarcane cultivars [59, 60], By now it is well established that there is a lot of variation among the somaclones derived from cell and tissue cultures due to numerical variations in chromosome. Phenotypic variations among somaclones have been used as potential tools for crop improvement. [61, 62, 63] Such variations associated with changes in chromosome number have led the breeders to exploit it in crop improvement programmes.

Isolation of somaclones with Fiji and downy meldew disease resistance [64, 65,66] eye spot disease resistance [67, 68] smut resistance [ 69,70 ] rust resistance [71] improvement in yield [72] and sucrose content [73, 74] are important examples. Izquierdo et al. [75] regenerated plantlets having high to moderate resistance to rust (Puccinia melanocephala) disease



106

10

6

using leaf explants of susceptible plants. Moreover, Peros et al. [76] identified stable cell lines resistant to rust (Puccinia melanocephala) disease from leaf callus culture. Several other investigators have also opined that healthy planting material could be obtained through tissue culture generated somaclonal variation. [77, 78] R.E. Coleman initiated cultures from fifteen sugarcane varieties susceptible to mosaic virus disease and regenerated numerous somaclones, out of them 116 somaclones were found resistant to this disease. They were virtually immune after more than 8 inoculations under field conditions favorable for the establishment of mosaic virus disease [49] Leaf drying characteristic of variety Co 7704, an another complex trait, could be corrected through somaclonal variation [50] The regeneration and isolation of sugarcane cell lines tolerant to salinity (NaCl) has been reported. However, after a long period of time, the callus cells lost their regeneration ability. Yasuda et al. [61] and Korneva and Maribona [62] have claimed to regenerate plants from the callus derived from redifferentiated sugarcane plantlets grown in a medium containing NaCl.

One of the major objectives of sugarcane breeder is to improve the sucrose content in juice of sugarcane cultivars. Liu and Chen [63] obtained a sugarcane subclone through callus culture with improved sugar contents. Subsequently, the development of somaclones of sugarcane with increased sugar contents was also reported by several other investigators [63, 64, 65]

These observations have clearly shown that variability for a number of characters can be obtained by passing the genotypes through tissue culture cycle. Somaclonal variation may offer additional variation to that induced through mutagenesis and such a variation can be more effective if it is successfully associated with cellular level selection and handling of large populations for screening [86] It is of common occurrence in tissue cultures of several plant species [67]

IN VITRO MUTAGENESIS

Induced mutation has become a recognized tool in crop improvement to supplement conventional breeding efforts to improve cultivars in certain specific traits. More than 2500 improved mutant varieties have been released for commercial cultivation in different crop species demonstrating the economic value of the

mutation breeding technology. The direct use of mutation is a very valuable supplementary approach of plant breeding, particularly when it is desired to improve one or few easily identifiable characters in an otherwise well adapted variety. The main advantage of mutation induction in vegetatively propagated plants is the ability to change one or few characters of an outstanding cultivar without altering the remaining genotype. Mutagenesis using cultured plant cells and tissues has generated great interest in creating novel genetic variability. In conventional mutagenesis using seeds or vegetative propagules, limitations arise mainly from large mutagenized population to be screened and from the unsatisfactory selection methods. Thus, in vitroinduced mutation could be used for sugarcane improvement [68]

MICROPROPAGATION

Micropropagation is an in vitro method for clonal multiplication of plants using shoot apical meristems as the explant. Conventionally, commercial sugarcane is propagated vegetatively by nodal cuttings, and for this reason, micropropagation offers a practical and fast method for mass production of clonal material. Mainly three routes of plant regeneration have been identified i.e. 1.Axillary shoot development, 2. Adventitious shoot development and 3. Somatic embryogenesis [69]. The 1st route is considered to be the safest one for production of true to the type clones. In sugarcane, plants can be produced by direct regeneration either from apical/axillary meristems [70] or from immature leaf tissues [71,72]. As with other plant species, sugarcane plants propagated in vitro from meristems are considered to be more genetically and phenotypically stable than those produced from callus [73]. Thus, considerable effort has been expended to investigate the adaptability of meristem culture to commercially grown elite sugarcane cultivars [74,75]. Development of a temporary immersion bioreactor system for large-scale propagation of sugarcane by Cuban researchers has also been achieved [76, 77].

SOMATIC EMBRYOGENESIS

Somatic embryogenesis is probably the most intensively investigated method of in vitro regeneration in sugarcane. Although developed originally as an alternative system to regeneration, somatic embryogenesis has achieved prominence as an integral



10

7

part of the genetic transformation system [78]. Somatic embryogenesis has been reported from a large number of commercial sugarcane clones and can be obtained directly or indirectly from the leaf tissues [79, 80, 81] Embryogenic callus can be maintained for several months without losing its regeneration potential to a significant level [82].

MOLECULAR BREEDING

Most of the current research in sugarcane biotechnology, however, is being focused on molecular breeding, primarily transgenic, and marker-assisted breeding. [83, 84] and the development of somatic embryogenesis was a turning point in sugarcane biotechnology research. The ability to induce somatic embryos in protoplast, cell suspension, and callus cultures formed the basis for the effective exploitation of transgenic technologies for sugarcane improvement.

DISEASE MANAGEMENT

The development of molecular techniques for identifying and distinguishing sugarcane pathogens continues to make rapid progress. Application of molecular techniques such as Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism (RFLP), Random Amplified Polymorphic DNA (RAPD), Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR), Immunofluorescence and enzyme linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) has been emphasized in the recent years to study molecular variation among plant pathogens.

PRODUCTION OF VIRUS AND PHYTOPLASMA FREE

PLANTS

Tissue culture techniques have been employed with variable success to recover virus and phytoplasma free sugarcane plants from infected lines. Meristem culture was successfully used to eliminate Sugarcane mosaic virus (SCMV) [84], chlorotic streak disease, ratoon stunting disease, and white leaf disease [85]. In combination with heat treatment, meristem and callus cultures were effective in producing pathogen-free stocks from plants infected with Fiji disease virus (FDV) [106] downy mildew [87] and SCMV. Recent researches showed that direct plant regeneration using thin cell layer culture could be used for rapid production of disease-free plants from sugarcane infected with FDV, SCMV [84] Cryotherapy of shoot tips was found to be an efficient method for elimination of SPLL phytoplasma

from sweet potato. Crytotherapy alone failed to eliminate RBDV that can infect meristematic tissue; however, thermotherapy followed by cryotherapy was able to eliminate RBDV. Furthermore, cryotherapy can be used simultaneously for long-term storage of germplasm and production of virus-and phytoplasma free- plants [89]

GERMPLASM CONSERVATION

Another area that attracted researchers’ interest was the application of in vitro techniques to germplasm conservation [90 Evidence to date indicates that in vitrostorage of sugarcane on low maintenance medium for extended periods causes little genetic change, suggesting its potential use for long-term conservation and international exchange of germplasm.

CONCLUSION

The scale and pace of biotechnology revolution has begun to impact over lives in so many ways that it appears that civilization is moving into the age of biotechnology. Advancements have made it possible to sequence the complete genome of increasingly complex organisms, including that of humans, and to clone and transfer individual genes to engineer new traits into various lives forms. Biotechnology is creating massive volume of information that is transforming the world’s chemical, pharmaceutical and agricultural establishment. Owing to the advancements made so far in the field of biotechnology, researches should develop a plan so that the world’s sugarcane establishment might reap the benefits of the biological revolution.

REFERENCES

[1] Stevenson GC .Genetic and breeding of sugarcane,1965; Green and Co. London

[2] Watson L, Clifford HT, Dalwitz MJ .The classification of Poaceae, sub family and supertribes. Aust J Bot 1985; 33 (4): 433-484

[3] Anonymous. Cooperative Sugar, September 2008; vol. 40(1)

[4] Hanlon D, MacMahon GG, McGuire P, Beattie RN, Stringer JK. Managing low sugar prices on farms –short term and long term strategies. In: Hogarth, D. M., ed. Proc. Aust. Soc. Sugarcane Technol 2000; 22:1–8

[5] Barber CA. The mosaic mottling disease of the sugarcane. International Sugar Journal 1921; 23:12-19



108

10

8

[6] Koike H , Gillaspie AG. Mosaic . In: Ricaud C,Egan BT, Gillaspie AG,Hughes CG (eds) Disease of sugarcane –major diseases. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1989; pp 301-322

[7] Shukla R, Khan AQ, Garg GK . In vitro clonal propagation of sugarcane: Optimization of media and hardening of plants. Indian Sugar 1994; 44: 113-116

[8] Shukla DD, Tosic M, Ford RE, Taker RW, Langham MAC. Taxonomy of Potyvirus infecting maize ,sorghum and sugarcane in Australia and United State as determined by reactivities of polyclonal antibodies directed towards virus specific N-termini of coat proteins. Phytopathology 1989; 79:223-229

[9] Arencibia A, Vazquez RI, Prieto D, Tellez P, Carmona ER, Coego A, Hernandez L, Dela Riva GA, Selman HG Transgenic sugarcane plants resistant to stem borer attack. Mol. Breed. 1997; 3: 247–255.

[10] Seifers DL, Salomon R, Marie-Jeanne V, Alliot B, Signoret P, Harber S, Laboda A, Ens W, She YM, Standing KG. Chaterization of nove potyvirusisolated from maize in Israel. Phytopathology 2000; 90 :505-513

[11] Gotz R, Maiss E . The complete sequence of the genome of Cocksfoot streak virus(CSV), a grass infecting Potyvirus. Arch Virol 2002; 147:1573-1583

[12] Fan Z, Chen H, Cai S, Deng C, Wang W, Liang X, LiH Molecular characterization of a distinct potyvirus from white grass in China. Arch Virol 2003; 148: 1219-1224

[13] Grisham MP. Mosaic. In: Rott P, Bailey R. A, Comstock J. C, Croft BJ, Saumtally AS (ed) A Guide to Sugarcane Diseases.CIRAD-ISSCT,CIRAD publication Services, Montepellier, France. 2000; pp 249-254

[14] Shukla DD, Frenkel MJ, Mckern NM, Ward CW, Jilka J, Tosic M, Ford RE. Present status of sugarcane mosaic subgroup of Potyvirus. Arch Virol [Suppl] 1992; 5:363-373

[15] Rao GP, Jain RK, Verma A . Identification of Sugarcane mosaic and maize dwarf mosaic potyviruses infecting poaceous crops in India, Phytopathol. 1998; 51:10-16

[16] Yang ZN, Mirkov TE. Sequence and relationships of sugarcane mosaic and sorghum mosaic strains and development of RT-PCR-based RFLPs for

strain discrimination. Phytopathology 1997; 87:932–939

[17] Lopez MM, Bertolini E, Olmos A, Carsuo P, Gorris MT, Llop P, Penyalve R, Cambra M. Innovative tools for detection of plant pathogenic viruses and bacteria .Int Microbiol 2003; 6:233-243

[18] Nassuth A, Pollari E, Helmeczy K, Stewart S, Kofalvi SA . Improved RNA extraction and one-tube RT-PCR assay for simultaneous detection of control plant RNA plus several viruses in plant extracts. J Virol Method 2000; 90:37-49

[19] Nickell LG . Tissue and cell cultures of sugarcane,Another research tool. Hawaii Plant Rec 1964; 57:223–229

[20] Barba R, Nickell LG. Nutrition and organ differentiation in tissue culture of sugarcane – a monocotyledon. Planta 1969; 89:299–302

[21] Heinz DJ, Mee GWP . Plant differentiation from callus tissue of Saccharum species. Crop Sci 1969; 9:346–348

[22] Sreenivasan TV, Jalaja NC. Sugarcane improvement through tissue culture. In: Plant cell culture in crop improvement. (S.K. Sen and Kenneth L. Giles, eds.), Plenum Press, New York, London, 1995; pp. 371-376

[23] Bower R, Birch RG . Transgenic sugarcane plants via microprojectile bombardment. Plant J 1992; 2:409–416

[24] Arencibia A, Vazquez RI, Prieto D, Tellez P, Carmona ER, Coego A, Hernandez L, Dela Riva GA, Selman HG Transgenic sugarcane plants resistant to stem borer attack. Mol Breed 1997; 3:247–255

[25] Enriquez-Obregon GA, Vazquez PRI, Prieto SDL, Riva-Gustavo ADL, Selman HG. Herbicide resistant sugarcane(Saccharum officinarum) Plants by Agrobacterium –Mediated Transformation. Planta 1998; 206 :20-27

[26] Setamou M, Bernal JS, Legaspi JC, Mirkov TE, Legaspi BC. Evaluation of lectin-expressing transgenic sugarcane against stalk borers (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae): effects on life history parameters. J Econ Entomol 2002; 95:469–477

[27] Manickavasagam M, Ganapathi A, Anbazhagan VR, Sudhakar B, Selvaraj N, Vasudevan A, Kasthurirengan S . Agrobacterium mediated genetic transformation and development of herbicide-resistant sugarcane (Saccharum species hybrids) using axillary buds. Plant Cell Rep 2004; 23:134–143



10

9

[28] Vickers JE, Grof CPL, Bonnett GD, Jackson PA, Morgan TE. Effects of Tissue culture , biolistic transformation, and introduction of PPO and SPS gene construct a performance of sugarcane clones in the field. Aust J Agric Res 2005; 56:57-68

[29] D’Hont A, Rao PS, Feldmann P, Grivet L, Islam FN, Taylor P, Glaszmann JC. Identification and characterisation of sugarcane intergeneric hybrids, Saccharum officinarum X Erianthus arundina-ceus, with molecular markers and DNA in situ hybridisation. Theor Appl Genet 1995; 91:320–326

[30] McIntyre L, Aitken K, Berding K, Casu R, Drenth J, Jackson P, Jordan D, Piperidis G, Reffay N, Smith G, Tao Y, Whan V, Whan V. Identification of DNA markers linked to agronomic traits in sugarcane in Australia. In: Hogarth DM, ed. Proc. Int. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol. Brisbane 2001; 24:560–562

[31] Butterfield MK, Barnes JM, Heinze BS, Rutherford RS, Huckett BI . RFLP markers for resistance to eldana and smut from an unstructured sugarcane population. Proc. Int. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Mol. Biol. Workshop, Montpellier, France 2003; 4:14

[32] Grivet L, Arruda P. Sugarcane genomics: depicting the complex genome of an important tropical crop. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol 2002; 2:122–127

[33] Da Silva FR, Telles GP, Arruda P. Clustering 300,000 sugarcane EST’s, the challenge of dealing with orthologs, peralogs, homologs and some rubbish. Proc. VII Int. Congr. Plant Mol. Biol. Barcelona, 2003; June 23–28;58

[34] Bakker H . Sugarcane cultivation and management. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers 1999

[35] Birch RG. Transgenic sugarcane: opportunities and limitations. In: Keating, B.A.; Wilson, J. R., eds. Intensive sugarcane production: meeting the challenge beyond 2000. Wallingford: CAB International, 1997; 125–140

[36] Arencibia A, Carmona E, Tellez P, Chan MT, Yu SM, Trujillo L, Oramas P. An efficient protocol for sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) transformation mediated by Agrobacterium tumefaciens. Transgenic Res 1998; 7:213–222

[37] Rathus C and Birch RG. Stable transformation of callus from electroporated sugarcane protoplasts. Plant Sci 1992; 82:81–89

[38] Chen WH, Gartland KMA, Davey MR, Sotak R, Gartland, JS, Mulligan BJ, Power JB Cocking, E. C. Transformation of sugarcane protoplasts by direct uptake of a selectable chimeric gene. Plant Cell Rep. 1987; 6: 297–301

[39] Franks T, Birch RG . Gene transfer into intact sugarcane cells using microprojectile bombardment. Aust J Plant Physiol 1991; 18:471–480

[40] Arencibia A., Molina P, De la Riva G, Selman-Houssein G. Production of transgenic sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) plants by intact cell electroporation. Plant Cell Rep 1995; 14:305–309

[41] Elliott AR, Campbell JA, Bretell RIS, Grof CPL. Agrobacterium mediated transformation of sugarcane using GFP as a screenable marker. Aust J Plant Physiol 1998; 25:739–743

[42] Nickell LG, Maretzki A. Growth of suspension cultures of sugarcane cells in chemically defined media. Physiol Plantarum 1969; 22: 117-125

[43] Heinz DJ, Mee GWP. Morphologic, cytogenetic, and enzymatic variation in Saccharum species hybrid clones derived from callus tissue. An J Bot 1971; 58: 257–262

[44] Hendre RR, Iyer RS, Kotwal, M, Khuspe SS, Mascarenhas AF . Rapid multiplication of sugarcane by tissue culture. Sugarcane 1983; May/June: 5–8

[45] Krishnamurthy M, Tlaskal J. Fiji disease resistant Saccharum officinarum var. Pindar sub-clones from tissue cultures. Proc. Int. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol. 1974; 15:130–137

[46] Taylor PWJ, Dukic S. Development of an Invitroculture technique for conservation of Saccharumspp. hybrid germplasm. Plant Cell Tiss Organ Cult 1993; 34:217–222

[47] Wang Q, Valkonen JPT . Elimination of virus and phytoplasma by cryotherapy of in vitro-grown shoot tips, 1st meeting on “Cryopreservation of Crop Series in Europe” 2007; pp 58-59

[48] Larkin PJ, Scowcroft WR. Somaclonal variation- a novel source of variability from cell cultures for plant improvement. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 1981, 60: 197-214

[49] Heinz DJ .Sugarcane improvement through induced mutations using vegetative propagules and cell culture techniques. In : Induced Mutations in Vegetatively Propagated Plants, IAEA, Viena. Austria. S11/PUB/, 1973; 399: 53-59



110

11

0

[50] Liu LJ, Marquez ER, Biascoechia MC . Variation in degree of rust resistance among plantlets derived from callus cultures of sugarcane in Puerto Rico. Phytopathology, 1983; 73 (5):797 (Abstract)

[51] Chen ZY . A clone of sugarcane with thick stalk and high sucrose content-regenerated from tissue culture. Scientia Agriculturae Sinica 1986; 3:90

[52] Krishnamurthi M. Sugarcane tissue culture, an example for crop improvement Proc. Int. workshop on improvement of tropical crop. through tissue culture, March 7-14, 1981, Ohakla, Bangladesh, pp. 12-22

[53] Mckern NM, Shukla DD, Toler RD, Jensen SG, Tosic M, Ford RE, Leon O, Ward CW. Confirmation that the sugarcane mosaic virus subgroup consist of four distinct potyvirus by using peptide profiles of coat proteins . Phytopathology 1991; 81: 1025-1029

[54] Parmessur Y, Aljanabi S, Saumtally S, Dookun-Saumtally A. Sugarcane yellow leaf virus and sugarcane yellows phytoplasma elimination by tissue culture. Plant Pathol. 2002; 51: 561–566.

[55] Krishnamurthi M Note on disease resistance of tissue culture subclone and fusion of sugarcane protoplast. Sugarcane Breed Newsl 1975; 35 : 24-26

[56] Tlaskal J . A note on disease resistant subclones derived from tissue culture techniques. Sugarcane Breed Newsl 1975; 36: 71-72

[57] Heinz DJ, Krishnamurthi M, Nickell LG, Maretzki A . Cell, tissue and organ culture in sugarcane improvement, In: J Reinert and YPS Bajaj (eds.) Applied and fundamental aspects of plant cell, tissue and organ culture, Springer, Berlin, 1977; pp 3-17

[58] Larkin PJ, Scowcroft WR . Somaclonal variation and eyespot toxin tolerance in sugarcane. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Culture 1983; 2: 111-121

[59] Liu MC, Chen W. Tissue and cell culture as aids to sugarcane breeding-II. Performance and field potential of Callus derived lines. Euphytica 1978a; 27:273-282

[60] Sreenivasan J, Sreenivasan TV, Alexander KC . Somaclonal variation for rust resistance in sugarcane Indian. J Genet 1987a; 47 (2): 109-114

[61] Sreenivasan J, Sreenivasan TV, Alexander KC, Rao M. Somaclonal variation for smut disease (Ustilago scitaminea Syd.) resistance in sugarcane. Proc. Symp. Plant cell and tissue culture of economically

importatant plants (G.M. Reddy ed.) Hyderabad. 1987b; pp. 259-264

[62] Liu MC, Yeh HS, Chen WH . A high sucrose and vigorously growing calliclone. 71-4829. Rep Taiwan Sugar Res Inst 1984; 102: 1-11

[63] Liu MC, Chen WH. Tissue and cell culture as aids to sugarcane breeding. I. Creation of genetic variation through callus culture. Euphytica, 1976; 25: 393-403

[64] Leu LS . Apical meristem culture and redifferentiation of callus masses to free some sugarcane systemic diseases. Plant Protect. Bull. (Taiwan) 1978; 20:77–82

[65] Liu M, Chen W. Improvement in sugarcane by using tissue culture methods In : T.A. Thorpe (ed) Fourth Intl. Congr. Plant Tissue and Cell Cult., Calgery, Canada, 1978b; pp 163

[66] Izquierdo F, Bravo N, Cutierrez R. Early evaluation of rust resistance in sugarcane tissue derived plantlets, Revistade Protection Vegetat 1988; 3(3): 217-226

[67] Paros JP, Bonnel E Fererol, Maubussian JC . Altered rust resistance and yield components arising from leaf tissue and bud culture in sugarcane. Proc 20th Congr ISSCT 1989; 732-738

[68] Feldman P, Ferecol L, Rao P . In vitro culture, a new tool for agricultural progress in Guadeloupe II. Sugarcane Bulletin Agronomique, 1989; 9 : 79-80

[69] Boer HDe, Roa S . Disease free sugarcane nursery through tissue culture. Proc. Barbados Soc. Tech in Agriculture, 1991; 57-60

[70] Jambhale ND, Patil SC, Pradeep T. Tissue culture in sugarcane improvement-A review. Ann. Conv. D.S.T.A., Pune, 1995; 44: 10-20

[71] Yasuda TH, Maegawa, Yamaguch T . The selection for the tolerance of mineral in tropical plant tissue culture. In: Plant Tissue Culture. 1982;491-492

[72] Korneva SB, Maribona RH . Salt resistant sugarcane somaclones. Academy of Sciences1984; 343-350

[73] Suprasanna P, Desai NS, Sapna G, Bapat VA . Monitoring genetic fidelity in plants derived through direct somatic embryogenesis in sugarcane by RAPD analysis. Journal of New Seeds 2006; 8(3):1-9:

[74] Hoy JW, Bischoff KP, Milligan SB, Gravois KA. Effect of tissue culture explant source on sugarcane yield components. Euphytica 2003;



11

1

129:237–240[75] Price S, Warner JN. The possible use of induced

mutations for sugarcane improvement. Proc. Int. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol 1959; 10:782–794

[76] Maretzki A .Tissue culture: Its prospects and problems. In: Sugarcane Improvement through Breeding (ed. [77] Heinz, D.J.) Elsevier Science Publishers Amsterdam. The Netherlands, 1987 pp. 343-384

[78] Lakshmanan P, Geijskes RJ, Elliott AR, Wang LF, McKeon MG, Swain RS, Borg Z Berding N, Grof CPL, Smith GRA . Thin cell layer culture system for the rapid and high frequency direct regeneration of sugarcane and other monocot species.. In: Vasil, I. K., ed. Proc. X Int. Assoc. Plant Tiss. Cult. Biotechnol. Orlando, 2002; June 23–28. (Abstract P-1441)

[79] Geijskes RJ, Wang LF, Lakshmanan P, McKeon MG, Berding N, Swain RS, Elliott AR, Grof CPL, Jackson J, Smith GR. Smartset seedlings: tissue culture seed plants for the Australian sugar industry. Sugarcane Int. 2003; May/June:13–17

[80] Burner DM, Grisham MP. Induction and stability of phenotypic variation in sugarcane as affected by propagation procedure. Crop Sci 1995; 35:875–880

[81] Lorenzo JC, Gonzalez B, Escalona M, Teisson C, Espinosa P, Borroto C. Sugarcane shoot formation in an improved temporary immersion system. Plant Cell Tiss Organ Cult 1998; 54:197–200

[82] Lorenzo JC, Ojeda E, Espinosa A, Borroto C. Field performance of temporary immersion bioreactor-derived sugarcane plants. In Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. Plant 2001; 37:803– 806

[83] Guiderdoni E, Demarly Y. Histology of somatic embryogenesis in cultured leaf segments of

sugarcane plantlets. Plant Cell Tiss. Organ Cult 1998; 14:71–88

[84] Guiderdoni E, Merot B, Eksomtramage T, Paulet F, Feldmann P, Glaszmann JC . Somatic embryogenesis in sugarcane (Saccharum species). In: Bajaj, YPS, ed. Biotechnology in agriculture and forestry, vol. 31. Somatic embryogenesis and synthetic seed II. Berlin: Springer 1995; pp. 92–113

[85] Manickavasagam M, Ganapathi A. Direct somatic embryogenesis and plant regeneration from leaf explants of sugarcane. Indian J Exp Biol 1998; 36:832–835

[86 ] Fitch MMM, Moore PH. Long term culture of embryogenic sugarcane callus. Plant Cell Tiss. Organ Cult 1993; 32:335–343

[87] Lakshmanan P, Geijskes RJ, Aitken KS, Grof CPL, Bonnett GD, Smith, G.R. Sugarcane biotechnology :the challenges and opportunities. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 2005; 41:345–363

[88] Ming R, Moore PH, Woo KK, D’Hont A, Glaszmann JC, Tew TL, Mirkov TE, Silva JD, Jifon J, Rai M, Schnell RJ, Brumbley SM, Lakshmanan P, Comstock JC, Paterson AH. Sugarcane improvement through breeding and biotechnology. Plant Breed Rev 2006; 27:17–117

[89] Kristini A . The use of tissue culture to eliminate some important diseases in sugarcane, M.Sc. thesis, University of Queensland, Australia. 2004

[90] Wagih ME, Gordon GH, Ryan CC, Adkins SW. Development of an axillary bud culture technique for Fiji disease virus elimination in sugarcane. Aust J Bot 1995 ; 43:135–143

BIOTECHNOLOGICAL APPROACHES FOR HIGH SUGARCANE YIELD

Documents

Transcript of BIOTECHNOLOGICAL APPROACHES FOR HIGH SUGARCANE YIELD