Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-tsvsl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-29T08:25:44.946Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Variation in the electrophoretic band pattern of tuber proteins from somaclones of potato

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

D. B. Smith
D. B. Smith
Affiliation:
Plant Breeding Institute, Trumpington, Cambridge, CB2 2LQ
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The soluble tuber proteins of potato (Solatium tuberosum) may be separated by electrophoresis on the basis of charge or molecular weight (Stegemann & Schnick, 1982; Maier & Wagner, 1981: Park et al. 1983). Considerable cultivar specific variation exists in the band patterns of these proteins and separation of native proteins in 6% polyacrylamide gels at pH 7·9 has been used as the basis of characterizing cultivars for the Index of European Potato Varieties (Stegemann & Schnick, 1982).

Type
Short Note
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 106 , Issue 2 , April 1986 , pp. 427 - 428
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Gunn, R. E., Jellis, G. J., Lacey, C. N. D. & Thomson, A. J. (1985). Exploitation of somaclonal variation in potato breeding. In The Improvement of Root and Tuber Crops and Similar Vegetatively Propagated Crop Plants in Tropical Countries by Induced Mutations. Proceedings of the First Co-ordination Meeting, Pattaya, Chonburi, Thailand (in the Press).Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.Google Scholar
Larkin, P. J. & Scowcroft, W. R. (1981). Somaclonal variation – a novel source of variability from cell cultures for plant improvement. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 60, 197–214.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maier, G. & Wagner, K. (1981). Identifizierung osterreichischer Kartoffelsorten mit Hilfe der Polyacrylamidgelelekrophorese. Die Bodenkultur 32, 314–325.Google Scholar
Park, W. D., Blackwood, C., Migmery, G. A., Hermodson, M. A. & Lister, R. M. (1983). Analysis of the heterogeneity of the 40000 molecular weight tuber glycoprotein of potatoes by immunological methods and by NH2-terminal sequence analysis. Plant Physiology 71, 156–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Secor, G. A. & Shepard, J. F. (1981). Variability of protoplast-derived potato clones. Crop Science 21, 102–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepard, J. F. (1980 a). Mutant selection and plant regeneration from potato mesophyll protoplasts. In Genetic Improvement in Crops – Emergent Techniques (ed. Rubenstein, I., Gengenbach, B., Phillips, R. L. and Green, C. E.), pp. 185–219. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Shepard, J. F. (1980 b). Abscisic acid-enhanced shoot initiation in protoplast-derived calli of potato. Plant Science Letters 18, 327–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stegemann, H. & Schnick, D. (1982). Index 1982 of European Potato Varieties. Berlin: Kommissions-verlag Paul Pareg.Google Scholar