Search
Submit Manuscript
Advanced Search
MAP  >  Technology in Horticulture
2024 Volume 4
Article Contents
Abstract
Introduction
Growth stages
Induction of pro-embryogenic callus
Formation and maturation of somatic embryos
Regeneration of somatic embryos into plantlets
Parameters for each growth stage
Callus induction
Formation and maintenance of somatic embryos
Plant regeneration
Current limitations and constraints
Conclusions
Author contributions
Data availability
Acknowledgments
Conflict of interest
Rights and permissions
References
About this article
Next Previous
REVIEW   Open Access    

Culture conditions for somatic embryogenesis in banana: brief review of the current practices, advantages, and constraints

  • 1.

    University of the Philippines, Los Baños, Laguna, 4031 Philippines

  • 2.

    University of the Philippines Mindanao, Davao City, Davao Del Sur, 8022, Philippines

  • 3.

    De La Salle University, Manila, 1004 Philippines

More Information
  • Banana (Musa spp.) is a high-value cash crop that serves as a staple food across Asia. However, numerous pests and diseases challenge the global production of bananas. The advent of advanced molecular technologies, such as plant tissue culture, played a pivotal role in banana production with enhanced physiology, morphology, and disease resistance. Since then, researchers and agricultural industries' interest has shifted to using plant tissue culture for the large-scale production of bananas. The production of somatic embryos from plant tissues, termed somatic embryogenesis (SE), is often utilized as an asexual means of reproducing banana plantlets with uniform genotypic characteristics. Various studies have also demonstrated the function of somatic embryogenesis for genetic transformation studies. However, the efficiency of SE protocols differs from one genotype to another. It is affected by several factors, including the type of explant, culture media, plant growth regulators, and environmental conditions. This review will summarize the current methodologies for performing SE in banana. In addition, the advantages and constraints of performing SE protocols were discussed.

  • Introduction

    Bananas (Genus Musa, family Musacaea) are herbaceous perennial monocots grown in more than 150 countries worldwide[1]. In the Philippines, banana accounts for around 17.2% of the total agricultural exports[2]. Cavendish bananas remain the primary cultivar grown commercially, accounting for 53.2% of the total production in the Philippines, followed by Lakatan (16.8%) [1] and Cardaba (14%)[2]. Commercial bananas, including the Cavendish group, are generally seedless and sterile[3]. Large-scale propagation of banana is therefore highly dependent on using vegetative planting materials- sword suckers, rhizomes, and bits- that potentially carry disease-causing microorganisms[4]. Throughout the years, various methods have been explored for banana production via plant tissue culture. The process allows the propagation of thousands of plantlets from a small amount of planting material. Shoot tip cultures and sword suckers are used primarily for in vitro propagation of true-to-type and disease-free plantlets. However, increased production of off-types has been observed using these methods[5].

    Somatic embryogenesis is another important means of plant production. It is defined as the asexual reproduction of plants from somatic embryos[6]. The success of the technology relies on the potential of cells for totipotency: the ability of a single cell to divide and undergo differentiation[7]. Somatic embryo formation is based on dedifferentiation in plants and the plants ability to reinitiate cell division. Somatic embryos may be induced using direct or indirect methods. Indirect embryogenesis, unlike direct, involves an intermediate callus phase from organized tissues[8]. Studies have reported the establishment of direct somatic embryogenesis, but low plant conversion rates were observed (for example, Remakanthan et al.[9]). Panis et al. reported direct somatic embryogenesis from protoplast cultures[10]. Recently, the use of shoot-tip cultures has been reported[9]. Here, the indirect production of somatic embryos from callus cultures were the focus.

    Somatic embryogenesis was first described in carrot (Daucus carota) cells in culture[11]. Although initially investigated for micropropagation of plants, somatic embryogenesis is also utilized for gene expression programs and genetic transformation to improve quality and disease resistance[12]. Genetic transformation using somatic embryos has been proven to minimize the formation of chimeric plantlets[13]. In plant breeding, somatic embryogenesis shortens the breeding cycle[14]. The protocol is also primarily used for cryopreservation of Musa germplasms[15].

    Several cultivars of banana, especially those belonging to the Cavendish subgroup, have been propagated from somatic embryogenesis (Table 1). The protocol for somatic embryogenesis in bananas is standardized using different types of explants. However, low embryo germination and plant conversion rates remain a concern[13]. Other issues include the labor-intensive optimization of culture medium, high production costs, and the formation of off-types[16]. Nevertheless, somatic embryogenesis has been exploited to generate planting materials that are of value and disease-free. Several of these methods have been scaled up to commercial laboratories and some for the protection and preservation of commercial banana cultivars that are under threat of extinction[17,18]. Studies have reported the use of somatic embryogenesis in banana but few have focused on the different culture conditions for growth. This review explored the different culture conditions used for somatic embryogenesis in banana and some of their advantages and constraints.

    Table 1.  Cultivars with successful embryogenic callus (EC) and cell suspension (ECS) protocols.
    Cultivar Genetic group Explants used EC ECS Ref.
    Calcutta 4 AA Scalps
    Axillary buds    		 x x [110]
    Lakatan AA Shoot tips x x [30]
    Highgate AAA Scalps x [47]
    Yangambi km5 AAA Immature flowers x [90]
    Williams AAA Scalps
    Immature flowers    		 x x [47,109,16,
    92,113]
    Grand Nain AAA Scalps
    Immature flowers
    Shoot tips    		 x x [37,47,111,
    112,39,92,9]
    Nanicão AAA Leaf sheath disks x [27]
    Gros Michel AAA Immature flowers x x [90,113]
    Lady finger AAB Scalps x [47]
    Prata AAB Scalps x [47,114]
    Saba ABB Immature flowers
    Scalps    		 x x [106,115]
    Cardaba ABB Scalps, shoot tips x [106,116,117]
    Bluggoe ABB Shoot tips
    Scalps    		 x x [26,118]
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Growth stages

    Somatic embryogenesis is an elaborate and complex process involving the production of a whole new plant from unorganized cells. The process is generally comprised of five stages: selection of suitable explant, production of embryogenic callus, development of somatic embryos from cell suspensions, regeneration of viable cells into plantlets, and field monitoring of acclimatized plants (Fig. 1). Each developmental stage requires different nutritional and environmental conditions for growth and is controlled by several factors including endogenous hormones, proteins, and transcription factors[19].

    Figure 1.  Flowchart showing the different stages of somatic embryogenesis in banana.
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    Induction of pro-embryogenic callus

    The quality and volume of embryogenic callus are crucial for implementing the subsequent steps in somatic embryogenesis[16]. A callus is a mass of unorganized cells naturally found in plants that form in response to stress and wounding[6]. Callus formation in plants is highly controlled by abiotic (light condition, pH and osmotic pressure, sugar content) and biotic (explant age and size, genotype, phytohormones) stimuli[20]. Callus formation differs between monocots and dicots and between diploid and triploid species[21,22]. Pathogen infection also leads to callus formation in plants through auxin and cytokinin production[23].

    Callus forms may vary from one set-up to another and can be differentiated based on macroscopic characteristics[20]. Generally, four types of calli can be observed in banana cultures: white and compact (Fig. 2a), clear and friable (Fig. 2b), yellow nodular (Fig. 2c), and ideal callus with translucent proembryos (Fig. 2d). Out of these four, only the ideal callus with translucent proembryos can regenerate and develop into a whole new plant[20]. The translucent proembryos contain differentiated and competent cells that enable plant organogenesis and regeneration[24]. Meanwhile, the white and compact, clear and friable, and yellow nodular calli are all non-embryogenic and non-regenerative types that may be used for further biotechnological studies such as metabolite production and cell suspensions[24,25]. In some cases, shoots and roots may form alongside these non-embryogenic calli that also have the potential to develop into new plants[20].

    Figure 2.  Types of callus formed in banana: (a) white and compact (non-embryogenic), (b) clear and friable, (c) non-embryogenic yellow nodular, and (d) ideal callus with translucent proembryos.
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    Scalps (meristematic tissues with cauliflower-like structure) and immature flowers (male and female inflorescence) are the two most commonly used explants in banana[16]. However, shoot-tips[26], leaf sheaths[27], sword suckers[28], and protoplasts[29] from tissue-cultured plantlets have also been reported. Callus induction may take from 8 weeks to 8 months, depending on the type of explant used. The formation of callus cultures from scalps take the longest, with 6 months average induction time[16]. Induction of embryogenic callus in 12 weeks has been observed from shoot tips[30], sword suckers[28], and immature flowers[20,31]. Callus induction from protoplast cultures are initiated in about three weeks[3,32]. However, it is usually derived from established cell suspensions[29].

    Somatic embryogenesis relies on the exogenous application of auxins and cytokinins to promote in-vitro callus induction in plants[16,33]. The combination of callus induction hormones differs from the type of explant used (Table 2). Commonly used auxins for callus initiation are 2,4-dichloro phenoxy acetic acid (2,4-D), indoleacetic acid (IAA), naphthalene acetic acid (NAA), 3,6 dichloro-2 methoxybenzoic acid (Dicamba) and picloram. These may be prepared with cytokinins such as kinetin (KIN), 6-benzyl amino purine (BAP), and zeatin. Brassinosteroids and abscisic acid (ABA) also induce callus formation in some plant species[34,35]. Thidiazuron (TDZ), a hormone with both cytokinin and auxin effects on plants, was also found to induce callus formation in banana[36].

    Table 2.  Synthetic hormones commonly used for embryogenic callus induction in Musa spp.
    Explant used Hormones tested (mg/L) Ref.
    2,4-D IAA NAA KIN 2iP BAP TDZ 4-CPPU ZEATIN Picloram Dicamba
    Immature flowers 2−6 1 1 [107,121,16,111,
    92,82,119,120,
    122,52,123,39]
    2−9 [62,37,125,16,112,13]
    2 [126]
    2 0.5−1 [111]
    1 0.22 [54]
    Scalps 1 0.22 [106,118,127,115,109,
    114,54,113,110,48]
    2−2.9 2.2−3.2 [128]
    6.4 [128]
    5.7 [128]
    Shoot tips 0.05 1 [9]
    0.1−4 [9]
    Leaf sheaths & rhizomes 6.63 [129]
    Protoplasts 2 [29]
    Leaf sheath disks 1.1 6.64 [22]
    100 100 [27]
    Sword suckers 0.5-2 0.5 [28]
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Optimum hormone levels for callus induction in banana vary from one genotype to another. For auxins, concentrations range from 0.2 to 4 mg/L when used alongside cytokinins and 4 to 9 mg/L if treated alone. Cytokinins, at 0.5 to 1.0 mg/L, are combined with auxins for callus induction. In addition, culture additives such as amino acids (e.g. proline, glutamine, methionine, tryptophan), sugars (e.g., sucrose, maltose, myo-inositol), and vitamins (e.g., biotin) also support callus induction in banana[22,37−40].

    Light exposure also affects callus formation in banana. In numerous studies, callus formation was frequently performed under dark conditions. One study found that light exposure is positively correlated with tissue browning due to increased physiological activity[22]. Hence, the dark treatment seems to prevent necrosis caused by photooxidative stress[41]. Color change of medium is also frequently encountered and can be resolved using gerlite as a gelling agent[22]. Blackening or browning of tissues due to the wounding of explant can be minimized by subculture every two weeks[16]. The addition of antioxidants such as ascorbic acid[42], citric acid[43], cysteine[44], activated charcoal[43], polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP)[45], potassium citrate, and citrate[46] have been proven to prevent explant browning in banana. It is challenging to optimize culture conditions and culture medium composition due to the extremely low amount of good embryogenic material available for use. Usually, young banana suspensions require a high inoculum density and frequent transfer to a new medium (every three to seven days) during the first few months[47]. In Grand Nain, only 3% to 10% of embryogenic calli (EC) were formed from scalps and 8% from immature flowers[16]. But for other species, % EC can reach up to 97%[48]. The embryogenic potential of callus is also expected to decrease over long periods of incubation[9,21].

    Formation and maturation of somatic embryos

    Somatic embryos are clones of the parent material formed in response to the changing culture conditions of the explant[49]. Unlike sexual structures (zygotic embryos), somatic embryos form in response to the drastic reduction of auxin levels after exposure to callus cultures[7]. Somatic embryos possess a bipolar structure that allows the formation of both apical and radical meristems where shoot and root structures initiate, respectively[13]. Depending on the cultivar, embryos generally form in 3 to 8 months[47].

    Complex processes are known to affect somatic embryogenesis in banana. Kumaravel et al. have characterized 25 endogenous proteins in banana associated with somatic embryo formation[40]. Several studies have further explored the involvement of genetic transcription factors in growth[21,50−52]. The addition of cytokinins, alternation of physiological state (pH), and heat shock are known drivers of somatic embryogenesis[21,53]. Reduction of MS salts to half strength and exposure to dark conditions to reduce osmotic pressure and prevent phenolic oxidation, respectively have also been frequently performed in established ECS protocols but the underlying principle remains poorly understood[47,48,54]. In cassava (Manihot esculenta), the use of half and quarter-strength MS resulted in enhanced viability and formation of somatic embryos compared to full-strength MS medium[55]. On the other hand, Groll and co-workers reported a higher formation of mature somatic embryos in full-strength MS[56].

    There are four main stages in the formation of somatic embryos- globule stage, oblong stage, heart stage, and torpedo stage- a developmental process shared with zygotic embryos that can be differentiated through distinct cell shape formation[12,57,58]. The first stage, the globular stage, is achieved through the establishment of embryogenic cell suspensions (ECS). Banana ECS protocols vary with the explant used for callus formation (Table 3) and are established by transferring the embryogenic callus into a (liquid) medium with reduced auxin levels or callus-induction medium devoid of agar; most with added amino acids (e.g. L-glutamine and malt extract) that function for metabolism and protein synthesis (Table 4)[13,16,59,60]. For instance, L-glutamine and proline were found to enhance the plant regeneration efficiency of banana (Musa acuminata cv. Berangan)[61]. Scalp-derived ECS utilizes a uniform concentration of exogenous growth regulators (e.g., 2,4-D and zeatin) during induction and multiplication phases[16]. For the immature flower method, somatic embryo expression is enhanced by reducing auxin concentration[59,60,62]. The continued presence of auxin drives the synthesis of gene products necessary to complete the globular stage through increased DNA demethylation[63,64].

    Table 3.  Culture media used for formation of somatic embryos in banana.
    ComponentsMA2ZZ1M2bECS1BM2SK4SS2IM1
    Macro-elementsMS1/2MS1/2MS1/2MSMSMSMSSH
    MicroelementsMSMSMSMSMSMSMSSH
    VitaminsMAMSDhed'aMSMSMSMSMS
    FeEDTA+−−−−−−−
    2,4-D (mg/L)1111
    Picloram0.11
    Zeatin (mg/L)0.2190.2190.219
    BAP (mg/L)0.05
    Coconut water (%)10
    Biotin (mg/L)11
    Casein hydrolysate200
    Ascorbic acid (mg/L)101010
    Malt extract (mg/L)100100100100100
    Amino acidsGlutamine
    100 g/L    		Glutamine
    100 mg/L
    Proline
    4 mg/L    		Glutamine
    100 mg/L    		Glutamine
    100 mg/L    		Glutamine
    100 mg/L
    SugarSaccharose
    45 g/L    		Sucrose
    30 g/L    		Sucrose
    20 g/L    		Sucrose
    30 g/L    		Sucrose
    45 g/L    		Sucrose
    30 g/L    		Sucrose
    30 g/L    		Sucrose
    30 g/L
    pH5.35.85.85.85.35.85.85.8
    Cultivars testedGrand Nain, Tropical, Rasthali,Somrani monthan,
    High gate, Williams,
    Gros Michel, Lady
    finger, Prata    		Mas, Bluggoe,
    Saba, Cardaba    		Calcutta 4RajeliDwarf BrazilianGrand NainGrand Nain, Ardhapuri, Basrai, Shrimanti, Mutheli, Lalkela and
    Safed Velchi
    Ref.[39,107,90,131,52][39,54,113,48][118,130,115][110][82][121][9][111]
    Ma2, M2b, BM2, SK4, IM1-immature flower method; ECS1, ZZI-scalps method; SS2-split shoot tips.
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 4.  Culture media used for somatic embryo maturation in banana.
    ComponentsMA3RD1BM3SK8MMSS3IM2M3b
    Macro-elementsSH1/2MSSH1/2MSSHMSSHMS
    MicroelementsSHMSSHMSMSMSSHMS
    VitaminsMAMSMSMSMSMSMSMS
    FeEDTA+−−−−−−−
    2,4-D (mg/L)1
    BAP (mg/L)50.050.05
    IAA (mg/L)0.2
    NAA (mg/L)0.20.2
    Zeatin (mg/L)0.050.05
    Kinetin (mg/L)0.10.1
    2iP (mg/L)0.2
    Picloram (mg/L)0.1
    Myo-inositol (mg/L)100100
    Biotin (mg/L)1
    Ascorbic acid (mg/L)10
    Malt extract (mg/L)100100100100
    Amino acidsGlutamine
    100 mg/L
    Proline
    230 mg/L    		Glutamine
    100 mg/L
    		Glutamine
    100 mg/L
    SugarSaccharose
    45 g/L    		Sucrose
    30 g/L    		Sucrose
    45 g/L    		Sucrose
    30 g/L    		Saccharose
    45 g/L    		Sucrose
    30 g/L    		Sucrose
    30 g/L    		Sucrose
    30 g/L
    Gelling agent (g/L)Phytagel
    4 g/L    		Gelrite
    3 g/L    		Gelrite
    2 g/L    		Phytagel
    2.6 g/L    		Gelrite
    2 g/L    		Gelrite
    3 g/L    		−−
    pH5.85.85.85.85.85.85.85.8
    Cultivars testedGrand Nain, Gros Michel, WilliamsGrand Nain, Calcutta 4,
    Somrani monthan,
    High gate, Williams,
    Lady finger, Prata    		Rajeli, Grand
    Nain, Tropical    		Dwarf BrazilianGrand Nain; RasthaliGrand NainGrand Nain, Ardhapuri, Basrai, Shrimanti,
    Mutheli, Lalkela,
    Safed Velchi    		Bluggoe, Saba,
    Cardaba
    Ref.[39,107,125][47,110,54,113][82,123,124][121,132][125,16,52][9][111][118,115]
    Ma3, BM3, SK8, MM , IM2, M3b-immature flower method; RDI-scalps method; SS3-split shoot tips.
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    At the globular stage, the pro-embryos also contain other mRNAs and proteins that generally inhibit the continuation of embryogenesis[11]. The removal of auxin is believed to result in the inactivation of these genes necessary to enter the next embryogenic growth stage[50]. Guzzo et al. proposed a model linking auxin response, asymmetric division, and totipotency: upon environmental stimuli, cells can be made morpho-genetically totipotent in response to auxin if the cells contain inducible receptors to complete embryogenesis; but only organogenesis or unorganized proliferation will occur otherwise[65]. Cytokinins, in minute concentrations, may also affect the sensitivity of somatic embryogenesis and cell division, but their molecular basis remains unknown[66,67].

    The globular embryo then enters the oblong stage, signaling the shift from isodiametric to bilaterally symmetrical growth, followed by the beginning of the heart stage[68]. This globular-to-heart embryot ransition is pronounced by the outgrowth of the two cotyledons, hypocotyl elongation, and radicle initiation[11]. Finally, the embryo enters the torpedo stage, a stage with a distinct increase in size, before reaching full maturity[68]. Sometimes, immature embryos formed from callus cultures may undergo differentiation, and this can be prevented through high osmotic pressure and the addition of abscisic acid[21]. Removal of bigger aggregates of, more developed, somatic embryos is recommended because they have the tendency to accumulate starch and produce high amounts of polyphenols[47].

    Water stress is one of the most important factors for somatic embryo maturation[69]. During maturation, embryos undergo gradual loss of water and initiate desiccation tolerance to survive[70−72]. Available ECS protocols regulate water availability to the developing somatic embryos through high concentrations of gelling gum or overlaid filter paper[13]. Studies suggest the involvement of early response to dehydration proteins (ERDs) in embryo maturation[73]. Oxygen availability and pH of the culture medium also affect embryo maturation. High levels of oxygen have been shown to promote somatic embryo multiplication while low levels result in histodifferentiation[74]. The optimum pH for embryo development is pH 5.8, but relatively lower quality and irregular embryos may also form at pH 4.5-5.5 and at pH 6.0 to 7.0[75−77].

    Regeneration of somatic embryos into plantlets

    The germination of the somatic embryo into normal shoots, termed regeneration, is achieved primarily on culture medium in a genotype-dependent manner. Plants derived from embryogenic cell suspensions (ECS), called emblings, are highly dependent on ECS density and quality[50]. High cell density (105 cells/mL) is for embryogenic cell clusters formation from and lower cell density (2 × 104 cells/mL) for embryo development originating from embryogenic cells[78,79]. Embling conversion rates vary within banana genotypes. For instance, 13% in the edible (AA) Pisang Mas and 13% to 25% for Grand Nain of the Cavendish subgroup (AAA)[80]. High regeneration rates (90% to 95%) from ECS cultures have been recorded for some triploid and diploid species such as cv. Dwarf Brasilian (AAB) and M. a. ssp. malaccensis (AA), both of which passed through a differentiation–maturation phase[13,81].

    Most commonly, BAP, at 0.2 to 3 mg/L concentrations, is used for plant regeneration[47,54,82]. Sometimes, BAP is complemented with other cytokinins (at 0.2 to 0.5 mg/L) for embryo germination (Table 5). These are supplemented with antioxidants such as activated charcoal and ascorbic acid to prevent browning and further support the regeneration of tissues[83]. Kumaravel and co-workers further investigated different concentrations of NAA (2.68, 5.37, and 10.74 μM) for the regeneration of banana somatic embryos with three (100 and 200 μM) and methionine (335.09, 670.19, and 1 mM) as additives[40]. They also tested various concentrations of CaCl2 (5, 10, and 15 mM) and gibberellic acid (GA3) (1.44, 2.88, and 5.77 μM) with 11.41 μM IAA and 2.21 μM BAP. In 'Grand Nain', media supplemented with 5.37 μM NAA + 1.44 μM GA3 showed the highest regeneration efficiency (91.0%). The lowest regeneration was recorded in the medium supplemented with 1 mM methionine in 'Rasthali', whereas 'Grand Nain' media with 200 μM showed the least germination. It was found that in 'Grand Nain', an increased concentration of IAA recorded the highest regeneration (24.28%), but relatively lower (showed 18.96%) in 'Red Banana' in kinetin-supplemented media. These results demonstrate that in banana, regeneration is not only genome-dependent but also cultivar-dependent. The observed overexpression of IAA monooxygenase in the emblings also showed that tryptophan-dependent auxin biosynthesis plays a key role in somatic embryo formation. El-Kereamy et al. previously reported the overexpression of these proteins in rice resulted in enhanced shoot formation due to increased biosynthesis of GA and cytokinin, whereas Patterson et al. reported the role of germination-related proteins for root hormone regulation in Arabidopsis[84,85]. These results suggested that the endogenous hormones stimulated the formation of pro-embryonic roots and shoots of somatic embryos. Furthermore, scientists discovered important genes affecting the morphogenesis of somatic embryos. Boutilier and co-workers described the role of the BABY BOOM1 (BBM1) gene for morphogenesis in coffee (Coffea canephora) embryogenesis, while the LEAFY COTYLEDON1 (LEC1) and WUSCHEL-RELATED HOMEOBOX4 (WOX4) genes are crucial in the initial phase of cell differentiation[86−89]. Elhiti and co-workers further identified 12 candidate genes that play key roles in the early stages of somatic embryogenesis[6]. According to their study, epigenetic regulation occurs among the candidate genes involved.

    Table 5.  Culture conditions used for plant regeneration from somatic embryos of banana.
    ComponentsMA4RD2BM5SK10M4SS4IM3SB4
    Macro-elementsMS1/2 MSSHMSMSMS1/2 MSMS
    MicroelementsMSMSSHMSMSMSMSMS
    VitaminsMorelMSMSMorelMorelMorelMSMorel
    FeEDTA+−−−−−−+
    IAA (mg/L)2.02
    BAP (mg/L)0.50.2270.520.4
    NAA (mg/L)0.5
    Zeatin (mg/L)2
    Myo-inositol (mg/L)100
    Ascorbic acid (mg/L)10
    Activated charcoal (%)0.5
    Lactose (g/L)0.1
    SugarSaccharose
    30 g/L    		Sucrose
    30 g/L    		Sucrose
    30 g/L    		Sucrose
    30 g/L    		Saccharose
    30 g/L    		Sucrose
    30 g/L    		Sucrose
    30 g/L    		Sucrose
    30 g/L
    Gelling agent (g/L)Phytagel
    3 g/L    		Gelrite
    3 g/L    		Gelrite
    3 g/L    		Phytagel
    2.6 g/L    		Gelrite
    2 g/L    		Gelrite
    3 g/L    		Gelrite
    2 g/L    		Gelrite
    2 g/L
    pH5.85.85.85.85.75.85.85.8
    Cultivars testedGrand Nain, Tropical, Rasthali, Calcutta 4Somrani monthan,
    High gate, Williams,
    Lady finger, Prata    		RajeliDwarf BrazilianMasGrand NainGrand Nain, Ardhapuri,Basrai, Shrimanti, Mutheli, Lalkela and
    Safed Velchi    		Bluggoe, Saba,
    Cardaba
    Ref.[39,107,125,110,52,123][47,54,113,48][82][121,130][13]
    		[9][111][118,115]
    Ma4, BM5, SK10, IM3, SB4-immature flower method; RD2-scalps method; SS4-split shoot tips.
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Parameters for each growth stage

    Callus induction

    A common method for quantitative and qualitative assessment of callus induction is obtaining the percent formation of ideal callus (IC) calculated using the formula: %IC = the number of IC/number of inoculated explants. The %IC values obtained for 'Grand Nain' range between 3% to 10%, using the scalping method, and 8% on average, using the immature flower method[16]. But a higher callus induction percentage of 70% has been reported using sword suckers[28]. Qualitative assessment of IC can be performed by physical examination of the type of callus formed as previously mentioned above (Fig. 2).

    Formation and maintenance of somatic embryos

    According to Strosse and co-workers, the quality of an embryogenic cell suspension (ECS) can be primarily assessed according to the number of embryos/mL of plated cells[16]. It can be conveniently applied for analysis since it only requires a very small aliquot (1 mL) of the cell material[47]. The number of embryos/mL can yield between 100 to 300,000[60,90]. But only one out of two to one out of five embryonic calli will lead to a good quality ECS, characterized by bright to light yellow color with a high proportion of homogeneous embryogenic cell aggregates[91]. On the other hand, pale white suspensions are indicative of a high proportion of starch-rich and non-regenerable cells[16].

    ECS establishment can further be measured using the formula: % of ECS initiated = number of ECSs/number of IC placed in liquid medium or by counting the number of embryos formed per IC[13,39,92]. A cell viability test using fluorescein diacetate (FDA) is usually accompanied to determine ECS quality[93]. To perform the FDA test, add a few drops of fluorescein diacetate (FDA) stock (−20 °C, dissolved in acetone water) to distilled water until a blue shine is observed. Add 1 to 2 drops of this diluted stock to a suspension sample. Viable tissue fluorescence is brightly green when observed under ultra-violet light. Somatic embryos with an FDA score over 80% are considered to be viable and acceptable for regeneration.

    ECS quality declines with increased subcultures[18]. Subsequently, higher rates of subculture result in an increased probability of contamination and a decreased growth rate, regeneration capacity, and higher risk of somaclonal variation[13]. The increased contamination and regeneration can be owed to the fast-growing, dense, and starch-rich cells taking over the cultures[91]. To reduce these problems, cryopreservation protocols have been developed which allow the storage of ECSs for longer periods[10]. In addition, early detection of undesirable genetic variation in suspensions can be assessed using the flow cytometry method[94].

    Plant regeneration

    The regeneration rate of somatic embryos often describes the success of a somatic embryogenesis protocol. Hence, proper evaluation of a regeneration process is crucial for somatic embryogenesis. Strosse and co-workers suggested the following criteria for evaluation: % of germination (number of plantlets obtained/number of embryos in medium) and regeneration capacity (Regeneration capacity = number of in vitro plants produced/mL of plated cells)[16]. According to their study, the regeneration capacity of an ECS may further be assessed using the following morphometric assays: total weight of the regenerated embryos, the average number of green shoots 1.5 months after shoot emergence, and the average amount of rooted shoots 1.5 to 2 months after root initiation. The settled cell volume (SCV) (precipitation by gravity forces), packed cell volume (PCV) (precipitation by centrifugation), and fresh and dry weights were also described as determinants of regeneration capacity and growth rate.

    Subculture of regenerants (somaclones) is an important part of the regeneration stage to prevent the production of somaclonal variants[95]. The required number of cycles for the subculture of regenerated embryos (clones) depends on the genotype but usually ranges from 2 to 10 cycles[13]. The subcultured clones are then transferred to a rooting medium followed by acclimatization under greenhouse conditions before planting in the field[90]. Regenerated plantlets should be 6−8 cm tall before transplanting in the greenhouse[96]. High relative humidity (> 80%) and a temperature ranging from 19 to 30 °C are also required for growth under greenhouse conditions[97].

    Current limitations and constraints

    Somatic embryogenesis (SE) is essential in the development of in vitro regeneration systems which are critical steps for the development of resistant varieties[98]. Despite extensive studies in SE, low embryo regeneration rates, and somaclonal variation continue to be the bottlenecks of SE procedures in various banana embryogenic systems[90]. In 'Grand Nain', regeneration values reach as low as 8% under optimal conditions and less than 1% under non-optimal conditions[99]. Embryogenic responses of over 30% could be obtained, from scalps, for some plantain types and cooking bananas[47]. Recently, Youssef and co-workers recorded a high regeneration rate (80%) of 'Grand Nain' from male flower buds[92].

    The in vitro culture environment, the type (and concentration) of plant growth regulators (PGRs), the plant's genetic background and the number and duration of subcultures can also affect the properties of plants regenerated by somatic embryos, contributing to the generation of genetic and epigenetic variation[100]. This variation is apparent in the culture's phenotype, more popularly known as somaclonal variation was thought to be a pre-existent genetic variation in the explant due to changes in chromosome structure, chromosome numbers such as polyploidy and aneuploidy, or induced during in vitro culture[101−104]. These genetic variations may be detected based on plant morphology (e.g. plant height, size, and number of hands) and using advanced DNA markers (e.g. ISSR, SSR, RAPD, SNP)[105].

    Dhed'a observed 5%−10% abnormal somatic embryos recovered from a 'Bluggoe' (ABB, cooking banana) suspension derived from the scalp with only one off-type (0.7%) found with phenotypic changes[106]. Grapin and co-workers reported 16%−22% somaclonal variants regenerated from a 'French Sombre' (AAB, plantain) male flower-derived suspension[90]. Côte and co-workers reported 'variegated' plants with 'double' leaves (two parts coalescing at the central vein) in 'Grand Nain' plants due to somaclonal variation[107]. But all 500 tested plants showed later an agronomical behavior similar to that of plants produced by in vitro budding method. Contrastingly, Uma and co-workers evaluated genetic fidelity in banana cv. 'Grand Nain' and 'Rasthali' were produced from embryogenic cell suspensions using ISSR markers[3]. The overall variation was found to be 3.34% and 2.09%, respectively. Field evaluation further showed no negative effects of vegetative and yield, with no off-types produced.

    Somaclonal variation in banana has been reported to be associated with long-term cultures or cultures that involve a callus phase or high rates of multiplication treatments[96,108]. The decline in the regeneration capacity of ECS cultures has also been associated with cytogenetic instabilities in triploid (AAA, genome) Cavendish bananas, off-type regenerants from long-term Bluggoe suspension cultures (ABB, cooking banana), and the subsequent loss of regeneration potential[13,95,100]. For example, a four-year-old Three Han Planty' (AAB, plantain) suspension was found to have very high regeneration potential with normal ploidy levels, but a nine-year-old 'Bluggoe' (ABB, cooking banana) suspension was found to lack 4−5 chromosomes[47].

    Conclusions

    This paper reviews the current protocols used for somatic embryogenesis in banana, with a focus on the commercial Cavendish group. Due to the various factors affecting somatic embryogenesis and the laborious aspect of optimization, protocols are usually standardized based on the explant source. Much attention was given to the alteration of culture media conditions such as the concentration of plant growth regulators and additives for the formation of desirable clones. However, the particular effect of these alterations on the genetic aspect and the formation of somaclonal variants is lacking. Understanding the physiological, biochemical, and molecular processes involved in each stage of growth is therefore essential for the proper optimization of somatic embryogenesis protocols. For example, determining the sensitivity of clones to changes in the exogenous hormone application, the subsequent levels of endogenous hormones, and gene regulation which miRNA-mediated gene silencing can offer. Functional characterization of key genes involved during somatic embryogenesis may lead to an enhanced understanding of the totipotency of plant cells and provide approaches to improve the efficiency of the process.

    Author contributions

    The authors confirm contribution to the paper as follows: topic conception: Cruz MA, Alcasid C, Silvosa-Millado CS, Balendres MA; data collection: Cruz MA; data curation: Cruz MA; formal analysis: Cruz MA, Alcasid C, Silvosa-Millado CS, Balendres MA; writing - original draft: Cruz MA; writing - review & editing: Alcasid C, Silvosa-Millado CS, Balendres MA; supervision: Balendres MA. All authors reviewed the results and approved the final version of the manuscript.

    Data availability

    Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

    Acknowledgments

    The authors thank the Department of Agriculture-Bureau of Agricultural Research and the University of the Philippines Los Baños.

  • The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

  • [1]

    Lescot T. 2020. Banana genetic diversity. FruiTrop n°269 98−102. https://www.fruitrop.com/en/Articles-by-subject/Varieties/2020/Banana-genetic-diversity

    Google Scholar

    [2]

    Department of Agriculture. 2019. Philippine banana industry roadmap 2019−2022. Department of Agriculture, High Value Crops Program. 50 pp. www.da.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Philippine-Banana-Industry-Roadmap-2019-2022.pdf
    [3]

    Uma S, Kumaravel M, Backiyarani S, Saraswathi MS, Durai P, et al. 2021. Somatic embryogenesis as a tool for reproduction of genetically stable plants in banana and confirmatory field trials. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture (PCTOC) 147:181−88

    doi: 10.1007/s11240-021-02108-0

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [4]

    Tumuhimbise R, Talengera D. 2018. Improved propagation techniques to enhance the productivity of banana (Musa spp.). Open Agriculture 3:138−45

    doi: 10.1515/opag-2018-0014

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [5]

    Johns GG. 1994. Field evaluation of five clones of tissue-cultured bananas in northern NSW. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 34:521−28

    doi: 10.1071/EA9940521

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [6]

    Elhiti M, Stasolla C, Wang A. 2013. Molecular regulation of plant somatic embryogenesis. In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology - Plant 49:631−42

    doi: 10.1007/s11627-013-9547-3

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [7]

    Raemakers CJJM, Jacobsen E, Visser RGF. 1995. Secondary somatic embryogenesis and applications in plant breeding. Euphytica 81:93−107

    doi: 10.1007/BF00022463

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [8]

    Slatter A, Scott NW, Fowler MR. 2003. Plant biotechnology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 346 pp.
    [9]

    Remakanthan A, Menon TG, Soniya EV. 2014. Somatic embryogenesis in banana (Musa acuminata AAA cv. Grand Naine): effect of explant and culture conditions. In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology - Plant 50:127−36

    doi: 10.1007/s11627-013-9546-4

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [10]

    Panis B, Van Wauwe A, Swennen R. 1993. Plant regeneration through direct somatic embryogenesis from protoplasts of banana (Musa spp.). Plant Cell Reports 12:403−7

    doi: 10.1007/BF00234701

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [11]

    Zimmerman JL. 1993. Somatic embryogenesis: a model for early development in higher plants. The Plant Cell 5:1411−23

    doi: 10.1105/tpc.5.10.1411

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [12]

    Salaün C, Lepiniec L, Dubreucq B. 2021. Genetic and molecular control of somatic embryogenesis. Plants 10:1467

    doi: 10.3390/plants10071467

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [13]

    Escobedo-Gracia Medrano RM, Enríquez-Valencia AJ, Youssef M, López-Gómez P, Cruz-Cárdenas CI, et al. 2016. Somatic embryogenesis in banana, Musa ssp. In Somatic Embryogenesis: Fundamental Aspects and Applications, eds. Loyola-Vargas V, Ochoa-Alejo N. Cham: Springer. pp. 381−400. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33705-0_21
    [14]

    Guan Y, Li S, Fan X, Su Z. 2016. Application of somatic embryogenesis in woody plants. Frontiers in Plant Science 7:938

    doi: 10.3389/fpls.2016.00938

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [15]

    Panis BJ, Withers LA, De Langhe E. 1990. Cryopreservation of Musa suspension cultures and subsequent regeneration of plants. Cryoletters 11:337−50

    Google Scholar

    [16]

    Strosse H, Domergue R, Panis B, Escalant JV, Côte F. 2003. Banana and plantain embryogenic cell suspensions. In INIBAP Technical Guidelines 8, eds. Vézina A, Picq C. Montpellier. France: The International Network for the Improvement of Banana and Plantain. https://cropgenebank.sgrp.cgiar.org/files/tg8_en.pdf
    [17]

    López J, Rayas A, Medero V, Santos A, Basail M, et al. 2022. Somatic embryogenesis in banana (Musa spp.). In Somatic Embryogenesis, ed. Ramírez-Mosqueda MA. New York, NY: Humana. 2527:97−110. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-0716-2485-2_8
    [18]

    Kulkarni VM, Ganapathi TR. 2009. A simple procedure for slow growth maintenance of banana (Musa spp.) embryogenic cell suspension cultures at low temperature. Current Science 96:1372−77

    Google Scholar

    [19]

    Joshi R, Kumar P. 2013. Regulation of somatic embryogenesis in crops: a review. Agricultural Reviews 34:1−20

    Google Scholar

    [20]

    Ikeuchi M, Sugimoto K, Iwase A. 2013. Plant callus: mechanisms of induction and repression. The Plant Cell 25:3159−73

    doi: 10.1105/tpc.113.116053

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [21]

    Emons AMC. 1994. Somatic embryogenesis: cell biological aspects. Acta Botanica Neerlandica 43:1−14

    doi: 10.1111/j.1438-8677.1994.tb00729.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [22]

    Khatri A, Khan IA, Dahot MU, Shah G, Nizamani GS, et al. 2005. Study of callus induction in banana (Musa sp). Pakistan Journal of Biotechnology 2:36−40

    Google Scholar

    [23]

    Manulis S, Haviv-Chesner A, Brandl MT, Lindow SE, Barash I. 1998. Differential involvement of indole-3-acetic acid biosynthetic pathways in pathogenicity and epiphytic fitness of Erwinia herbicola pv. gypsophilae. Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions 11:634−42

    doi: 10.1094/MPMI.1998.11.7.634

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [24]

    Efferth T. 2019. Biotechnology applications of plant callus cultures. Engineering 5:50−59

    doi: 10.1016/j.eng.2018.11.006

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [25]

    Jamil SZMR, Rohani ER, Baharum SN, Noor NM. 2018. Metabolite profiles of callus and cell suspension cultures of mangosteen. 3 Biotech 8:322

    doi: 10.1007/s13205-018-1336-6

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [26]

    Banerjee N, Schoofs J, Hollevoet S, Dumortier F, De Langhe E. 1987. Aspects and prospects of somatic embryogenesis in musa, abb, cv. bluggoe. Acta Horticulturae :727−30

    doi: 10.17660/actahortic.1987.212.126

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [27]

    Da Silva Conceição ADS, Matsumoto K, Bakry F, Bernd-Souza RB. 1998. Plant regeneration from long-term callus culture of AAA-group dessert banana. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira 33:1291−96

    Google Scholar

    [28]

    Kumar R, Ahmed MF, Mir H, Mehta S, Sohane RK. 2019. Study on in vitro establishment and callus induction in banana cv. Grand Nain. Current Journal of Applied Science and Technology 33: 1−5

    doi: 10.9734/cjast/2019/v33i330073

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [29]

    Megia R, Haïcour R, Rossignol L, Sihachakr D. 1992. Callus formation from cultured protoplasts of banana (Musa sp.). Plant Science 85:91−98

    doi: 10.1016/0168-9452(92)90097-6

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [30]

    Perez EA, Brunner H, Afza R. 1998. Somatic embryogenesis in banana (Musa ssp.) cv. lakatan and latundan. Philippine Journal of Crop Science 23:85

    Google Scholar

    [31]

    Dai X, Xiao W, Huang X, Zhao J, Chen Y, et al. 2010. Plant regeneration from embryogenic cell suspensions and protoplasts of dessert banana cv. 'Da Jiao' (Musa paradisiacal ABB Linn.) via somatic embryogenesis. In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology - Plant 46:403−10

    doi: 10.1007/s11627-010-9314-7

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [32]

    Assani A, Haicour R, Wenzel G, Côte F, Bakry F, et al. 2001. Plant regeneration from protoplasts of dessert banana cv. Grande Naine (Musa spp., Cavendish sub-group AAA) via somatic embryogenesis. Plant Cell Reports 20:482−88

    doi: 10.1007/s002990100366

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [33]

    Skoog F, Miller CO. 1957. Chemical regulation of growth and organ formation in plant tissues cultured in vitro. Symposia of the Society for Experimental Biology 11:118−30

    Google Scholar

    [34]

    Goren R, Altman A, Giladi I. 1979. Role of ethylene in abscisic acid-induced callus formation in Citrus bud cultures. Plant Physiology 63:280−82

    doi: 10.1104/pp.63.2.280

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [35]

    Hu Y, Bao F, Li J. 2000. Promotive effect of brassinosteroids on cell division involves a distinct CycD3-induction pathway in Arabidopsis. The Plant Journal 24:693−701

    doi: 10.1046/j.1365-313x.2000.00915.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [36]

    Srangsam A, Kanchanapoom K. 2003. Thidiazuron induced plant regeneration in callus culture of triploid banana (Musa sp.) 'Gros Michel', AAA group. Songklanakarin Journal of Science and Technology 25:689−96

    Google Scholar

    [37]

    Escalant JV, Teisson C, Cote F. 1994. Amplified somatic embryogenesis from male flowers of triploid banana and plantain cultivars (Musa spp.). In Vitro – Plant 30:181−86

    doi: 10.1007/BF02823029

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [38]

    Pervin MR, Azam FMS, Morshed MT, Rahman S, Hero MKA, et al. 2013. Natural growth substances has effective role in callus culture of banana (Musa spp.) cultivar 'Anupam' (AAB genome, Sapientum subgroup). American-Eurasian Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 7:149−54

    Google Scholar

    [39]

    Nandhakumar N, Kumar K, Sudhakar D, Soorianathasundaram K. 2018. Plant regeneration, developmental pattern and genetic fidelity of somatic embryogenesis derived Musa spp. Journal of Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology 16:587−98

    doi: 10.1016/j.jgeb.2018.10.001

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [40]

    Kumaravel M, Backiyarani S, Saraswathi MS, Arun K, Uma S. 2020. Induction of somatic embryogenesis (SE) in recalcitrant Musa spp. by media manipulation based on SE's molecular mechanism. Acta Horticulturae 1272: 119−27

    doi: 10.17660/actahortic.2020.1272.15

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [41]

    Kevers C, Bisbis B, Le Dily F, Billard JP, Huault C, et al. 1995. Darkness improves growth and delays necrosis in a nonchlorophyllous habituated sugarbeet callus: biochemical changes. In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology - Plant 31:122−26

    doi: 10.1007/BF02632249

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [42]

    Munguatosha N, Emerald M, Patric N. 2014. Control of lethal browning by using ascorbic acid on shoot tip cultures of a local Musa spp. (Banana) cv. Mzuzu in Tanzania. African Journal of Biotechnology 13:1721−25

    doi: 10.5897/ajb2013.13251

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [43]

    Safwat G, Abdul-Rahman F, El Sharbasy S. 2016. The effect of some antioxidants on blackening and growth of in vitro culture of banana (Musa spp. cv. grand naine). Egyptian Journal of Genetics and Cytology 44:47−59

    Google Scholar

    [44]

    Jarret RL, Rodriguez W, Fernandez R. 1985. Evaluation, tissue culture propagation, and dissemination of 'Saba' and 'Pelipita' plantains in Costa Rica. Scientia Horticulturae 25:137−47

    doi: 10.1016/0304-4238(85)90085-8

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [45]

    Santos de Oliveira H, Filgueira de Lemos O, Miranda VS, Cristina da Paixão Moura H, Campelo MF, et al. 2011. Establishment and in vitro multiplication of banana (Musa spp.) cultivars with the use of PVP (Polyvinylpyrrolidone). Acta Amazonica 41:369−76

    doi: 10.1590/S0044-59672011000300006

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [46]

    Onuoha IC, Eze CJ, Unamba CIN. 2011. In vitro prevention of browning in plantain culture. OnLine Journal of Biological Sciences 11:13−17

    doi: 10.3844/ojbsci.2011.13.17

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [47]

    Schoofs H. 1997. The origin of embryogenic cells in Musa. PhD thesis. KU Leuven, Belgium. 257 pp.
    [48]

    Rustagi A, Shekhar S, Kumar D, Lawrence K, Bhat V, et al. 2019. High speed regeneration via somatic embryogenesis in elite Indian banana cv. Somrani monthan (ABB). Vegetos 32:39−47

    doi: 10.1007/s42535-019-00005-8

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [49]

    Srivastava PS, Bharti N, Pande D, Srivastava S. 2002. Role of mycorrhiza in in vitro micropropagation of plants. In Techniques in Mycorrhizal Studies, eds. Mukerji KG, Manoharachary C, Chamola BP. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. pp. 443−68. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3209-3_23
    [50]

    Jiménez VM. 2005. Involvement of plant hormones and plant growth regulators on in vitro somatic embryogenesis. Plant Growth Regulation 47:91−110

    doi: 10.1007/s10725-005-3478-x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [51]

    Horstman A, Li M, Heidmann I, Weemen M, Chen B, et al. 2017. The BABY BOOM transcription factor activates the LEC1-ABI3-FUS3-LEC2 network to induce somatic embryogenesis. Plant Physiology 175:848−57

    doi: 10.1104/pp.17.00232

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [52]

    Marimuthu K, Subbaraya U, Suthanthiram B, Marimuthu SS. 2019. Molecular analysis of somatic embryogenesis through proteomic approach and optimization of protocol in recalcitrant Musa spp. Physiologia Plantarum 167:282−301

    doi: 10.1111/ppl.12966

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [53]

    Chung JP, Lu CC, Kuo LT, Ma SS, Shii CT. 2016. Acidogenic growth model of embryogenic cell suspension culture and qualitative mass production of somatic embryos from triploid bananas. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture (PCTOC) 124:241−51

    doi: 10.1007/s11240-015-0888-y

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [54]

    Tripathi JN, Muwonge A, Tripathi L. 2012. Efficient regeneration and transformation protocol for plantain cv. 'Gonja manjaya' (Musa spp. AAB) using embryogenic cell suspension. In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology - Plant 48:216−24

    doi: 10.1007/s11627-011-9422-z

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [55]

    Konan NK, Schöpke C, Cárcamo R, Beachy RN, Fauquet C. 1997. An efficient mass propagation system for cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) based on nodal explants and axillary bud-derived meristems. Plant Cell Reports 16:444−49

    doi: 10.1007/BF01092763

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [56]

    Groll J, Mycock DJ, Gray VM. 2002. Effect of medium salt concentration on differentiation and maturation of somatic embryos of cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz). Annals of Botany 89:645−48

    doi: 10.1093/aob/mcf095

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [57]

    Gray DJ. 1995. Somatic embryogenesis in grape. In Somatic Embryogenesis in Woody Plants, eds. Jain SM, Gupta PK, Newton RJ. Dordrecht: Springer. pp. 191–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-0491-3_12
    [58]

    Toonen MAJ, De Vries SC. 1995. Initiation of somatic embryos from single cells. In Embryogenesis: the Generation of a Plant, eds. Wang TL, Cuning A. Oxford: Bios Scientific Publishers. pp. 173−89
    [59]

    Côte FX, Folliot M, Domergue R, Dubois C. 2000. Field performance of embryogenic cell suspension-derived banana plants (Musa AAA, cv. Grande naine). Euphytica 112:245−51

    doi: 10.1023/A:1003960724547

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [60]

    Jafari N, Othman RY, Tan BC, Khalid N. 2015. Morphohistological and molecular profiles during the developmental stages of somatic embryogenesis of Musa acuminata cv. 'Berangan' (AAA). Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 37:45

    doi: 10.1007/s11738-015-1796-9

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [61]

    Husin N, Jalil M, Othman RY, Khalid N. 2014. Enhancement of regeneration efficiency in banana (Musa acuminata cv. Berangan) by using proline and glutamine. Scientia Horticulturae 168:33−37

    doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2014.01.013

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [62]

    Ma SS. 1991. Somatic embryogenesis and plant regeneration from cell suspension culture of banana. Proceedings of Symposium on Tissue culture of horticultural crops, Taipei, Taiwan, 1988. pp. 181–88
    [63]

    Litz RE, Gray DJ. 1995. Somatic embryogenesis for agricultural improvement. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology 11:416−25

    doi: 10.1007/BF00364617

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [64]

    Schiavo FL, Giuliano G, de Vries SC, Genga A, Bollini R, et al. 1990. A carrot cell variant temperature sensitive for somatic embryogenesis reveals a defect in the glycosylation of extracellular proteins. Molecular and General Genetics MGG 223:385−93

    doi: 10.1007/BF00264444

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [65]

    Guzzo F, Baldan B, Mariani P, Schiavo FL, Terzi M. 1994. Studies on the origin of totipotent cells in explants of Daucus carota L. Journal of Experimental Botany 45:1427−32

    doi: 10.1093/jxb/45.10.1427

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [66]

    Danin M, Upfold SJ, Levin N, Nadel BL, Altman A, et al. 1993. Polyamines and cytokinins in celery embryogenic cell cultures. Plant Growth Regulation 12:245−54

    doi: 10.1007/BF00027205

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [67]

    Hare PD, van Staden J. 1997. The molecular basis of cytokinin action. Plant Growth Regulation 23:41−78

    doi: 10.1023/A:1005902508249

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [68]

    Schiavone FM, Cooke TJ. 1985. A geometric analysis of somatic embryo formation in carrot cell cultures. Canadian Journal of Botany 63:1573−78

    doi: 10.1139/b85-218

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [69]

    Attree SM, Moore D, Sawhney VK, Fowke LC. 1991. Enhanced maturation and desiccation tolerance of white spruce[Picea glauca (Moench) voss] somatic embryos: effects of a non-plasmolysing water stress and abscisic acid. Annals of Botany 68:519−25

    doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a088291

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [70]

    Bomal C, Le VQ, Tremblay FM. 2002. Induction of tolerance to fast desiccation in black spruce (Picea mariana) somatic embryos: relationship between partial water loss, sugars, and dehydrins. Physiologia Plantarum 115:523−30

    doi: 10.1034/j.1399-3054.2002.1150406.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [71]

    Bewley JD, Bradford KJ, Hilhorst HWM, Nonogaki H. 2013. Development and maturation. In Seeds: Physiology of Development, Germination and Dormancy, 3rd Edition. New York, NY: Springer. pp. 27–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4693-4_2
    [72]

    Dekkers BJW, Bentsink L. 2015. Regulation of seed dormancy by abscisic acid and DELAY OF GERMINATION 1. Seed Science Research 25:82−98

    doi: 10.1017/s0960258514000415

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [73]

    Maldonado-Borges JI, Ku-Cauich JR, Escobedo-GraciaMedrano RM. 2013. Annotation of differentially expressed genes in the somatic embryogenesis of Musa and their location in the banana genome. The Scientific World Journal 2013:535737

    doi: 10.1155/2013/535737

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [74]

    del Rivero Bautista N, Agramante-Peñalver D, Barbón-Rodríguez R, Camacho-Chiu W, Collado-López R, et al. 2008. Embriogénesis somática en (Anthurium andraeanum Lind.) variedad 'LAMBADA'. Ra Ximhai 135−49

    Google Scholar

    [75]

    Smith DL, Krikorian AD. 1990. Somatic embryogenesis of carrot in hormone-free medium: external pH control over morphogenesis. American Journal of Botany 77:1634−47

    doi: 10.1002/j.1537-2197.1990.tb11403.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [76]

    Smith DL, Krikorian AD. 1991. Growth and maintenance of an embryogenic cell culture of daylily (Hemerocallis) on hormone-free medium. Annals of Botany 67:443−49

    doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a088180

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [77]

    Krikorian AD. 2000. Historical insights into some contemporary problems in somatic embryogenesis. In Somatic Embryogenesis in Woody Plants, eds. Jain SM, Gupta PK, Newton RJ. Dordrecht: Springer. pp. 17–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3030-3_2
    [78]

    Nomura K, Komamine A. 1985. Identification and isolation of single cells that produce somatic embryos at a high frequency in a carrot suspension culture. Plant Physiology 79:988−91

    doi: 10.1104/pp.79.4.988

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [79]

    Fujimura T, Komamine A. 1979. Synchronization of somatic embryogenesis in a carrot cell suspension culture. Plant Physiology 64:162−64

    doi: 10.1104/pp.64.1.162

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [80]

    Namanya P, Magambo SM, Mutumba G, Tushemereirwe W. 2004. Somatic embryogenesis from immature male inflorescences of East African highland banana CV 'Nakyetengu'. African Crop Science Journal 12:43−49

    doi: 10.4314/acsj.v12i1.27661

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [81]

    Domergue FGR, Ferrière N, Côte FX. 2000. Morphohistological study of the different constituents of a banana (Musa AAA, cv. Grande naine) embryogenic cell suspension. Plant Cell Reports 19:748−54

    doi: 10.1007/s002999900188

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [82]

    Kulkarni VM, Bapat VA. 2013. Somatic embryogenesis and plant regeneration from cell suspension cultures of Rajeli (AAB), an endangered banana cultivar. Journal of Plant Biochemistry and Biotechnology 22:132−37

    doi: 10.1007/s13562-012-0119-0

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [83]

    Bhardwaj L, Ramawat KG. 1993. Effect of anti-oxidants and adsorbents on tissue browning associated metabolism in Cocculus pendulus callus cultures. Indian Journal of Experimental Biology 31:715−18

    Google Scholar

    [84]

    El-Kereamy A, Bi YM, Mahmood K, Ranathunge K, Yaish MW, et al. 2015. Overexpression of the CC-type glutaredoxin, OsGRX6 affects hormone and nitrogen status in rice plants. Frontiers in Plant Science 6:934

    doi: 10.3389/fpls.2015.00934

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [85]

    Patterson K, Walters LA, Cooper AM, Olvera JG, Rosas MA, et al. 2016. Nitrate-regulated glutaredoxins control Arabidopsis primary root growth. Plant Physiology 170:989−99

    doi: 10.1104/pp.15.01776

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [86]

    Boutilier K, Offringa R, Sharma VK, Kieft H, Ouellet T, et al. 2002. Ectopic expression of BABY BOOM triggers a conversion from vegetative to embryonic growth. The Plant Cell 14:1737−49

    doi: 10.1105/tpc.001941

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [87]

    Lotan T, Ohto MA, Yee KM, West MAL, Lo R, et al. 1998. Arabidopsis LEAFY COTYLEDON1 is sufficient to induce embryo development in vegetative cells. Cell 93:1195−205

    doi: 10.1016/s0092-8674(00)81463-4

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [88]

    Ji W, Zhu Y, Li Y, Yang L, Zhao X, et al. 2010. Over-expression of a glutathione S-transferase gene, GsGST, from wild soybean (Glycine soja) enhances drought and salt tolerance in transgenic tobacco. Biotechnology Letters 32:1173−79

    doi: 10.1007/s10529-010-0269-x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [89]

    Suer S, Agusti J, Sanchez P, Schwarz M, Greb T. 2011. WOX4 imparts auxin responsiveness to cambium cells in Arabidopsis. The Plant Cell 23:3247−59

    doi: 10.1105/tpc.111.087874

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [90]

    Grapin A, Ortiz JL, Domergue R, Babeau J, Monmarson S, et al. 1998. Establishment of embryogenic callus and initiation and regeneration of embryogenic cell suspensions from female and male immature flowers of Musa. InfoMusa 7:13−15

    Google Scholar

    [91]

    Cote F, Goue O, Domergue R, Panis B, Jenny C. 2000. In-field behaviour of banana plants (Musa AA sp) obtained after regeneration of cryopreserved embryogenic cell suspensions. Cryo Letters 21:19−24

    Google Scholar

    [92]

    Youssef M, James A, Mayo-Mosqueda A, Ku-Cauich JR, Grijalva-Arango R, et al. 2010. Influence of genotype and age of explant source on the capacity for somatic embryogenesis of two Cavendish banana cultivars Musa acuminata Colla AAA. African Journal of Biotechnology 9:2216−23

    Google Scholar

    [93]

    Widholm JM. 1972. The use of fluorescein diacetate and phenosafranine for determining viability of cultured plant cells. Stain Technology 47:189−94

    doi: 10.3109/10520297209116483

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [94]

    Roux N, Strosse H, Toloza A, Panis B, Doležel J. 2004. Detecting ploidy level instability of banana embryogenic cell suspension cultures by flow cytometry. In Banana Improvement: Cellular Molecular Biology and Induced Mutations, eds. Jain S.M, Sweennen R. Enfield, UK: Science Publishers Inc. pp.183−91
    [95]

    Rodrigues PHV, Tulmann Neto A, Cassieri Neto P, Mendes BMJ. 1998. Influence of the number of subcultures on somaclonal variation in micropropagated nanicão (Musa spp., AAA group). Acta Horticulturae 490:469−74

    doi: 10.17660/actahortic.1998.490.49

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [96]

    Pérez EA, Hooks CR. 2008. Preparing tissue-cultured banana plantlets for field planting. Biotechnology 8:1−3

    Google Scholar

    [97]

    Tomekpe K, Fondi E. 2008. Regeneration guidelines of banana. In Crop specific regeneration guidelines, eds. Dulloo ME, Thormann I, Jorge MA, Hanson J. Rome, Italy: SGRP. 9 pp
    [98]

    Ghag SB, Shekhawat UKS, Ganapathi TR. 2014. Transgenic banana plants expressing a Stellaria media defensin gene (Sm-AMP-D1) demonstrate improved resistance to Fusarium oxysporum. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture (PCTOC) 119:247−55

    doi: 10.1007/s11240-014-0529-x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [99]

    Schoofs H, Panis B, Strosse H, Mayo Mosqueda A, Lopez Torres J, et al. 1999. Bottlenecks in the generation and maintenance of morphogenic banana cell suspensions and plant regeneration via somatic embryogenesis therefrom. InfoMusa 8:3−7

    Google Scholar

    [100]

    Konieczny R, Sliwinska E, Pilarska M, Tuleja M. 2012. Morphohistological and flow cytometric analyses of somatic embryogenesis in Trifolium nigrescens Viv. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture (PCTOC) 109:131−41

    doi: 10.1007/s11240-011-0081-x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [101]

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

    doi: 10.1007/BF02342540

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [102]

    Bairu MW, Aremu AO, Van Staden J. 2011. Somaclonal variation in plants: causes and detection methods. Plant Growth Regulation 63:147−73

    doi: 10.1007/s10725-010-9554-x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [103]

    D'Amato F. 1990. Somatic nuclear mutationsin vivo and in vitro in higher plants. Caryologia 43:191−204

    doi: 10.1080/00087114.1990.10796998

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [104]

    Evans DA, Sharp WR, Medina-Filho HP. 1984. Somaclonal and gametoclonal variation. American Journal of Botany 71:759−74

    doi: 10.2307/2443467

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [105]

    Sahijram L, Soneji JR, Bollamma KT. 2003. Analyzing somaclonal variation in micropropagated bananas (Musa spp.). In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology - Plant 39:551−56

    doi: 10.1079/IVP2003467

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [106]

    Dhed'a D. 1992. Culture de suspensions cellulaires embryogèniques et règènèration en plantules par embryogènèse somatique chez le bananier et le bananier plantain (Musa spp.). PhD Thesis. KU Leuven, Belgium
    [107]

    Côte FX, Domergue R, Monmarson S, Schwendiman J, Teisson C, et al. 1996. Embryogenic cell suspensions from the male flower of Musa AAA cv. Grand nain. Physiologia Plantarum 97:285−90

    doi: 10.1034/j.1399-3054.1996.970211.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [108]

    Bairu MW, Fennell CW, van Staden J. 2006. The effect of plant growth regulators on somaclonal variation in Cavendish banana (Musa AAA cv. 'Zelig'). Scientia Horticulturae 108:347−51

    doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2006.01.039

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [109]

    Xu C, Panis B, Strosse H, Li H, Xiao H, et al. 2005. Establishment of embryogenic cell suspensions and plant regeneration of the dessert banana 'Williams' (Musa AAA group). The Journal of Horticultural Science and Biotechnology 80:551−56

    doi: 10.1080/14620316.2005.11511972

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [110]

    Torres JL, Kosky RG, Pérez NM, Alvarez DR, Cabrera AR, et al. 2012. New explant for somatic embryogenesis induction and plant regeneration from diploid banana ('Calcutta 4', Musa AA). Biotecnología Vegetal 12:25−31

    Google Scholar

    [111]

    Sidha M, Suprasanna P, Bapat VA, Kulkarni UG, Shinde BN. 2007. Developing somatic embryogenic culture system and plant regeneration in banana. BARC Newsletter 285:153−61

    Google Scholar

    [112]

    Ali M, Abbasi BH, Ihsan-ul-haq. 2013. Production of commercially important secondary metabolites and antioxidant activity in cell suspension cultures of Artemisia absinthium L. Industrial Crops and Products 49:400−6

    doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2013.05.033

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [113]

    Tripathi JN, Oduor RO, Tripathi L. 2015. A high-throughput regeneration and transformation platform for production of genetically modified banana. Frontiers in Plant Science 6:1025

    doi: 10.3389/fpls.2015.01025

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [114]

    Ribeiro LO, Paiva LV, Pádua MS, Santos BR, Alves E, et al. 2012. Morphological and ultrastructural analysis of various types of banana callus, cv. Prata anã. Acta Scientiarum Agronomy 34:423−29

    doi: 10.4025/actasciagron.v34i4.14501

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [115]

    Aspuria ET, de Juras RJC. 2009. Plantlet regeneration from cell suspension cultures of banana cv. Saba via somatic embryogenesis. Philippine Journal of Crop Science 34:1−12

    Google Scholar

    [116]

    Cronauer SS, Krikorian AD. 1986. Banana (Musa spp.). Trees 1: 233
    [117]

    Krikorian AD. 1996. Strategies for "minimal growth maintenance" of cell cultures: a perspective on management for extended duration experimentation in the microgravity environment of a space station. The Botanical Review 62:41−108

    doi: 10.1007/BF02868920

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [118]

    Dhed'a DB, Dumortier F, Panis B, Vuylsteke D. 1991. Plant regeneration in cell suspension cultures of the cooking banana cv. Bluggoes' (Musa spp. ABB group). Fruits 46:125−35

    Google Scholar

    [119]

    Meenakshi S, Shinde BN, Suprasanna P. 2011. Somatic embryogenesis from immature male flowers and molecular analysis of regenerated plants in banana 'Lal Kela' (AAA). Journal of Fruit and Ornamental Plant Research 19:15−30

    Google Scholar

    [120]

    Elayabalan S, Kalaiponmani K, Pillay M, Chandrasekar A, Selvarajan R, et al. 2013. Efficient regeneration of the endangered banana cultivar Virupakshi AAB via embryogenic cell suspension from immature male flowers. African Journal of Biotechnology 12:563−69

    Google Scholar

    [121]

    Khalil S, Cheah K, Perez E, Gaskill D, Hu J. 2002. Regeneration of banana (Musa spp. AAB cv. Dwarf Brazilian) via secondary somatic embryogenesis. Plant Cell Reports 20:1128−34

    doi: 10.1007/s00299-002-0461-0

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [122]

    Karintanyakit P, Suvittawat K, Chinachit W, Silayoi B, Saratultad P. 2014. The impact of genome and 2, 4-d on callus induction from immature male flowers of seven banana cultivars. Acta Horticulturae 1027:253−55

    doi: 10.17660/actahortic.2014.1024.33

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [123]

    Morais-Lino LS, Almeida Santos-Serejo J, Amorim EP, de Santana JRF, Pasqual M, et al. 2016. Somatic embryogenesis, cell suspension, and genetic stability of banana cultivars. In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology - Plant 52:99−106

    doi: 10.1007/s11627-015-9729-2

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [124]

    Morais-Lino LS, Almeida dos Santos-Serejo J, de Oliveira e Silva S, de Santana JRF, Kobayashi AK. 2008. Cell suspension culture and plant regeneration of a Brazilian plantain, cultivar Terra. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira 43:1325−30

    doi: 10.1590/s0100-204x2008001000010

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [125]

    Navarro C, Escobedo RM, Mayo A. 1997. In vitro plant regeneration from embryogenic cultures of a diploid and a triploid, Cavendish banana. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture 51:17−25

    doi: 10.1023/A:1005965030075

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [126]

    Wei Y, Yang H, Huang B, Huang X, Huang X, et al. 2007. Effects of picloram, ABA and TDZ on somatic embryogenesis of banana. Acta Horticulturae Sinica 34:81−86

    doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2007.01.017

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [127]

    Strosse H, Schoofs H, Panis B, Andre E, Reyniers K, et al. 2006. Development of embryogenic cell suspensions from shoot meristematic tissue in bananas and plantains (Musa spp.). Plant Science 170:104−12

    doi: 10.1016/j.plantsci.2005.08.007

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [128]

    Sadik K, Arinaitwe G, Rubaihayo PR, Kiggundu A, and Mukasa SB. 2014. TDZ and 4-CPPU in Gamborg B5 salts with ms vitamins doubles embryogenic response from male flowers of EA-AAA banana. African Crop Science Journal 22:191−203

    Google Scholar

    [129]

    Novak FJ, Afza R, Van Duren M, Perea-Dallos M, Conger BV, et al. 1989. Somatic embryogenesis and plant regeneration in suspension cultures of dessert (AA and AAA) and cooking (ABB) bananas (Musa spp.). Bio/Technology 7:154−59

    doi: 10.1038/nbt0289-154

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [130]

    Jalil M, Khalid N, Yasmin Othman RY. 2003. Plant regeneration from embryogenic suspension cultures of Musa acuminata cv. Mas (AA). Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture 75:209−14

    doi: 10.1023/A:1025814922547

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [131]

    Grapin A, Ortíz JL, Lescot T, Ferrière N, Côte FX. 2000. Recovery and regeneration of embryogenic cultures from female flowers of False Horn Plantain. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture 61:237−44

    doi: 10.1023/A:1006423304033

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [132]

    Khalil SM, Elbanna AAM. 2004. Highly efficient somatic embryogenesis and plant regeneration via suspension cultures of banana (Musa spp.). Arab Journal of Biotechnology 7:99−110

    Google Scholar

  • Cite this article

    Cruz MA, Alcasid C, Silvosa-Millado CS, Balendres MA. 2024. Culture conditions for somatic embryogenesis in banana: brief review of the current practices, advantages, and constraints. Technology in Horticulture 4: e016 doi: 10.48130/tihort-0024-0013
    Cruz MA, Alcasid C, Silvosa-Millado CS, Balendres MA. 2024. Culture conditions for somatic embryogenesis in banana: brief review of the current practices, advantages, and constraints. Technology in Horticulture 4: e016 doi: 10.48130/tihort-0024-0013
    shu

Figures(2)  /  Tables(5)

Download PDF

Article Metrics

Article views(2619) PDF downloads(561)

Other Articles By Authors

REVIEW   Open Access    

Culture conditions for somatic embryogenesis in banana: brief review of the current practices, advantages, and constraints

  • 1.

    University of the Philippines, Los Baños, Laguna, 4031 Philippines

  • 2.

    University of the Philippines Mindanao, Davao City, Davao Del Sur, 8022, Philippines

  • 3.

    De La Salle University, Manila, 1004 Philippines

  • Received: 08 March 2024
  • Revised: 12 June 2024
  • Accepted: 17 June 2024
  • Published online: 16 July 2024
Technology in Horticulture  4,  Article number: e016  (2024)  |  Cite this article

Abstract: Banana (Musa spp.) is a high-value cash crop that serves as a staple food across Asia. However, numerous pests and diseases challenge the global production of bananas. The advent of advanced molecular technologies, such as plant tissue culture, played a pivotal role in banana production with enhanced physiology, morphology, and disease resistance. Since then, researchers and agricultural industries' interest has shifted to using plant tissue culture for the large-scale production of bananas. The production of somatic embryos from plant tissues, termed somatic embryogenesis (SE), is often utilized as an asexual means of reproducing banana plantlets with uniform genotypic characteristics. Various studies have also demonstrated the function of somatic embryogenesis for genetic transformation studies. However, the efficiency of SE protocols differs from one genotype to another. It is affected by several factors, including the type of explant, culture media, plant growth regulators, and environmental conditions. This review will summarize the current methodologies for performing SE in banana. In addition, the advantages and constraints of performing SE protocols were discussed.

    HTML

    Introduction

    • Bananas (Genus Musa, family Musacaea) are herbaceous perennial monocots grown in more than 150 countries worldwide[1]. In the Philippines, banana accounts for around 17.2% of the total agricultural exports[2]. Cavendish bananas remain the primary cultivar grown commercially, accounting for 53.2% of the total production in the Philippines, followed by Lakatan (16.8%) [1] and Cardaba (14%)[2]. Commercial bananas, including the Cavendish group, are generally seedless and sterile[3]. Large-scale propagation of banana is therefore highly dependent on using vegetative planting materials- sword suckers, rhizomes, and bits- that potentially carry disease-causing microorganisms[4]. Throughout the years, various methods have been explored for banana production via plant tissue culture. The process allows the propagation of thousands of plantlets from a small amount of planting material. Shoot tip cultures and sword suckers are used primarily for in vitro propagation of true-to-type and disease-free plantlets. However, increased production of off-types has been observed using these methods[5].

      Somatic embryogenesis is another important means of plant production. It is defined as the asexual reproduction of plants from somatic embryos[6]. The success of the technology relies on the potential of cells for totipotency: the ability of a single cell to divide and undergo differentiation[7]. Somatic embryo formation is based on dedifferentiation in plants and the plants ability to reinitiate cell division. Somatic embryos may be induced using direct or indirect methods. Indirect embryogenesis, unlike direct, involves an intermediate callus phase from organized tissues[8]. Studies have reported the establishment of direct somatic embryogenesis, but low plant conversion rates were observed (for example, Remakanthan et al.[9]). Panis et al. reported direct somatic embryogenesis from protoplast cultures[10]. Recently, the use of shoot-tip cultures has been reported[9]. Here, the indirect production of somatic embryos from callus cultures were the focus.

      Somatic embryogenesis was first described in carrot (Daucus carota) cells in culture[11]. Although initially investigated for micropropagation of plants, somatic embryogenesis is also utilized for gene expression programs and genetic transformation to improve quality and disease resistance[12]. Genetic transformation using somatic embryos has been proven to minimize the formation of chimeric plantlets[13]. In plant breeding, somatic embryogenesis shortens the breeding cycle[14]. The protocol is also primarily used for cryopreservation of Musa germplasms[15].

      Several cultivars of banana, especially those belonging to the Cavendish subgroup, have been propagated from somatic embryogenesis (Table 1). The protocol for somatic embryogenesis in bananas is standardized using different types of explants. However, low embryo germination and plant conversion rates remain a concern[13]. Other issues include the labor-intensive optimization of culture medium, high production costs, and the formation of off-types[16]. Nevertheless, somatic embryogenesis has been exploited to generate planting materials that are of value and disease-free. Several of these methods have been scaled up to commercial laboratories and some for the protection and preservation of commercial banana cultivars that are under threat of extinction[17,18]. Studies have reported the use of somatic embryogenesis in banana but few have focused on the different culture conditions for growth. This review explored the different culture conditions used for somatic embryogenesis in banana and some of their advantages and constraints.

      Table 1.  Cultivars with successful embryogenic callus (EC) and cell suspension (ECS) protocols.

      Cultivar Genetic group Explants used EC ECS Ref.
      Calcutta 4 AA Scalps
      Axillary buds      		 x x [110]
      Lakatan AA Shoot tips x x [30]
      Highgate AAA Scalps x [47]
      Yangambi km5 AAA Immature flowers x [90]
      Williams AAA Scalps
      Immature flowers      		 x x [47,109,16,
      92,113]
      Grand Nain AAA Scalps
      Immature flowers
      Shoot tips      		 x x [37,47,111,
      112,39,92,9]
      Nanicão AAA Leaf sheath disks x [27]
      Gros Michel AAA Immature flowers x x [90,113]
      Lady finger AAB Scalps x [47]
      Prata AAB Scalps x [47,114]
      Saba ABB Immature flowers
      Scalps      		 x x [106,115]
      Cardaba ABB Scalps, shoot tips x [106,116,117]
      Bluggoe ABB Shoot tips
      Scalps      		 x x [26,118]
    Growth stages

    • Somatic embryogenesis is an elaborate and complex process involving the production of a whole new plant from unorganized cells. The process is generally comprised of five stages: selection of suitable explant, production of embryogenic callus, development of somatic embryos from cell suspensions, regeneration of viable cells into plantlets, and field monitoring of acclimatized plants (Fig. 1). Each developmental stage requires different nutritional and environmental conditions for growth and is controlled by several factors including endogenous hormones, proteins, and transcription factors[19].

      Figure 1. 

      Flowchart showing the different stages of somatic embryogenesis in banana.

    Induction of pro-embryogenic callus

    • The quality and volume of embryogenic callus are crucial for implementing the subsequent steps in somatic embryogenesis[16]. A callus is a mass of unorganized cells naturally found in plants that form in response to stress and wounding[6]. Callus formation in plants is highly controlled by abiotic (light condition, pH and osmotic pressure, sugar content) and biotic (explant age and size, genotype, phytohormones) stimuli[20]. Callus formation differs between monocots and dicots and between diploid and triploid species[21,22]. Pathogen infection also leads to callus formation in plants through auxin and cytokinin production[23].

      Callus forms may vary from one set-up to another and can be differentiated based on macroscopic characteristics[20]. Generally, four types of calli can be observed in banana cultures: white and compact (Fig. 2a), clear and friable (Fig. 2b), yellow nodular (Fig. 2c), and ideal callus with translucent proembryos (Fig. 2d). Out of these four, only the ideal callus with translucent proembryos can regenerate and develop into a whole new plant[20]. The translucent proembryos contain differentiated and competent cells that enable plant organogenesis and regeneration[24]. Meanwhile, the white and compact, clear and friable, and yellow nodular calli are all non-embryogenic and non-regenerative types that may be used for further biotechnological studies such as metabolite production and cell suspensions[24,25]. In some cases, shoots and roots may form alongside these non-embryogenic calli that also have the potential to develop into new plants[20].

      Figure 2. 

      Types of callus formed in banana: (a) white and compact (non-embryogenic), (b) clear and friable, (c) non-embryogenic yellow nodular, and (d) ideal callus with translucent proembryos.

      Scalps (meristematic tissues with cauliflower-like structure) and immature flowers (male and female inflorescence) are the two most commonly used explants in banana[16]. However, shoot-tips[26], leaf sheaths[27], sword suckers[28], and protoplasts[29] from tissue-cultured plantlets have also been reported. Callus induction may take from 8 weeks to 8 months, depending on the type of explant used. The formation of callus cultures from scalps take the longest, with 6 months average induction time[16]. Induction of embryogenic callus in 12 weeks has been observed from shoot tips[30], sword suckers[28], and immature flowers[20,31]. Callus induction from protoplast cultures are initiated in about three weeks[3,32]. However, it is usually derived from established cell suspensions[29].

      Somatic embryogenesis relies on the exogenous application of auxins and cytokinins to promote in-vitro callus induction in plants[16,33]. The combination of callus induction hormones differs from the type of explant used (Table 2). Commonly used auxins for callus initiation are 2,4-dichloro phenoxy acetic acid (2,4-D), indoleacetic acid (IAA), naphthalene acetic acid (NAA), 3,6 dichloro-2 methoxybenzoic acid (Dicamba) and picloram. These may be prepared with cytokinins such as kinetin (KIN), 6-benzyl amino purine (BAP), and zeatin. Brassinosteroids and abscisic acid (ABA) also induce callus formation in some plant species[34,35]. Thidiazuron (TDZ), a hormone with both cytokinin and auxin effects on plants, was also found to induce callus formation in banana[36].

      Table 2.  Synthetic hormones commonly used for embryogenic callus induction in Musa spp.

      Explant used Hormones tested (mg/L) Ref.
      2,4-D IAA NAA KIN 2iP BAP TDZ 4-CPPU ZEATIN Picloram Dicamba
      Immature flowers 2−6 1 1 [107,121,16,111,
      92,82,119,120,
      122,52,123,39]
      2−9 [62,37,125,16,112,13]
      2 [126]
      2 0.5−1 [111]
      1 0.22 [54]
      Scalps 1 0.22 [106,118,127,115,109,
      114,54,113,110,48]
      2−2.9 2.2−3.2 [128]
      6.4 [128]
      5.7 [128]
      Shoot tips 0.05 1 [9]
      0.1−4 [9]
      Leaf sheaths & rhizomes 6.63 [129]
      Protoplasts 2 [29]
      Leaf sheath disks 1.1 6.64 [22]
      100 100 [27]
      Sword suckers 0.5-2 0.5 [28]

      Optimum hormone levels for callus induction in banana vary from one genotype to another. For auxins, concentrations range from 0.2 to 4 mg/L when used alongside cytokinins and 4 to 9 mg/L if treated alone. Cytokinins, at 0.5 to 1.0 mg/L, are combined with auxins for callus induction. In addition, culture additives such as amino acids (e.g. proline, glutamine, methionine, tryptophan), sugars (e.g., sucrose, maltose, myo-inositol), and vitamins (e.g., biotin) also support callus induction in banana[22,37−40].

      Light exposure also affects callus formation in banana. In numerous studies, callus formation was frequently performed under dark conditions. One study found that light exposure is positively correlated with tissue browning due to increased physiological activity[22]. Hence, the dark treatment seems to prevent necrosis caused by photooxidative stress[41]. Color change of medium is also frequently encountered and can be resolved using gerlite as a gelling agent[22]. Blackening or browning of tissues due to the wounding of explant can be minimized by subculture every two weeks[16]. The addition of antioxidants such as ascorbic acid[42], citric acid[43], cysteine[44], activated charcoal[43], polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP)[45], potassium citrate, and citrate[46] have been proven to prevent explant browning in banana. It is challenging to optimize culture conditions and culture medium composition due to the extremely low amount of good embryogenic material available for use. Usually, young banana suspensions require a high inoculum density and frequent transfer to a new medium (every three to seven days) during the first few months[47]. In Grand Nain, only 3% to 10% of embryogenic calli (EC) were formed from scalps and 8% from immature flowers[16]. But for other species, % EC can reach up to 97%[48]. The embryogenic potential of callus is also expected to decrease over long periods of incubation[9,21].

    Formation and maturation of somatic embryos

    • Somatic embryos are clones of the parent material formed in response to the changing culture conditions of the explant[49]. Unlike sexual structures (zygotic embryos), somatic embryos form in response to the drastic reduction of auxin levels after exposure to callus cultures[7]. Somatic embryos possess a bipolar structure that allows the formation of both apical and radical meristems where shoot and root structures initiate, respectively[13]. Depending on the cultivar, embryos generally form in 3 to 8 months[47].

      Complex processes are known to affect somatic embryogenesis in banana. Kumaravel et al. have characterized 25 endogenous proteins in banana associated with somatic embryo formation[40]. Several studies have further explored the involvement of genetic transcription factors in growth[21,50−52]. The addition of cytokinins, alternation of physiological state (pH), and heat shock are known drivers of somatic embryogenesis[21,53]. Reduction of MS salts to half strength and exposure to dark conditions to reduce osmotic pressure and prevent phenolic oxidation, respectively have also been frequently performed in established ECS protocols but the underlying principle remains poorly understood[47,48,54]. In cassava (Manihot esculenta), the use of half and quarter-strength MS resulted in enhanced viability and formation of somatic embryos compared to full-strength MS medium[55]. On the other hand, Groll and co-workers reported a higher formation of mature somatic embryos in full-strength MS[56].

      There are four main stages in the formation of somatic embryos- globule stage, oblong stage, heart stage, and torpedo stage- a developmental process shared with zygotic embryos that can be differentiated through distinct cell shape formation[12,57,58]. The first stage, the globular stage, is achieved through the establishment of embryogenic cell suspensions (ECS). Banana ECS protocols vary with the explant used for callus formation (Table 3) and are established by transferring the embryogenic callus into a (liquid) medium with reduced auxin levels or callus-induction medium devoid of agar; most with added amino acids (e.g. L-glutamine and malt extract) that function for metabolism and protein synthesis (Table 4)[13,16,59,60]. For instance, L-glutamine and proline were found to enhance the plant regeneration efficiency of banana (Musa acuminata cv. Berangan)[61]. Scalp-derived ECS utilizes a uniform concentration of exogenous growth regulators (e.g., 2,4-D and zeatin) during induction and multiplication phases[16]. For the immature flower method, somatic embryo expression is enhanced by reducing auxin concentration[59,60,62]. The continued presence of auxin drives the synthesis of gene products necessary to complete the globular stage through increased DNA demethylation[63,64].

      Table 3.  Culture media used for formation of somatic embryos in banana.

      ComponentsMA2ZZ1M2bECS1BM2SK4SS2IM1
      Macro-elementsMS1/2MS1/2MS1/2MSMSMSMSSH
      MicroelementsMSMSMSMSMSMSMSSH
      VitaminsMAMSDhed'aMSMSMSMSMS
      FeEDTA+−−−−−−−
      2,4-D (mg/L)1111
      Picloram0.11
      Zeatin (mg/L)0.2190.2190.219
      BAP (mg/L)0.05
      Coconut water (%)10
      Biotin (mg/L)11
      Casein hydrolysate200
      Ascorbic acid (mg/L)101010
      Malt extract (mg/L)100100100100100
      Amino acidsGlutamine
      100 g/L      		Glutamine
      100 mg/L
      Proline
      4 mg/L      		Glutamine
      100 mg/L      		Glutamine
      100 mg/L      		Glutamine
      100 mg/L
      SugarSaccharose
      45 g/L      		Sucrose
      30 g/L      		Sucrose
      20 g/L      		Sucrose
      30 g/L      		Sucrose
      45 g/L      		Sucrose
      30 g/L      		Sucrose
      30 g/L      		Sucrose
      30 g/L
      pH5.35.85.85.85.35.85.85.8
      Cultivars testedGrand Nain, Tropical, Rasthali,Somrani monthan,
      High gate, Williams,
      Gros Michel, Lady
      finger, Prata      		Mas, Bluggoe,
      Saba, Cardaba      		Calcutta 4RajeliDwarf BrazilianGrand NainGrand Nain, Ardhapuri, Basrai, Shrimanti, Mutheli, Lalkela and
      Safed Velchi
      Ref.[39,107,90,131,52][39,54,113,48][118,130,115][110][82][121][9][111]
      Ma2, M2b, BM2, SK4, IM1-immature flower method; ECS1, ZZI-scalps method; SS2-split shoot tips.

      Table 4.  Culture media used for somatic embryo maturation in banana.

      ComponentsMA3RD1BM3SK8MMSS3IM2M3b
      Macro-elementsSH1/2MSSH1/2MSSHMSSHMS
      MicroelementsSHMSSHMSMSMSSHMS
      VitaminsMAMSMSMSMSMSMSMS
      FeEDTA+−−−−−−−
      2,4-D (mg/L)1
      BAP (mg/L)50.050.05
      IAA (mg/L)0.2
      NAA (mg/L)0.20.2
      Zeatin (mg/L)0.050.05
      Kinetin (mg/L)0.10.1
      2iP (mg/L)0.2
      Picloram (mg/L)0.1
      Myo-inositol (mg/L)100100
      Biotin (mg/L)1
      Ascorbic acid (mg/L)10
      Malt extract (mg/L)100100100100
      Amino acidsGlutamine
      100 mg/L
      Proline
      230 mg/L      		Glutamine
      100 mg/L
      		Glutamine
      100 mg/L
      SugarSaccharose
      45 g/L      		Sucrose
      30 g/L      		Sucrose
      45 g/L      		Sucrose
      30 g/L      		Saccharose
      45 g/L      		Sucrose
      30 g/L      		Sucrose
      30 g/L      		Sucrose
      30 g/L
      Gelling agent (g/L)Phytagel
      4 g/L      		Gelrite
      3 g/L      		Gelrite
      2 g/L      		Phytagel
      2.6 g/L      		Gelrite
      2 g/L      		Gelrite
      3 g/L      		−−
      pH5.85.85.85.85.85.85.85.8
      Cultivars testedGrand Nain, Gros Michel, WilliamsGrand Nain, Calcutta 4,
      Somrani monthan,
      High gate, Williams,
      Lady finger, Prata      		Rajeli, Grand
      Nain, Tropical      		Dwarf BrazilianGrand Nain; RasthaliGrand NainGrand Nain, Ardhapuri, Basrai, Shrimanti,
      Mutheli, Lalkela,
      Safed Velchi      		Bluggoe, Saba,
      Cardaba
      Ref.[39,107,125][47,110,54,113][82,123,124][121,132][125,16,52][9][111][118,115]
      Ma3, BM3, SK8, MM , IM2, M3b-immature flower method; RDI-scalps method; SS3-split shoot tips.

      At the globular stage, the pro-embryos also contain other mRNAs and proteins that generally inhibit the continuation of embryogenesis[11]. The removal of auxin is believed to result in the inactivation of these genes necessary to enter the next embryogenic growth stage[50]. Guzzo et al. proposed a model linking auxin response, asymmetric division, and totipotency: upon environmental stimuli, cells can be made morpho-genetically totipotent in response to auxin if the cells contain inducible receptors to complete embryogenesis; but only organogenesis or unorganized proliferation will occur otherwise[65]. Cytokinins, in minute concentrations, may also affect the sensitivity of somatic embryogenesis and cell division, but their molecular basis remains unknown[66,67].

      The globular embryo then enters the oblong stage, signaling the shift from isodiametric to bilaterally symmetrical growth, followed by the beginning of the heart stage[68]. This globular-to-heart embryot ransition is pronounced by the outgrowth of the two cotyledons, hypocotyl elongation, and radicle initiation[11]. Finally, the embryo enters the torpedo stage, a stage with a distinct increase in size, before reaching full maturity[68]. Sometimes, immature embryos formed from callus cultures may undergo differentiation, and this can be prevented through high osmotic pressure and the addition of abscisic acid[21]. Removal of bigger aggregates of, more developed, somatic embryos is recommended because they have the tendency to accumulate starch and produce high amounts of polyphenols[47].

      Water stress is one of the most important factors for somatic embryo maturation[69]. During maturation, embryos undergo gradual loss of water and initiate desiccation tolerance to survive[70−72]. Available ECS protocols regulate water availability to the developing somatic embryos through high concentrations of gelling gum or overlaid filter paper[13]. Studies suggest the involvement of early response to dehydration proteins (ERDs) in embryo maturation[73]. Oxygen availability and pH of the culture medium also affect embryo maturation. High levels of oxygen have been shown to promote somatic embryo multiplication while low levels result in histodifferentiation[74]. The optimum pH for embryo development is pH 5.8, but relatively lower quality and irregular embryos may also form at pH 4.5-5.5 and at pH 6.0 to 7.0[75−77].

    Regeneration of somatic embryos into plantlets

    • The germination of the somatic embryo into normal shoots, termed regeneration, is achieved primarily on culture medium in a genotype-dependent manner. Plants derived from embryogenic cell suspensions (ECS), called emblings, are highly dependent on ECS density and quality[50]. High cell density (105 cells/mL) is for embryogenic cell clusters formation from and lower cell density (2 × 104 cells/mL) for embryo development originating from embryogenic cells[78,79]. Embling conversion rates vary within banana genotypes. For instance, 13% in the edible (AA) Pisang Mas and 13% to 25% for Grand Nain of the Cavendish subgroup (AAA)[80]. High regeneration rates (90% to 95%) from ECS cultures have been recorded for some triploid and diploid species such as cv. Dwarf Brasilian (AAB) and M. a. ssp. malaccensis (AA), both of which passed through a differentiation–maturation phase[13,81].

      Most commonly, BAP, at 0.2 to 3 mg/L concentrations, is used for plant regeneration[47,54,82]. Sometimes, BAP is complemented with other cytokinins (at 0.2 to 0.5 mg/L) for embryo germination (Table 5). These are supplemented with antioxidants such as activated charcoal and ascorbic acid to prevent browning and further support the regeneration of tissues[83]. Kumaravel and co-workers further investigated different concentrations of NAA (2.68, 5.37, and 10.74 μM) for the regeneration of banana somatic embryos with three (100 and 200 μM) and methionine (335.09, 670.19, and 1 mM) as additives[40]. They also tested various concentrations of CaCl2 (5, 10, and 15 mM) and gibberellic acid (GA3) (1.44, 2.88, and 5.77 μM) with 11.41 μM IAA and 2.21 μM BAP. In 'Grand Nain', media supplemented with 5.37 μM NAA + 1.44 μM GA3 showed the highest regeneration efficiency (91.0%). The lowest regeneration was recorded in the medium supplemented with 1 mM methionine in 'Rasthali', whereas 'Grand Nain' media with 200 μM showed the least germination. It was found that in 'Grand Nain', an increased concentration of IAA recorded the highest regeneration (24.28%), but relatively lower (showed 18.96%) in 'Red Banana' in kinetin-supplemented media. These results demonstrate that in banana, regeneration is not only genome-dependent but also cultivar-dependent. The observed overexpression of IAA monooxygenase in the emblings also showed that tryptophan-dependent auxin biosynthesis plays a key role in somatic embryo formation. El-Kereamy et al. previously reported the overexpression of these proteins in rice resulted in enhanced shoot formation due to increased biosynthesis of GA and cytokinin, whereas Patterson et al. reported the role of germination-related proteins for root hormone regulation in Arabidopsis[84,85]. These results suggested that the endogenous hormones stimulated the formation of pro-embryonic roots and shoots of somatic embryos. Furthermore, scientists discovered important genes affecting the morphogenesis of somatic embryos. Boutilier and co-workers described the role of the BABY BOOM1 (BBM1) gene for morphogenesis in coffee (Coffea canephora) embryogenesis, while the LEAFY COTYLEDON1 (LEC1) and WUSCHEL-RELATED HOMEOBOX4 (WOX4) genes are crucial in the initial phase of cell differentiation[86−89]. Elhiti and co-workers further identified 12 candidate genes that play key roles in the early stages of somatic embryogenesis[6]. According to their study, epigenetic regulation occurs among the candidate genes involved.

      Table 5.  Culture conditions used for plant regeneration from somatic embryos of banana.

      ComponentsMA4RD2BM5SK10M4SS4IM3SB4
      Macro-elementsMS1/2 MSSHMSMSMS1/2 MSMS
      MicroelementsMSMSSHMSMSMSMSMS
      VitaminsMorelMSMSMorelMorelMorelMSMorel
      FeEDTA+−−−−−−+
      IAA (mg/L)2.02
      BAP (mg/L)0.50.2270.520.4
      NAA (mg/L)0.5
      Zeatin (mg/L)2
      Myo-inositol (mg/L)100
      Ascorbic acid (mg/L)10
      Activated charcoal (%)0.5
      Lactose (g/L)0.1
      SugarSaccharose
      30 g/L      		Sucrose
      30 g/L      		Sucrose
      30 g/L      		Sucrose
      30 g/L      		Saccharose
      30 g/L      		Sucrose
      30 g/L      		Sucrose
      30 g/L      		Sucrose
      30 g/L
      Gelling agent (g/L)Phytagel
      3 g/L      		Gelrite
      3 g/L      		Gelrite
      3 g/L      		Phytagel
      2.6 g/L      		Gelrite
      2 g/L      		Gelrite
      3 g/L      		Gelrite
      2 g/L      		Gelrite
      2 g/L
      pH5.85.85.85.85.75.85.85.8
      Cultivars testedGrand Nain, Tropical, Rasthali, Calcutta 4Somrani monthan,
      High gate, Williams,
      Lady finger, Prata      		RajeliDwarf BrazilianMasGrand NainGrand Nain, Ardhapuri,Basrai, Shrimanti, Mutheli, Lalkela and
      Safed Velchi      		Bluggoe, Saba,
      Cardaba
      Ref.[39,107,125,110,52,123][47,54,113,48][82][121,130][13]
      		[9][111][118,115]
      Ma4, BM5, SK10, IM3, SB4-immature flower method; RD2-scalps method; SS4-split shoot tips.
    Parameters for each growth stage

      Callus induction

    • A common method for quantitative and qualitative assessment of callus induction is obtaining the percent formation of ideal callus (IC) calculated using the formula: %IC = the number of IC/number of inoculated explants. The %IC values obtained for 'Grand Nain' range between 3% to 10%, using the scalping method, and 8% on average, using the immature flower method[16]. But a higher callus induction percentage of 70% has been reported using sword suckers[28]. Qualitative assessment of IC can be performed by physical examination of the type of callus formed as previously mentioned above (Fig. 2).

      Formation and maintenance of somatic embryos

    • According to Strosse and co-workers, the quality of an embryogenic cell suspension (ECS) can be primarily assessed according to the number of embryos/mL of plated cells[16]. It can be conveniently applied for analysis since it only requires a very small aliquot (1 mL) of the cell material[47]. The number of embryos/mL can yield between 100 to 300,000[60,90]. But only one out of two to one out of five embryonic calli will lead to a good quality ECS, characterized by bright to light yellow color with a high proportion of homogeneous embryogenic cell aggregates[91]. On the other hand, pale white suspensions are indicative of a high proportion of starch-rich and non-regenerable cells[16].

      ECS establishment can further be measured using the formula: % of ECS initiated = number of ECSs/number of IC placed in liquid medium or by counting the number of embryos formed per IC[13,39,92]. A cell viability test using fluorescein diacetate (FDA) is usually accompanied to determine ECS quality[93]. To perform the FDA test, add a few drops of fluorescein diacetate (FDA) stock (−20 °C, dissolved in acetone water) to distilled water until a blue shine is observed. Add 1 to 2 drops of this diluted stock to a suspension sample. Viable tissue fluorescence is brightly green when observed under ultra-violet light. Somatic embryos with an FDA score over 80% are considered to be viable and acceptable for regeneration.

      ECS quality declines with increased subcultures[18]. Subsequently, higher rates of subculture result in an increased probability of contamination and a decreased growth rate, regeneration capacity, and higher risk of somaclonal variation[13]. The increased contamination and regeneration can be owed to the fast-growing, dense, and starch-rich cells taking over the cultures[91]. To reduce these problems, cryopreservation protocols have been developed which allow the storage of ECSs for longer periods[10]. In addition, early detection of undesirable genetic variation in suspensions can be assessed using the flow cytometry method[94].

      Plant regeneration

    • The regeneration rate of somatic embryos often describes the success of a somatic embryogenesis protocol. Hence, proper evaluation of a regeneration process is crucial for somatic embryogenesis. Strosse and co-workers suggested the following criteria for evaluation: % of germination (number of plantlets obtained/number of embryos in medium) and regeneration capacity (Regeneration capacity = number of in vitro plants produced/mL of plated cells)[16]. According to their study, the regeneration capacity of an ECS may further be assessed using the following morphometric assays: total weight of the regenerated embryos, the average number of green shoots 1.5 months after shoot emergence, and the average amount of rooted shoots 1.5 to 2 months after root initiation. The settled cell volume (SCV) (precipitation by gravity forces), packed cell volume (PCV) (precipitation by centrifugation), and fresh and dry weights were also described as determinants of regeneration capacity and growth rate.

      Subculture of regenerants (somaclones) is an important part of the regeneration stage to prevent the production of somaclonal variants[95]. The required number of cycles for the subculture of regenerated embryos (clones) depends on the genotype but usually ranges from 2 to 10 cycles[13]. The subcultured clones are then transferred to a rooting medium followed by acclimatization under greenhouse conditions before planting in the field[90]. Regenerated plantlets should be 6−8 cm tall before transplanting in the greenhouse[96]. High relative humidity (> 80%) and a temperature ranging from 19 to 30 °C are also required for growth under greenhouse conditions[97].

    Current limitations and constraints

    • Somatic embryogenesis (SE) is essential in the development of in vitro regeneration systems which are critical steps for the development of resistant varieties[98]. Despite extensive studies in SE, low embryo regeneration rates, and somaclonal variation continue to be the bottlenecks of SE procedures in various banana embryogenic systems[90]. In 'Grand Nain', regeneration values reach as low as 8% under optimal conditions and less than 1% under non-optimal conditions[99]. Embryogenic responses of over 30% could be obtained, from scalps, for some plantain types and cooking bananas[47]. Recently, Youssef and co-workers recorded a high regeneration rate (80%) of 'Grand Nain' from male flower buds[92].

      The in vitro culture environment, the type (and concentration) of plant growth regulators (PGRs), the plant's genetic background and the number and duration of subcultures can also affect the properties of plants regenerated by somatic embryos, contributing to the generation of genetic and epigenetic variation[100]. This variation is apparent in the culture's phenotype, more popularly known as somaclonal variation was thought to be a pre-existent genetic variation in the explant due to changes in chromosome structure, chromosome numbers such as polyploidy and aneuploidy, or induced during in vitro culture[101−104]. These genetic variations may be detected based on plant morphology (e.g. plant height, size, and number of hands) and using advanced DNA markers (e.g. ISSR, SSR, RAPD, SNP)[105].

      Dhed'a observed 5%−10% abnormal somatic embryos recovered from a 'Bluggoe' (ABB, cooking banana) suspension derived from the scalp with only one off-type (0.7%) found with phenotypic changes[106]. Grapin and co-workers reported 16%−22% somaclonal variants regenerated from a 'French Sombre' (AAB, plantain) male flower-derived suspension[90]. Côte and co-workers reported 'variegated' plants with 'double' leaves (two parts coalescing at the central vein) in 'Grand Nain' plants due to somaclonal variation[107]. But all 500 tested plants showed later an agronomical behavior similar to that of plants produced by in vitro budding method. Contrastingly, Uma and co-workers evaluated genetic fidelity in banana cv. 'Grand Nain' and 'Rasthali' were produced from embryogenic cell suspensions using ISSR markers[3]. The overall variation was found to be 3.34% and 2.09%, respectively. Field evaluation further showed no negative effects of vegetative and yield, with no off-types produced.

      Somaclonal variation in banana has been reported to be associated with long-term cultures or cultures that involve a callus phase or high rates of multiplication treatments[96,108]. The decline in the regeneration capacity of ECS cultures has also been associated with cytogenetic instabilities in triploid (AAA, genome) Cavendish bananas, off-type regenerants from long-term Bluggoe suspension cultures (ABB, cooking banana), and the subsequent loss of regeneration potential[13,95,100]. For example, a four-year-old Three Han Planty' (AAB, plantain) suspension was found to have very high regeneration potential with normal ploidy levels, but a nine-year-old 'Bluggoe' (ABB, cooking banana) suspension was found to lack 4−5 chromosomes[47].

    Conclusions

    • This paper reviews the current protocols used for somatic embryogenesis in banana, with a focus on the commercial Cavendish group. Due to the various factors affecting somatic embryogenesis and the laborious aspect of optimization, protocols are usually standardized based on the explant source. Much attention was given to the alteration of culture media conditions such as the concentration of plant growth regulators and additives for the formation of desirable clones. However, the particular effect of these alterations on the genetic aspect and the formation of somaclonal variants is lacking. Understanding the physiological, biochemical, and molecular processes involved in each stage of growth is therefore essential for the proper optimization of somatic embryogenesis protocols. For example, determining the sensitivity of clones to changes in the exogenous hormone application, the subsequent levels of endogenous hormones, and gene regulation which miRNA-mediated gene silencing can offer. Functional characterization of key genes involved during somatic embryogenesis may lead to an enhanced understanding of the totipotency of plant cells and provide approaches to improve the efficiency of the process.

    Author contributions

    • The authors confirm contribution to the paper as follows: topic conception: Cruz MA, Alcasid C, Silvosa-Millado CS, Balendres MA; data collection: Cruz MA; data curation: Cruz MA; formal analysis: Cruz MA, Alcasid C, Silvosa-Millado CS, Balendres MA; writing - original draft: Cruz MA; writing - review & editing: Alcasid C, Silvosa-Millado CS, Balendres MA; supervision: Balendres MA. All authors reviewed the results and approved the final version of the manuscript.

    Data availability

    • Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

    Acknowledgments

    • The authors thank the Department of Agriculture-Bureau of Agricultural Research and the University of the Philippines Los Baños.

      Conflict of interest

      • The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

      Rights and permissions
      • Copyright: © 2024 by the author(s). Published by Maximum Academic Press, Fayetteville, GA. This article is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
    Figure (2)  Table (5) References (132)
  • About this article
    Cite this article
    Cruz MA, Alcasid C, Silvosa-Millado CS, Balendres MA. 2024. Culture conditions for somatic embryogenesis in banana: brief review of the current practices, advantages, and constraints. Technology in Horticulture 4: e016 doi: 10.48130/tihort-0024-0013
    Cruz MA, Alcasid C, Silvosa-Millado CS, Balendres MA. 2024. Culture conditions for somatic embryogenesis in banana: brief review of the current practices, advantages, and constraints. Technology in Horticulture 4: e016 doi: 10.48130/tihort-0024-0013
    shu

Catalog

  • HTML

  • Introduction
  • Growth stages
  • Induction of pro-embryogenic callus
  • Formation and maturation of somatic embryos
  • Regeneration of somatic embryos into plantlets
  • Parameters for each growth stage

  • Callus induction

  • Formation and maintenance of somatic embryos

  • Plant regeneration

  • Current limitations and constraints
  • Conclusions
  • Author contributions
  • Data availability
  • Acknowledgments
  • Conflict of interest
  • Rights and permissions
  • About this article
logo

Contents

Policies

Services

Partnerships

© 2025 Maximum Academic Press, except Open Access articles. MAP is a member of ALPSP, COPE, CrossRef, cOAlition S, OASPA and STM.

Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Terms and Conditions

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return