Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract. Production of doubled haploid (DH) plants the protocol. Duplication of the haploid genome of andro-
through androgenesis induction is a promising and conve- genic individuals has been thought to occur through three
nient alternative to conventional selfing techniques for the mechanisms: endoreduplication, nuclear fusion and c-mi-
generation of pure lines for breeding programs. This pro- tosis. In this review we will revise and analyze the evidenc-
cess comprises two main steps: induction of androgenesis es supporting each of the proposed mechanisms and their
and duplication of the haploid genome. Such duplication is relevance during androgenesis induction, embryo/callus
sometimes indirectly induced by the treatments used to development and plant regeneration. Special attention will
promote androgenic development. But usually, an addition- be devoted to nuclear fusion, whose evidences are accumu-
al step of direct chromosome doubling must be included in lating in the last years. Copyright © 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel
Haploid individuals possess only a gametic number of ment. The constant discovery of new protocols to obtain
chromosomes, which makes them extremely useful from a DHs in an increasing number of agronomically interesting
theoretical and practical point of view, for example, in stud- species has boosted the application of DHs in breeding pro-
ies of induced mutagenesis where recessive mutations can grams. Besides the practical facet of this technique, it is a
be easily detected without the masking effects of domi- valuable method for genetic cartography of complex traits,
nance, or to reveal deleterious genes present in diploids of transgenesis and genomics among others (see Forster et al.,
cross-pollinating species. However, haploids tend to be 2007 for a review on applications of DHs).
smaller in habit, less vigorous, more sensitive to disease and In order to obtain a DH, two main steps should be usu-
stress sources and, most importantly, sterile. Therefore, it is ally considered: (1) the induction of haploid development
usually desired for practical purposes to obtain doubled and (2) the induction of chromosome doubling of the hap-
haploids (DHs). DH technology has emerged as an exciting loid individual. There are several experimental pathways to
and powerful tool of pure line production for crop improve- haploidy, including wide hybridization, parthenogenesis,
gynogenesis and androgenesis (Palmer and Keller, 2005;
Forster et al., 2007). The choice of method for haploid pro-
duction largely depends on the specific response of a given
species to each method. But in species that respond to dif-
This work was supported by grants GV05-023 from Generalitat Valenciana ferent methods, the most used by far is androgenesis, due to
and AGL2006-06678 from the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science its higher simplicity and efficiency. Androgenesis is defined
(MEC) to J.M.S.S.
as a developmental route, alternative to zygotic embryogen-
Request reprints from José M. Seguí-Simarro, Instituto para la
Conservación y Mejora de la Agrodiversidad Valenciana (COMAV) esis, whereby a haploid individual is obtained from a male-
Universidad politécnica de Valencia Ciudad Politécnica de la derived haploid (reduced) nucleus, thus having the genetic
Innovación (CPI), Edificio 8E – Escalera 9, Camino de Vera s/n traits of the male donor plant. At present, there are several
ES–46022 Valencia (Spain)
telephone: +34 387 7000, ext. 88472; fax: +34 96 387 9422 recent reviews on the different aspects of androgenesis in-
e-mail: seguisim@btc.upv.es duction, treatments and potentialities (Datta, 2005; Maras-
Fax +41 61 306 12 34 © 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel Accessible online at:
E-Mail karger@karger.ch 1424–8581/08/1204–0358$24.50/0 www.karger.com/cgr
www.karger.com
chin et al., 2005; Germana, 2006; Pauls et al., 2006; Shariat- Even the type of explant used to induce androgenesis can
panahi et al., 2006; Forster et al., 2007). However, reviews have an impact. A striking example can be found in the
on chromosome doubling (the second step) during andro- work on Brassica rapa of Sato et al. (2005), who found that
genesis are comparatively scarcer despite its importance. microspore culture yields up to a three-fold higher rate of
This will be the main topic of this review. duplication than anther culture. Similar results have been
In most of the species studied, chromosome doubling oc- obtained in B. napus (Lichter et al., 1988) and B. oleracea
curs ‘spontaneously’ in a percentage of individuals. This (Wang et al., 1999). On the other hand, chromosome dou-
percentage may be largely influenced by the in vitro condi- bling is an event that also occurs spontaneously in nature
tions used to induce androgenesis. But there are always a and has been historically referred to as spontaneous or nat-
number of induced embryos which do not undergo dou- ural chromosome doubling (Jensen, 1974). Therefore, in or-
bling and finally become a haploid plant. This number of der to avoid misinterpretations it would be advisable to refer
individuals may oscillate enormously among species. With- to the doubling indirectly induced by the androgenesis in-
in a species, there are differences among genotypes as well. duction treatments as a sort of secondary or indirect effect
For example, doubling rates ranging from 0 to 21.4% have of the culture conditions, thus being ‘indirect’ or ‘indirect-
been reported for different maize genotypes (Barnabas et ly-induced chromosome doubling’.
al., 1999), and from 10 to 40% in Brassica napus (Henry, Across the literature, four major mechanisms for plant
1998). As an exception, the frequency of ‘spontaneous’ chromosome doubling have been proposed (Jensen, 1974;
(nondirectly induced) chromosome doubling in some elite d’Amato, 1984, 1989; Kasha, 2005) alternatively to the nor-
cultivars may be high enough – up to 87% in certain barley mal cell cycle (Fig. 1A): endoreduplication (DNA duplica-
cultivars (Hoekstra et al., 1993) – to skip the doubling step tion without mitosis; Fig. 1B), nuclear fusion (merging of
and use the directly obtained DHs, discarding those (few) coalescing nuclei into a larger nucleus, mixing both DNA
haploid individuals. The mechanism by which androgenic contents; Fig. 1C), endomitosis (mitosis in the absence of
microspores, embryos or calli double their genome is not both mitotic spindle and nuclear envelope breakdown;
well understood. There are examples of the occurrence of Fig. 1D) and c-mitosis (colchicine-induced collapse of the
endomitosis, nuclear fusion or endoreduplication, but some mitotic spindle and breakdown of the nuclear envelope;
of them are controversial and it is not known what factors Fig. 1E). All of these mechanisms have been proposed to
influence each of these processes. Given the relevance of the mediate chromosome doubling in specific situations. By far,
doubling step for DH production, it is important to gain endoreduplication is the most common way to ploidy in-
deeper knowledge on the mechanisms intervening on this crease during the normal life cycle of plants. In flowering
step. In this paper we will review the different cellular mech- plants, it is believed to occur in ⬃90% of the cases of dou-
anisms known to lead to chromosome doubling during an- bling (d’Amato, 1984). Conversely, endomitosis and nuclear
drogenesis, including those indirectly promoted by the fusions have been rarely documented in angiosperms
treatment of androgenesis induction and those directly ap- (d’Amato, 1984) with the exception of fusion of sperm nuclei
plied to specifically duplicate the genome. and female polar nuclei involved in zygote and endosperm
formation (West and Harada, 1993).
However, the situation is somewhat different with re-
‘Spontaneous’ or indirect chromosome doubling spect to chromosome duplication during an experimentally
induced process such as in vitro androgenesis. On the one
The use of the term ‘spontaneous’ chromosome doubling hand, soon after the demonstration of the experimental in-
is widely spread throughout the DH literature to refer to a duction of androgenesis (Guha and Maheshwari, 1964), ev-
doubling event under experimental conditions not just suit- idences favoring the occurrence of endoreduplication and
ed to promote duplication. However, we as well as other au- nuclear fusion began to accumulate. On the other hand, the
thors (Kasha, 2005; Kasha et al., 2006) feel that such a pro- fact that colchicine can promote c-mitosis was known for
cess seems far from being spontaneous, as many different in long and applied for practical purposes (Eigsti and Dustin,
vitro or ex vitro factors may be influencing duplication. As 1955). One of these applications of colchicine is to induce
pointed out by Henry (1998) and Kasha (2005), the micro- c-mitosis in androgenic haploids so that DHs can be ob-
spore stage at the time of anther/microspore inoculation, tained. In the following sections, we will present and discuss
the stressing treatments or the culture conditions used to the evidences and hypotheses accounting for the role and
induce androgenesis do affect the frequency of chromo- mode of action of these three mechanisms in chromosome
some doubling. Several factors, like duration of inductive doubling for DH production through androgenesis.
conditions, temperature (heat and cold), mannitol pretreat-
ments and colchicine and other antimitotic drugs, used to
induce androgenesis, are known to influence the frequency Endoreduplication
of genome duplication (Zhao and Simmonds, 1995; Henry,
1998; Kasha et al., 2001; Zhou et al., 2002a, b; Kasha, 2005; Endoreduplication (Fig. 1B) is characterized by one or
Shim et al., 2006). The use of plant hormones for in vitro more extra rounds of chromatid duplication, in addition to
cultures has also been directly related to DNA duplication the normally-occurring during the phase of DNA synthesis
events (Joubes and Chevalier, 2000; Magyar et al., 2005). (S-phase) of the cell cycle. A parallel inhibition of mitosis
(M-phase) is also necessary. In this manner, the cell uncou- cation increases the number of chromatids of a chromo-
ples S and M phases and exits the cell cycle. During the nor- some without a change in the number of chromosomes. If
mal life cycle of a plant, it is widely accepted that once a cell more than one duplication round takes place, polytene
enters endoreduplication cycles, it irreversibly differentiates chromosomes are formed. Diplochromosomes or polytenic
and there is no way back to re-enter into a new cell cycle chromosomes are generally originated without the usual
(Joubes and Chevalier, 2000; Larkins et al., 2001). However, rounds of chromatin condensation and decondensation
under special circumstances, such as in vitro culture condi- (Sugimoto-Shirasu and Roberts, 2003), which makes it very
tions, endoreduplicated cells may have the potential to de- difficult to gain insights about their structure. However,
differentiate and re-enter the mitotic cycle (Rao and Supra- there is considerable information on the molecular machin-
sanna, 1996). If an endoreduplicated cell re-enters the cell ery involved in the regulation of endoreduplication, as well
cycle (Fig. 1Bⴕ), chromosomes undergoing one round of en- as in the switch from the normal cell cycle to endoredupli-
doreduplication (diplochromosomes) would arrive at mi- cation. A normal cell cycle and endoreduplication cycle
totic metaphase with four sister chromatids and during ana- seem to be mutually exclusive, but they share much of the
phase segregation, two-chromatid chromosomes migrate to molecular machinery needed to enter into both DNA-repli-
the future daughter cells, which will enter the next G1 phase cative processes (Traas et al., 1998). Constitutive expression
with a doubled DNA content. In other words, endoredupli- of genes involved in DNA replication stimulates both types
Nuclear fusion
A B
Nuclear fusion has also been proposed as a mechanism
of chromosome duplication during androgenesis for more
than 30 years. Pioneering authors proposed two possible
ways of nuclear fusion: (1) fusion of mitotic nuclei and (2)
fusion of nuclei at interphase. Fusion of mitotic nuclei was
proposed by Sunderland et al. (1974) as an explanation for
genome duplication in induced Datura pollen grains by
means of a synchronous entry into mitosis of both vegeta-
tive and generative nuclei. According to Sunderland et al.
(1974) and Sunderland and Evans (1980), chromosomes
C D
from both nuclei intermix and then segregate together
through a common mitotic spindle. This hypothesis, al-
though attractive, has been questioned due to the lack of
evidence for such a common spindle and most importantly,
to the unlikelihood of perfectly synchronized mitoses in
pollen grains. In wheat, mitotic synchronization was ob-
served in less than 4% of androgenic microspores (Raquin
et al., 1982). In a posterior paper, Sunderland (1974) report-
ed a ‘high frequency’ of 16 of these compound mitoses in
one anther, but unfortunately the percentage from the total
of pollen grains was not given.
In parallel, fusion of interphasic nuclei (Fig. 1C) has been
E F better documented. It consists of a normally-occurring
karyokinesis and nuclear reassembly, followed by a disrupt-
ed cytokinesis that allows daughter nuclei to coalesce with-
in the same cytoplasm and finally fuse into a single, larger
G nucleus with twice the chromosome number of the original
nucleus. As far as we are aware, the first visual evidence of
Fig. 2. Examples of absent or defective cell walls, binucleated cells two fusing interphasic nuclei during androgenesis was pro-
and fusing nuclei in different androgenic systems. (A) Binucleated cell vided in barley (Chen et al., 1984a, b), the androgenic system
within a rapeseed androgenic multicellular microspore, still surround- where nuclear fusion has been more and better studied. But
ed by the exine coat (ex). (B) Magnification of the binucleated cell it has been in the last decade that examples of occurrence of
shown in A . Note the absence of cell wall in the cytoplasm (ct) be-
tween the two interphasic nuclei (n) with active nucleoli (nu). (C , D) this mechanism in androgenic systems such as maize (Tes-
Meiocyte-derived tomato young callus. (C) Callus region showing mul- tillano et al., 2004), barley (Kasha et al., 2001; González-Me-
tiple binucleated cells. (D) Electron microscopy of a binucleated cell lendi et al., 2005; Shim et al., 2006), wheat (Hu and Kasha,
where the nuclear envelopes (ne) are in contact at several regions. 1999) and recently tomato (Seguí-Simarro and Nuez, 2007)
(E , F) Barley binucleated embryogenic microspore, v: vacuole. (F) De- and rapeseed (Fig. 2A, B; unpublished results) are accumu-
tail of the tightly apposed nuclear envelopes. (G) Barley multinucleated
embryogenic microspore stained with Sytox Green (for nuclei, green) lating.
and calcofluor (for cell walls, blue) and observed under a confocal laser In maize, Testillano et al. (2004) reported the occurrence
scanning microscope. The series shows five consecutive confocal of incomplete or absent cell walls and therefore polynucle-
planes through which two nuclei in a same cell (white arrowheads) and ated cells during the early stages of microspore embryogen-
a large, fused nucleus (yellow arrowheads) can be followed. Images E ,
F and G courtesy of Dr. P. González-Melendi. Bars in (A , B): 10 m; (C):
esis. They observed fusing, peanut-like shaped nuclei in
20 m; (D–F): 500 nm; (G): 100 m. both embryo- and endosperm-like domains, and proposed
this mechanism to explain the observed ploidy shift to 2C
in the embryo-like domain and to higher ploidies in the en-
dosperm-like domain. In tomato, the presence of binucle-
ated cells and fusing nuclei in induced meiocytes and meio-
cyte-derived mixoploid (C + 2C) calli (Fig. 2C, D) giving
References
Aionesei T, Touraev A, Heberle BE: Pathways to mi- Collins GB, Dunwell JM, Sunderland N: Irregular Finnie SJ, Forster BP, Chalmers KJ, Dyer AF, Waugh
crospore embryogenesis, in Palmer CE, Keller microspore formation in Datura innoxia and its R, Powell W: Genetic stability of microspore-
WA, Kasha KJ (eds): Haploids in crop improve- relevance to anther culture. Protoplasma 82: derived doubled haploids of barley – a cytolog-
ment II Vol 56, pp 11–34 (Springer-Verlag, Ber- 365–378 (1974). ical, biochemical, and molecular study. Ge-
lin Heidelberg 2005). Corbett KD, Berger JM: Emerging roles for plant nome 34: 923–928 (1991).
Baenziger PS, Keppenne VD, Morris MR, Peterson topoisomerase VI. Chem Biol 10: 107–111 Forster BP, Heberle-Bors E, Kasha KJ, Touraev A:
CJ, Mattern PJ: Quantifying gametoclonal vari- (2003). The resurgence of haploids in higher plants.
ation in wheat doubled haploids. Cereal Res Custers JBM, Cordewener JHG, Nöllen Y, Dons JJ, Trends Plant Sci 12:368–375 (2007).
Commun 19:33–42 (1991). van Lookeren-Campagne MM: Temperature Fowke LC, Constabel F, Gamborg OL: Fine-struc-
Barnabas B, Pfahler PL, Kovacs G: Direct effect of controls both gametophytic and sporophytic ture of fusion products from soybean cell-cul-
colchicine on the microspore embryogenesis to development in microspore cultures of Brassica ture and pea leaf protoplasts. Planta 135: 257–
produce dihaploid plants in wheat (Triticum napus. Plant Cell Rep 13:267–271 (1994). 266 (1977).
aestivum L.). Theoret Appl Genet 81: 675–678 d’Amato F: Role of polyploidy in reproductive or- Germana M: Doubled haploid production in fruit
(1991). gans and tissues, in Johri BM (ed): Embryology crops. Plant Cell Tiss Org 86:131–146 (2006).
Barnabas B, Obert B, Kovacs G: Colchicine, an ef- of Angiosperms, pp 519–566 (Springer-Verlag, Gervais C, Newcomb W, Simmonds DH: Rear-
ficient genome-doubling agent for maize (Zea New York 1984). rangement of the actin filament and microtu-
mays L.) microspores cultured in anthero. Plant d’Amato F: Polyploidy in cell differentiation. bule cytoskeleton during induction of micro-
Cell Rep 18:858–862 (1999). Caryologia 42: 183–211 (1989). spore embryogenesis in Brasssica napus L. cv.
Barret P, Brinkman M, Beckert M: A sequence re- Datta SK: Androgenic haploids: Factors controlling Topas. Protoplasma 213: 194–202 (2000).
lated to rice Pong transposable element displays development and its application in crop im- Gimenez-Abian MI, Utrilla L, Canovas JL, Gi-
transcriptional activation by in vitro culture provement. Curr Sci India 89: 1870–1878 menez-Martin G, Navarrete MH, De la Torre C:
and reveals somaclonal variations in maize. Ge- (2005). The positional control of mitosis and cytokine-
nome 49: 1399–1407 (2006). Dumas de Vaulx R, Chambonnet D: Culture in vi- sis in higher-plant cells. Planta 204: 37–43
Binarova P, Straatman KR, Hause B, Hause G, van tro d’anthères d’aubergine (Solanum melon- (1998).
Lammeren AAM: Nuclear DNA synthesis dur- gena L.): stimulation de la production de plan- González-Melendi P, Ramírez C, Testillano PS,
ing the induction of embryogenesis in cultured tes au moyen de traitements à +35 °C associés à Kumlehn J, Risueño MC: Three dimensional
microspores and pollen of Brassica napus L. de faibles teneurs en substances de croissance. confocal and electron microscopy imaging de-
Theoret Appl Genet 87: 9–16 (1993). Agronomie 2:983–988 (1982). fine the dynamics and mechanisms of diploidi-
Caperta AD, Delgado M, Ressurreicao F, Meister A, Dumas de Vaulx R, Chambonnet D, Pochard E: In sation at early stages of barley microspore-de-
Jones RN, et al: Colchicine-induced polyploidi- vitro culture of pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) rived embryogenesis. Planta 222: 47–57 (2005).
zation depends on tubulin polymerization in anthers. High-rate plant production from dif- Guha S, Maheshwari SC: In vitro production of em-
c-metaphase cells. Protoplasma 227: 147–153 ferent genotypes by +35 ° C treatments. Agrono- bryos from anthers of Datura. Nature 204: 497
(2006). mie 1:859–864 (1981). (1964).
Chen CC, Howarth MJ, Peterson RL, Kasha KJ: Ul- Dunwell JM, Sunderland N: Pollen ultrastructure Hancock LC, Behta RP, Lopes JM: Genomic analy-
trastructure of androgenic microspores of bar- in anther cultures of Nicotiana tabacum I. Ear- sis of the Opi(-) phenotype. Genetics 173: 621–
ley during the early stages of anther culture. ly stages of culture. J Exp Bot 25: 352–361 634 (2006).
Can J Genet Cytol 26:484–491 (1984a). (1974). Hansen NJP, Andersen SB: In vitro chromosome
Chen CC, Kasha KJ, Marsolais A: Segmentation Dunwell JM, Sunderland N: Pollen ultrastructure doubling potential of colchicine, oryzalin, tri-
patterns and mechanisms of genome multipli- in anther cultures of Datura innoxia. II. The fluralin, and APM in Brassica napus micro-
cation in cultured microspores of barley. Can J generative cell wall. J Cell Sci 22: 481–491 spore culture. Euphytica 88: 159–164 (1996).
Genet Cytol 26:475–483 (1984b). (1976). Hansen NJP, Andersen SB: Efficient production of
Chen ZZ, Snyder S, Fan ZG, Loh WH: Efficient pro- Duzgunes N, Wilschut J, Fraley R, Papahadjopou- doubled haploid wheat plants by in vitro treat-
duction of doubled haploid plants through los D: Studies on the mechanism of mebrane- ment of microspores with trifluralin or APM.
chromosome doubling of isolated microspores fusion – role of headgroup composition in cal- Plant Breeding 117: 401–405 (1998).
in Brassica napus. Plant Breeding 113: 217–221 cium-induced and magnesium-induced fusion Harada H, Kyo M, Imamura J: The induction of em-
(1994). of mixed phospholipid-vesicles. Biochim Bio- bryogenesis in Nicotiana inmature pollen cul-
Chervin D, Gawer M, Guern N, Mazliak P: Modula- phys Acta 642: 182–195 (1981). ture, in Bock G, Marsh J (eds): Applications of
tions of the effects of choline on tobacco cells by Eigsti OJ, Dustin P: Colchicine in agriculture, med- Plant Cell and Tissue Culture, pp 59–74 (John
a solid medium and a sucrose or phosphate sup- icine, biology and chemistry. (The Iowa State Wiley and Sons, Chichester 1988).
plementation. Plant Physiol Biochem 33: 471– College Press, Ames 1955). Hause B, Hause G, Pecham P, van Lammeren AAM:
478 (1995). Faure JE, Morgensen HL, Dumas C, Lorz H, Kranz Cytoskeletal changes and induction of embryo-
Christensen CA, Gorsich SW, Brown RH, Jones LG, E: Karyogamy after electrofusion of single egg genesis in microspore and pollen cultures of
Brown J, et al: Mitochondrial GFA2 is required and sperm cell protoplasts from maize – cyto- Brassica napus L. Cell Biol Int 17: 153–168
for synergid cell death in Arabidopsis. Plant logical evidence and time-course. Plant Cell 5: (1993).
Cell 14:2215–2232 (2002). 747–755 (1993). Henry Y: Origin of microspore-derived dihaploid
and polyhaploid in vitro plants. Plant Tissue
Cult Biotech 4: 127–135 (1998).