Abstract
Ceropegia maculata Bedd. is an endemic plant of Southern Western Ghats, Tamil Nadu, India. It has important medicinal properties, edible tubers, and ornamental flowers. In vitro propagation protocol of this plant is required and is established by using nodal explants. Sterilized nodal explant was inoculated on Murashige and Skoog (MS) medium supplemented with various plant growth regulators (PGRs) and additives for in vitro shoot multiplication. Maximum shoot induction (86%) with an average of 2.43 shoots per explant was obtained on MS medium supplemented with 1.5 mg L−1 of N6-benzyl adenine (BA). The highest number of shoots (6.66) per explant was observed on MS medium containing combination of 1.5 mg L−1 BA and 0.5 mg L−1 indole-3-butyric acid (IBA). In this study, in vitro flowering (93.33% and 4.86 flowers per mature shoot) on MS medium plus 0.5 mg L−1 BA and tubers (95.33%) on MS medium plus combination with 2.0 mg L−1 BA with 0.5 mg L−1 naphthalene acetic acid (NAA) were observed. The highest number of roots (9.33) per shoot was recorded on half-strength MS medium supplemented with 0.5 mg L−1 IBA. The rooted plantlets were hardened with sand and coconut coir mixed with red soil 1:1:1 (w/w/w) ratio. Acclimatized plants were transferred to field and survival rate was 90%. For the first time, developed this protocol allows an efficient method for in vitro plant regeneration and conservation of this endangered species.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Ceropegia maculata Bedd. is an ethnomedical plant which belongs to the family Apocynaceae. The genus Ceropegia comprising twiners, herbs, and occasionally subshrubs is distributed in tropical and subtropical regions of Asia, Africa, Australia, Malaysia, and the Canary and Pacific Islands (Nayar and Sastry 1988; Anonymous 1992). The plant names are universally called as the lantern flower, Christensen, parasol flower, parachute flower, bushman’s pipe, the string of hearts, snake creeper, wine-glass vine, rosary vine, necklace vine flower, Chinese lantern, lantern plant, trap flowers, and pitfall trap flowers (Yadav 1996; Quattrocchi 2000). The six recognized centers of diversity of the genus are East Africa, Africa of the West, Southern Africa, the Indian subcontinent, the Arabian Peninsula, and Madagascar (Chavan et al. 2018). The maximum variety of flowers of the Ceropegia spp. is found in subtropical Africa on the eastern side of the African continent (Dyer 1983; Bruyns 2003; Bruyns et al. 2015). The Indian Ceropegia was first updated with 44 species, of which 28 were endemic; after 13 new additions, the genus now comprises 57 species, 3 varieties, and 2 subspecies in which 35 species are endemic to the Western Ghats (Karthikeyan et al. 2009). The Indian Ceropegia species are present in limited, inaccessible pockets of the Himalayas and the Western Ghats due to over exploitation for medicinal purposes. The edible sweet–sour leaves of Ceropegia are known to be digestive tonic. Ceropegia tubers are also edible as they contain starch, sugar, gum, albumin, carbohydrates, fats, and raw fiber (Mabberley 1987; Jain and Defillips 1991). Tubers of some Ceropegia contain 40–50% starch and act as coolant (Khare, 2007). Nutritional profile of C. hirsuta and C. bulbosa exhibited the presence of ash, protein, phosphorus, Cu, Mn, Fe, Zn, Vit-C, carbohydrates, protein, and fibber (Deshmukh and Rathod 2013). Cerpegin (1,1-dimethylfuro[3,4-C] pyridine-3,4(1H,5H)-dione), a pyridine type of alkaloid which is relatively rare in nature, has been isolated from the root tubers of Ceropegia (Adibatti et al. 1991; Phulwaria et al. 2013). The overall alkaloidal fractions have shown promising hepatoprotective, antipyretic, anti-ulcer, analgesic, stabilizing mast cells, tranquilizing, and hypotensive activities (Adibatti et al. 1991). The Ceropegia tubers were cooked to make curries by tribal women to promote fertility and vitality. In Ayurvedic medications, the Ceropegia tubers have been used to treat diarrhea and dysentery (Kirtikar and Basu 1935; Jain and Defillips 1991; Beena et al. 2003; Khare 2007).
Ceropegia maculata Bedd. is a perennial twiner with terete stems and protruding spots. Natural fruit setting of this species is very rare, while in vitro flowering was recorded by Nair et al. (2007). Earlier, Nayar and Sastry (1987) assessed this plant as endangered or possibly extinct, while it has been reported to be collected from few places of South India (Kambale and Yadav 2019). However, to our knowledge, only one article is available on rediscovery of C. maculata from Tirunelveli Hills of Tamil Nadu, and yet the data on the distribution and extent still needs to be studied (Rajasekar et al. 2018). Hence, studies on conservation measures of this rediscovered species have become very important. There are few reports available on in vitro micropropagation methods of Ceropegia species like C. spiralis (Chavan et al. 2011a), C. attenuate (Chavan et al. 2011b), C. bulbosa (Dhir and Shekhawat 2013, 2014; Shete 2014), C. noorjahaniae (Chavan et al. 2014a), C. juncea (Balakrishnan et al. 2015), C. ensifolia (Reddy et al. 2015), and C. mahabalei (Upadhye et al. 2015). In vitro micropropagation of Ceropegia maculata species is not studied yet and is required to establish in vitro plant regeneration protocol for this species; therefore, we aimed to establish an effective micropropagation protocol for rapid mass propagation, in vitro flowering, tuberization, and conservation of C. maculata.
Materials and Methods
Explant Source
C. maculata plants were collected from Karaiyar dam of Inchikuzhi region from Tirunelveli District, Tamil Nadu, India. The collected specimens were maintained in earthen pots at the glasshouse in the Department of Botany, Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu, India, and used as the source of explant. A portion of the plant was fixed for herbarium and submitted to the Botanical Survey of India, Regional Canter, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, for authentication (No.: BSI/SRC/5/23/2021/Tech/93).
Explant Preparation and Sterilization
Nodal segments of ~ 2 cm long were excised from the glasshouse-maintained plants and washed under running tap water for 15 min. Then, the explants were surface-sterilized with 70% (v/v) ethanol for 30 s, followed by 0.1% (w/v) HgCl2 for 3 min and rinsed in sterile distilled water each time for 3–4 times.
Basal Medium and Culture Conditions
Murashige and Skoog (MS) medium (1962) fortified with 3% sucrose, meso-inositol (100 mg L−1), and 0.8% agar was used as basal medium for in vitro shoot regeneration, flowering, tuberization, and rooting. The pH of the medium was adjusted to 5.8 ± 0.02 with 1 N HCl or NaOH prior to autoclaving at 120 °C for 20 min. All the cultures were incubated in the culture room at 25 ± 2 °C, under 16-h photoperiod with a light intensity of 60–70 μM m−2 s−1 supplied by cool white fluorescent lamps (Phillips, Mumbai, India), and relative humidity of 55–60%. All the chemicals used in the experiments were purchased from HiMedia®, Mumbai, India.
Shoot Bud Induction, Shoot Multiplication, and Elongation
The sterilized nodal explants were cultured on MS medium supplemented with N6-benzyladenine (BA), thidiazuron (TDZ), and N6-(2-isopentyl) adenine (2iP) at various concentrations (0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 mg L−1) for shoot bud induction. In vitro shoots were cultured on MS medium containing BA 1.5 mg L−1 supplemented with indole-3-butyric acid (IBA), indole-3-acetic acid (IAA), and α-naphthalene acetic acid (NAA) at different concentrations (0.1, 0.5, 0.7, and 1.0 mg L−1) for shoot multiplication.
MS medium containing BA (1.5 mg L−1) and IBA (0.5 mg L−1) and addition of 25, 50, and 100 mg L−1 of ascorbic acid (AA) and adenine sulfate (Ads) were used for shoot elongation.
In Vitro Rooting, Hardening, and Acclimatization
The elongated shoots (4–5 cm) excised from multiple shoot clump were further cultured on rooting medium consisting of half-strength MS medium (½ MS) supplemented with IAA, IBA, and NAA at different concentrations (0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, and 1.0 mg L−1). Then, the rooted plantlets were removed from the culture tubes/flasks and rinsed with sterile distilled water to remove the adhering agar and introduced on paper cups (5 cm in diameter) containing sterile (autoclaved) sand and coconut coir mixed with red soil at 1:1:1 (w/w/w) ratio for hardening. The hardened plantlets were sprayed with one-fourth strength of MS basal (100 mL) salt solution devoid of sucrose and meso-inositol every 4 d, for 6 wk. Finally, the hardened plantlets were moved to a glasshouse condition.
In Vitro Flowering
The in vitro shoots (3–4 cm) from shoot multiplication medium were used for in vitro flowering. A full-strength MS medium with BA and TDZ at different concentrations (0.3, 0.5, 0.7, and 1.0 mg L−1) was used to study their influence on in vitro flowering.
In Vitro Tuberization and Histology
The shoots (3–4 cm) obtained from shoot multiplication medium were cultured on full-strength MS medium, containing 3% reinforced sucrose (w/v) with various PGRs such as, BA (1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 3.0 mg L−1), NAA (1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 3.0 mg L−1), BA (2.0 mg L−1) with IBA (0.5, 1.0, 1.5 mg L−1), and NAA (0.5, 1.0, 1.5 mg L−1) for in vitro tuber formation.tuberization with an average tuber diameter of 0.85tuberization with an average tuber diameter of 0.85
To confirm the tuber formation, the developing tubers as fresh and after dehydration were fine-sectioned using hand and microtome (Leica, Guragon, India), stained with iodine (I2/KI) and observed under light microscope (Labomed, Guragon, India) and confocal microscope (Carl Zeiss, model-LSM 710, Jena, Germany) following Ovecka et al. (2012).
Statistical Analysis
Data on percentage of response, mean number, and length of shoot and root were recorded after 45 and 20 d of culture period, respectively. Frequency of flowering, number of inflorescence and flower, frequency of tuberization, tuber nature, and tuber diameter (mm) were recorded after 30 and 60 d of culture period, respectively. All the experiments were carried out in a completely randomized block design with triplicates. All the data were subjected to variance analysis, and the significance of differences was carried out between mean values using Duncan’s multiple range test (DMRT) at P < 0.05 using SPSS software, version 22.0 (SPSS Inc., Armonk, NY). The results were expressed as the mean ± standard error (SE) of the triplicates.
Results and Discussion
Influence of Cytokinins on Shoot Induction and Multiplication
Nodal explant cultured on MS basal medium supplemented with different cytokinins exhibited a variety of responses depending on the form and concentration of the substance used for shoot bud induction. Shoot induction response was recorded after 45 d on medium with BA 1.5 mg L−1 (Fig. 1a), TDZ 2.0 mg L−1, and 2iP 1.5 mg L−1, respectively. MS medium supplemented with BA 1.5 mg L−1 induced a maximum number of 2.43 shoots per nodal explant after 45 d of culture (Table 1). At this concentration, 86% of nodal explant cultures exhibited shoot induction and multiplication. Successful results on shoot production using BA have been reported in Ceropegia species such as Ceropegia bulbosa (Dhir and Shekhawat 2013), C. noorjahaniae (Chavan et al. 2014a), C. barnesii (Ananthan et al. 2018), and C. mohanramii (Adsul et al. 2019). BA was found to have beneficial impact at concentrations ≤ 2.0 mg L−1 on shoot multiplication and elongation, while TDZ showed similar response at ≥ 1.5 mg L−1. The ability of BA on induction of cytokinin accumulation may be responsible for the effective in vitro shoot regeneration over TDZ or 2iP (Baskaran and Jayabalan 2007; Phulwaria et al. 2012). This may also be due to increased auxin aggregation and translocation (Chavan et al. 2013).
Synergistic Effect of Auxin on Shoot Multiplication
The BA-exposed shoots were transferred to a secondary medium containing auxins for shoot multiplication after a 30-d incubation on basal MS medium. For the multiplication of C. maculata shoots, a lower concentration of IBA combined with BA 1.5 mg L−1 was most effective. At all concentrations, IBA outperformed other auxins (IAA and NAA) in terms of shoot multiplication. The maximum number of 6.66 shoots was obtained from nodal explants, with 87% response on BA (1.5 mg L−1) supplemented with IBA (0.5 mg L−1) treatment (Table 2 and Fig. 1b). The potential of IBA along with BA on in vitro multiplication of shoots has been registered in Ceropegia santapaui (Chavan et al. 2014b), C. candelabrum (Beena et al. 2003), C. noorjahaniae (Chavan et al. 2014a), and C. mohanramii (Adsul et al. 2019).
Effect of Supplements on Shoot Elongation
The shoots cultured on MS medium supplemented with BA (1.5 mg L−1) and IBA (0.5 mg L−1) were considered control for both adenine sulfate (Ads) and ascorbic acid (AA) supplementation. AA at 50 mg L−1 showed the best response in shoot elongation (13.6 cm) (Fig. 1c) with reduced frequency of 72.33%, and reduced shoot number (3.73) (Table 3). Due to the effective shoot elongation response, the number of shoots was reduced, compared to the previous experiments (Tables 1 and 2). In vitro shoot multiplication has been reported to be influenced by AA in Eulophia ochrea (Shriram et al. 2014) and Litsea glutinosa (Shah et al. 2013). Among the adenine sulfate concentration, 50 mg L−1 showed the best response in terms of shoot number (2.10) and frequency of response (54%) from nodal explant–derived shoots. The high efficiency of AA over other supplements on shoot regeneration has been noticed with Ceropegia thwaitesii (Muthukrishnan et al. 2012), Hoya wightii (Lakshmi et al. 2010), and Prosopis cineraria (Shekhawat et al. 1993). The addition of exogenous ascorbic acid to plant tissue is said to boost metabolic activity and speed up sugar release, allowing for better growth and development (George 1993). In plant tissue culture research, it is one-of-a-kind natural supplement.
In Vitro Rooting, Hardening, and Acclimatization
The in vitro derived shoots of C. maculata (up to 5 cm long) were transferred to rooting medium containing half-strength MS supplemented with auxins. Among the auxin, IBA at 0.5 mg L−1 showed the highest frequency of 87% (Fig. 1d) rooting response withpotential of IBA along an average of 9.33 roots per shoot (Table 4). All the roots are continued its linear growth without lateral roots. The effect of IBA at low concentration on in vitro rooting has been reported for Ceropegia candelabrum (Beena et al. 2003), C. attenuates (Chavan et al. 2011b), C. thwaitesii (Muthukrishnan et al. 2012), C. barnesii (Ananthan et al. 2018), and C. mohanramii (Adsul et al. 2019). In contrast, plantlets rooted in IAA and IBA reported to produce basal callus and unsuitable for acclimatization Actinidia deliciosa (Nasib et al. 2008). Hardening of in vitro rooted plantlets in paper cups containing a soil mixture grew well and was transferred to glasshouse conditions for acclimatization (Fig. 1e). The hardened plantlets were well acclimatized in the greenhouse condition in 30 d with a 90% survival rate (Fig. 1f).
In Vitro Flowering
The influence of cytokinin on in vitro flowering has been noticed in Ceropegia species such as C. bulbosa, C. hirsute, C. lawii, C. maccannii, C. oculate and C. Sahyadri, and C. mohanramii (Nair et al. 2007; Adsul et al. 2019). Similarly, in the present study, MS medium with BA and TDZ at low concentration showed a varied response in flower bud induction (Fig. 2a). Shoots cultured on BA 0.5 mg L−1 showed the highest response of 93% flower bud induction, with 4.86 flower buds per shoot (Fig. 2b), while BA at 2.0 mg L−1 with IAA reported to favor flowering in C. mohanramii (Adsul et al. 2019). Also, MS medium supplemented with 0.5 mg L−1 concentration of TDZ induced a maximum of 3.73 floral buds and showed a culture response rate of 85% (Table 5). The beneficial impact of TDZ on in vitro flowering has been observed in some Ceropegia species like C. fantastica (Chandore et al. 2010) and C. bulbosa (Britto et al. 2003). In the current study, blooming of flowers were observed in 20 d of culture period.
In Vitro Tuberization
Several factors have been reported to affect in vitro tuber formation, including medium type and strength; sucrose, auxin, and cytokinin concentrations; temperature; and photoperiod (Skoog and Miller 1957; Madec 1963; Hussey and Stacey 1984; Uranbey et al. 2010). Even the response to in vitro tuber induction differed depending on the species and explant type (Uranbey et al. 2010). The levels of auxin and cytokinin in the medium were investigated in this study. In vitro raised shoots cultured on medium containing BA, NAA, BA with IBA, or NAA produce only basal tubers at varied response and size in diameter (Table 6) which were morphologically similar to the previous reports in C. media (Pandey et al. 2021), C. spiralis and C. pusilla (Murthy et al. 2012), C. ensifolia (Reddy et al. 2015), and C. spiralis (Murthy et al. 2010). Of the treatments, MS medium supplemented with BA 2.0 mg L−1 and NAA 0.5 mg L−1 produced the highest average tuber diameter of 1.43 cm with a maximum response of 95.33% tuberization (Fig. 3a). While NAA at 3.0 mg L−1 had an overall frequency of 46.66% tuberization with an average tuber diameter of 0.85 cm (Fig. 3b). Skoog and Miller (1957) and Vanderhoef and Key (1968) stated that cytokinins are important for tuber formation and growth. This is expressed in the current research that BA induced higher percentage of in vitro tuber formation over the auxin NAA. The effect of cytokines on in vitro basal tuberization was noticed in other species of the family Asclepiadoideae, namely C. jainii, C. bulbosa var. blbosa and C. bulbosa var. lushii (Patil 1998), C. pusilla (Kalimuthu et al. 2014), C. spiralis (Murthy et al. 2012), C. media (Pandey et al. 2021), and C. woodii (Barakat et al. 2021). BA (2.0 mg L−1) in combination with IBA at (0.5 mg L−1) produced a maximum response of 78% basal tubers with an average diameter of 1.03 cm (Fig. 3c). A similar effect of NAA in combination with a cytokinin (BA) study on microtuber (Fig. 3d) formation was published in Ceropegia pusilla by Murthy et al. (2012). The impact of BA with IBA on basal tuber formation was recorded in Ceropegia spiralis by Murthy et al. (2012). In contrary, Mbanaso et al. (2007) recorded aerial tubers in Dioscorea rotunda on the nutrient-depleted medium. The histological sections of the developing in vitro tubers confirmed the presence of starch granules (SG) (amyloplast) as dark to pinkish-brown, under a light microscope in their storage cells, by stained with iodine (I2/KI) (Fig. 3b-c). Confocal microscopic examination with 488 nm excitation also confirmed that the in vitro tuber contained storage starch by starch granule-specific green fluorescence emission detected using LSM488 filter (Fig. 3d) (Ovecka et al. 2012). The starch granules were confirmed in bulbous plant, Ledebouria ovatifolia, by histological studies (Baskaran et al. 2016).
Conclusions
The present study describes effective protocols for micropropagation, in vitro flowering, and in vitro tuberization for Ceropegia maculata. Effective shoot production was achieved from nodal explants on MS medium supplemented with BA (1.5 mg L−1) and IBA (0.5 mg L−1). MS medium supplemented with BA (0.5 mg L−1) influenced efficient in vitro flowering. Basal tubers were produced on BA (2.0 mg L−1) with NAA (0.5 mg L−1) combination. The tubers were confirmed with developing starch grains by using histological studies. In vitro shoots were best rooted on half-strength MS medium supplemented with IBA (0.5 mg L−1). The rooted plantlets were successfully hardened and acclimatized with 90% survival rate. Developed protocol in this study is helpful for mass propagation and conservation of C. maculata.
References
Adibatti NA, Thirugnanasambantham P, Kulothungan C, Viswanathan S, Kameswaran L, Balakrishna K, Sukumar E (1991) A pyridine alkaloid from Ceropegia juncea. Phytochemistry 30(7):2449–2450
Adsul AA, Chavan JJ, Gaikwad NB, Gurav RV, Dixit GB, Yadav SR (2019) In vitro regeneration approaches for restoration of Ceropegia mohanramii - an endemic and critically endangered asclepiad. J Genet Eng Biotechnol 17(1):1–5
Ananthan R, Mohanraj R, Bai VN (2018) In vitro regeneration, production, and storage of artificial seeds in Ceropegia barnesii, an endangered plant. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 54(5):553–563
Anonymous (1992). Ceropegia Linn. (Asclepiadaceae). The Wealth of India vol. 3. CSIR, New Delhi, pp 448–449
Balakrishnan S, Ponnusamy S, Rajendran V, Vellaichamy T (2015) In vitro multiple shoot induction of selected Ceropegia species - medicinally important plants. Int J Conserv Sci 6:253–260
Barakat AA, El-Tony FEZH, Gaber MK (2021) In vitro propagation, caulogenesis, and tuberization of Ceropegia woodii plants. Egypt Acad J Biolog Sci 12(1):53–74
Baskaran P, Jayabalan N (2007) Rapid micropropagation of Psoralea corylifolia L. using nodal explants cultured in organic additive-supplemented medium. J Hortic Sci and Biotechnol 82(6):908–913
Baskaran P, Kumari A, Naidoo D, Van Staden J (2016) In vitro propagation and ultrastructural studies of somatic embryogenesis of Ledebouria ovatifolia. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 52(3):283–292
Beena MR, Martin KP, Kirti PB, Hariharan M (2003) Rapid in vitro propagation of medicinally important Ceropegia candelabrum. Plant Cell Tiss Org Cult 72(3):285–289
Britto SJ, Natarajan E, Arockiasamy DI (2003) In vitro flowering and shoot multiplication from nodal explants of Ceropegia bulbosa Roxb. var. bulbosa. Taiwania-Taipei 48(2):106–111
Bruyns PV (2003) Three new succulent species of Apocynaceae (Asclepiadoideae) from southern Africa. Kew Bull 58(2):427–435
Bruyns PV, Klak C, Hanáček P (2015) Recent radiation of Brachystelma and Ceropegia (Apocynaceae) across the Old World against a background of climatic change. Mol Phylogenet Evol 90:49–66
Chandore AN, Nimbalkar MS, Gurav RV, Bapat VA, Yadav SR (2010) A protocol for multiplication and restoration of Ceropegia fantastica Sedgw.: a critically endangered plant species. Curr Sci 99(11):1593–1596
Chavan JJ, Gaikwad NB, Dixit GB, Yadav SR, Bapat VA (2018) Biotechnological interventions for propagation, conservation and improvement of ‘Lantern Flowers’ (Ceropegia spp.). S Afr J Bot 114:192–216
Chavan JJ, Gaikwad NB, Kshirsagar PR, Umdale SD, Bhat KV, Dixit GB, Yadav SR (2013) Application of molecular markers to appraise the genetic fidelity of Ceropegia spiralis, a threatened medicinal plant of South India. Curr Sci 105(10):1348–1350
Chavan JJ, Gaikwad NB, Umdale SD, Kshirsagar PR, Bhat KV, Yadav SR (2014b) Efficiency of direct and indirect shoot organogenesis, molecular profiling, secondary metabolite production and antioxidant activity of micro propagated Ceropegia santapaui. Plant Growth Regul 72:1–15
Chavan JJ, Nalawade AS, Gaikwad NB, Gurav RV, Dixit GB, Yadav SR (2014a) An efficient in vitro regeneration of Ceropegia noorjahaniae: an endemic and critically endangered medicinal herb of the Western Ghats. Physiol Mol Biol Plants 20:405–410
Chavan JJ, Nimbalkar MS, Adsul AA, Kamble SS, Gaikwad NB, Dixit GB (2011b) Micropropagation and in vitro flowering of endemic and endangered plant Ceropegia attenuata Hook. J Plant Biochem Biotechnol 20:276–282
Chavan JJ, Nimbalkar MS, Gaikwad NB, Dixit GB, Yadav SR (2011a) In vitro propagation of Ceropegia spiralis Wight - an endemic and rare potential ornamental plant of peninsular India. Proc Nat Acad Sci India Sect B 81(1):120–126
Deshmukh S, Rathod V (2013) Nutritional evaluation of some wild edible tuberous plants. Asian J Pharm Clin Res 6(2):58–60
Dhir R, Shekhawat GS (2013) Production, storability and morphogenic response of alginate encapsulated axillary meristems and genetic fidelity evaluation of in vitro regenerated Ceropegia bulbosa: a pharmaceutically important threatened plant species. Ind Crop Prod 47:139–144
Dhir R, Shekhawat GS (2014) Eco rehabilitation and biochemical studies of Ceropegia bulbosa Roxb: a threatened medicinal succulent. Acta Physiol Plant 36:1335–1343
Dyer MG (1983) The role of affect in narratives. Cogn Sci 7(3):211–242
George EF (1993) Plant propagation by tissue culture. Vol l, Exegetics Ltd, Basingstoke
Hussey G, Stacey NJ (1984) Factors affecting the formation of in vitro tubers of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.). Ann Bot 53(4):565–578
Jain SK, Defillips RA (1991) Asclepiadaceae. In: Algonae MI (ed) J Med Plants Res, vol 1. Reference Publications Inc. Michigan, USA, pp 144–152
Karthikeyan S, Sanjappa M, Moorthy S (2009) Flowering plants of India. Vol 1, Dicotyledons (Acanthaceae – Avicenniaceae). Kolkata, BSI, pp 160–164
Kalimuthu K, Prabakaran R, Paulsamy S, Jeyaraman S (2014) Microtuberization of Ceropegia pusilla Wight and Arn. an endangered medicinal plant. European J Med Plants 4(1):64–74
Khare CP (2007) Indian medicinal plants. An illustrated dictionary. Springer, New York, pp 139–140
Kirtikar KR, Basu BD (1935) Indian medicinal plants, vol 3. M/s Bishen Sing Mahendrapal Singh, New Delhi, India, p 1638
Lakshmi SR, Franklin BJH, Senthil KT, Murthy GVS, Rao MV (2010) In vitro propagation of Hoya wightii ssp. palniensis KT Mathew, a highly vulnerable and endemic species of Western Ghats of Tamil Nadu. India. Afr J Biotechnol 9(5):620–627
Mabberley DJ (1987) The plant book. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 114
Madec P (1963) Tuber forming substances in potato. In: Lins JI, Milthorpe FL (eds) Growth of the potato. Butterworth, London, pp 121–131
Mbanaso ENA, Chukwu LI, Opara MUA (2007) In vitro basal and nodal micro tuberization in yam shoot cultures (Discorea rotundata poir, cv. Obiaoturugo) under nutritional stress conditions. Afr J Biotechnol 6(21):2444–2446
Murashige T, Skoog F (1962) A revised medium for rapid growth and bio assays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol Plant 15(3):473–497
Murthy KSR, Kondamudi R, Karuppusamy S (2012) Microtuberization of Ceropegia spiralis Wight and Ceropegia pusilla Wt. and Arn. Afr J Plant Sci 6(12):321–327
Muthukrishnan S, Benjamin JF, Muthukumar M, Rao MV (2012) In vitro propagation of Ceropegia thwaitesii Hook - an endemic species of Western Ghats of Tamil Nadu. India Afr J Biotechnol 11(59):12277–12285
Nair AK, Dilip ND, Subhash PS (2007) High-frequency in vitro flowering in six species of Ceropegia. J Plant Biol 50(3):374–377
Nasib A, Ali K, Khan S (2008) An optimized and improved method for the in vitro propagation of kiwifruit (Actinidia deliciosa) using coconut water. Pak J Bot 40(6):2355–2360
Nayar MP, Sastry ARK (1987) Red data book of Indian plants, Vol 1. BSI, Kolkata
Nayar MP, Sastry ARK (1988) Red data book of Indian plants, Vol 2. BSI, Kolkata
Ovecka M, Bahaji A, Muñoz FJ, Almagro G, Ezquer I, Baroja-Fernández E, Li J, Pozueta-Romero J (2012) A sensitive method for confocal fluorescence microscopic visualization of starch granules in iodine stained samples. Plant Signal Behav 7(9):1146–1150
Patil VM (1998) Micropropagation studies in Ceropegia spp. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 34(3):240–243
Pandey M, Dholakia BB, Jayaramaiah RH, Punekar SA, Giri AP (2021) Combinatorial approach through in vitro regeneration and phytochemical profiling of Ceropegia media (Huber) Ans.: a potential way forward in the conservation of an endangered medicinal plant from the Western Ghats in India. J Plant Growth Regul 40:1139–1151
Phulwaria M, Rai MK, Gupta AK, Ram K, Shekhawat N (2012) An improved micropropagation of Terminalia bellirica from nodal explants of mature tree. Acta Physiol Plant 34(1):299–305
Phulwaria M, Shekhawat NS, Rathore JS, Singh RP (2013) An efficient in vitro regeneration and ex vitro rooting of Ceropegia bulbosa Roxb. —a threatened and pharmaceutical important plant of Indian Thar Desert. Ind Crops Prod 42:25–29
Quattrocchi U (2000) CRC world dictionary of plant names – common names, scientific names, eponyms, synonyms and etymology, 1st edn. Routledge, p 486
Rajasekar C, Jeevith S, Kottaimuthu R (2018) Rediscovery of Ceropegia maculata Bedd. (Apocynaceae: Ceropegieae) after 154 years from Tamil Nadu, India. I3 Biodiversity. 2, 202
Reddy MC, Bramhachari PV, Murthy KSR (2015) Optimized plant tissue culture protocol for in vitro morphogenesis of an endangered medicinal herb Ceropegia ensifolia Bedd. Trop Subtrop Agroecosystems 18:95–101
Shah SN, Husaini AM, Ansari SA (2013) Micropropagation of Litsea glutinosa (Lour) CB. Int J Biotechnol 4(5):78–85
Shekhawat NS, Rathore TS, Singh RP, Deora NS, Rao SR (1993) Factors affecting in vitro clonal propagation of Prosopis cineraria. Plant Growth Regul 12(3):273–280
Shete RU (2014) In vitro multiplication of Ceropegia bulbosa Roxb. Int J Emerg 11:383–385
Shriram V, Nanekar V, Kumar V, Kavikishor PB (2014) In vitro regeneration and ploidy level analysis of Eulophia ochreata Lindl. Ind Exp Biol 52:1112–1121
Skoog F, Miller CO (1957) Chemical regulation of growth and organ formation in plant tissue cultured in vitro. Symp Soc Exp Biol 11:118–130
Upadhye AS, Waghamode PB, Dhavare PM, Gaikwad NS (2015) Standardization and re-introduction of critically endangered Ceropegia mahabalei Hemadri and Ansari by in vitro propagation. Ann Plant Sci 4:987–993
Uranbey S, İpek A, Caliskan M, Dundar E, Cocu S, Basalma D, Guneylioglu H (2010) In vitro bulblet induction from bulb scales of endangered ornamental plant Muscari azureum. Biotechnol Biotechnol Equip 24(2):1843–1848
Vanderhoef LN, Key JL (1968) Inhibition by kinetin of cell elongation and RNA synthesis in excised soybean hypocotyl M2. Plant Cell Physiol 9(2):343–351
Yadav SR (1996) Flytrap Flowers of Western Ghats. Hornbill 1:1–7
Acknowledgements
The authors are thankful to Dr. Baskaran Ponnusamy, Principal Scientist, Dami OPRS, NBPOL, PNG, for his valuable assistance and manuscript corrections. We thank BDU-University Science Instrumentation Centre (USIC) for Confocal Microscopy Facilty.
Funding
This study received financial support from DST-PURSE (Grant No. SR/PURSE Phase 2/16) and UGC-SAP DRS-II (F.5–13/2018/DRS-II).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Anbazhakan, R., Rajasekar, C., Muthukumar, M. et al. In vitro micropropagation, flowering, and tuberization of Ceropegia maculata Bedd.—an endemic plant of Southern Western Ghats. In Vitro Cell.Dev.Biol.-Plant 58, 302–310 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11627-022-10253-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11627-022-10253-0