Abstract
Sugarcane (Saccharum spp. hybrids) accounts for 80% of the table sugar produced worldwide and is also a prime feedstock for biofuel production. However, very few studies are available for directly comparing Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated transfer of T-DNA (AMT) and biolistic transfer of minimal expression cassettes (BLT MC) regarding transgene complexity and expression stability. In this study, the transformation efficiency, transgene integration pattern, expression level, and expression stability were compared in the commercially important sugarcane cultivar CP88-1762. A total of 312 transgenic lines derived from AMT and 250 lines derived from BLT MC were identified by PCR from genomic DNA using nptII-specific primers. Lines were analyzed with both qPCR (TaqMan®) and NPTII ELISA to determine the nptII transgene copy number and expression level. The results of Southern blot analysis on selected lines were highly correlated to the qPCR results. There were no significant differences between the two transformation systems for transformation efficiency, frequency of single copy integration, or level and stability of transgene expression when carried out with the same expression cassette, tissue culture, and selection procedure in 12 independent experiments. These findings suggested that both BLT MC and AMT provide suitable platforms for generation of elite sugarcane events.
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Commercialization of transgenic sugarcane requires reliable transgene performance. Biolistic gene transfer (BLT) is the most common method used for transgene delivery to sugarcane because of its applicability to a wide range of genotypes (Altpeter and Oraby 2010). Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated gene transfer (AMT) is typically limited to few genotypes (Jackson et al. 2013; Joyce et al. 2014). BLT and AMT to sugarcane were first reported by Bower and Birch (1992) and Arencibia et al. (1998), respectively. Both methods result in variable transgene integration complexities with subsequent consequences for the transgene performance. Transgenes which are inserted in multiple copies are more likely to be silenced (Meyer 1995; Schubert et al. 2004; Meng et al. 2006). But even single-copy transgenic events can undergo silencing depending on where in the genome they are inserted (Stoger et al. 1998; Kohli et al. 1999). Single-copy integration of transgenes into the plant genome also facilitates structural characterization (Que et al. 2014).
AMT has traditionally been the preferred method to generate events with low transgene copy number. Standard BLT protocols, in which large quantities of whole plasmid constructs are introduced, typically result in the integration of multiple transgene copies as well as vector backbone sequences into the plant genome (Jayaraj et al. 2008). BLT protocols were improved by removal of the vector backbone prior to gene transfer (Fu et al. 2000; Breitler et al. 2002) and delivery of drastically reduced quantities of such minimal expression cassettes (MC) (Lowe et al. 2009). Compared with delivery of whole plasmids in large quantities, delivery of lower quantities of MC eliminated the vector backbone integration and increased the proportion of low-copy, structurally-intact transgene loci. This resulted in improved transgene performance (Fu et al. 2000; Lowe et al. 2009). To date, MC technology has been used to introduce genes of interest into several plant species such as rice (Oryza sativa; Fu et al. 2000; Breitler et al. 2002; Loc et al. 2002; Agrawal et al. 2005; Zhao et al. 2007), corn (Zea mays; Lowe et al. 2009; Prakash et al. 2009), wheat (Triticum aestivum; Yao et al. 2006, 2007), creeping bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera; Jayaraj et al. 2008), bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum, Sandhu and Altpeter 2008), sugarcane (Saccharum spp. hybrids, Taparia et al. 2012a; Taparia et al. 2012b; Jackson et al. 2013), soybean (Glycine max; Vianna et al. 2004; Gao et al. 2008; Liu et al. 2009), grapevine (Vitis vinifera; Vidal et al. 2006), potato (Solanum tuberosum; Romano et al. 2003), and common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris; Vianna et al. 2004).
Although both AMT and BLT are the main gene delivery systems for many plant species, few comparisons of these methods have been made for transformation efficiency, transgene copy number, and transgene expression. The first comparison was described in barley by Travella et al. (2005). Recently, a comparison of the two gene transfer methods was carried out using sugarcane cultivar Q117, which is efficiently transformed but, unfortunately, is susceptible to smut (Jackson et al. 2013; Joyce et al. 2014). Here, a comparison of AMT and BLT is made for transformation efficiency, number of integrated transgene copies, transgene expression, and stability of transgene expression in the commercially important sugarcane cultivar CP88-1762.
Materials and Methods
Plant material.
Sugarcane tops, including the shoot apex and the top visible node, were harvested from field grown cultivar CP88-1762 at the Everglades Research and Education Center, University of Florida, Belle Glade, Florida.
DNA for gene transfer.
For both AMT and BLT of minimal expression cassettes (BLT MC), the pPZP 200 binary vector (Hajdukiewicz et al. 1994) was used which carried nptII driven by maize ubiquitin 1 promoter, the ubiquitin 1st intron (Christensen et al. 1992), and the 3′ UTR of nopaline synthase gene (Fig. 1a ). For BLT, this expression cassette was released by digestion with PmeI and SspI, electrophoresed (70 V, 180 min) on agarose gel (0.8% w/v), and gel-elution using QIAquick Gel Extraction Kit (Qiagen Inc., Valencia, CA). The purified fragment was quantified with a NanoDrop ND-1000 spectrophotometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., Wilmington, DE).
Tissue culture and transformation.
The outermost leaf sheaths were removed from immature leaf whorls. Immature leaf whorls were wiped with 70% ethanol in a laminar flow bench and 2-mm cross-sections were transferred to CI3 medium (Chengalrayan and Gallo-Meagher 2001). Tissue cultures were incubated in the dark at 28°C and subcultured at weekly intervals. After 6 to 8 weeks, embryogenic calluses emerging from leaf whorl cross-sections were used as targets for gene transfer. AMT was conducted as described by Wu and Altpeter (2015). Briefly, Agrobacterium tumefaciens strain AGL1 harboring the binary vector was grown to a density OD600 = 0.6 and diluted 50-fold with CI3 medium. Calluses were immersed in the inoculum for 25 min. The calluses were then blotted with sterile filter paper to remove excess A. tumefaciens and transferred to co-cultivation medium for 3 d at 19°C in the dark. After co-cultivation, calluses were cultured on CI3 medium with 100 mg l−1 cefotaxime and 100 mg l−1 timentin (Cat #s C380, T869, respectively, PhytoTechnology Laboratories®, Shawnee Mission, KS) without geneticin for 4 d in darkness. The calluses were then transferred to CI3 medium supplemented with 30 mg l−1 geneticin (Cat# G810 PhytoTechnology Laboratories®), 100 mg l−1 cefotaxime, and 100 mg l−1 timentin for three biweekly subcultures in light (30 μE/m2/s, 16 h photoperiod, F17T8/TL841, Philips, Amsterdam, The Netherlands). Geneticin resistant calluses were transferred to regeneration medium with 0.1 mg l−1 BAP, 1.86 mg l−1 NAA, 30 mg l−1 paromomycin (Cat# P710, PhytoTechnology Laboratories®), 100 mg l−1 cefotaxime, and 100 mg l−1 timentin, and cultured at 28°C under a light density of 150 μE/m2/s. After reaching ∼2 cm in length, regenerating shoots were transferred for rooting to hormone free MS medium (PhytoTechnology Laboratories® Murashige and Skoog 1962) with 30 mg l−1 paromomycin, 100 mg l−1 cefotaxime, and 100 mg l−1 timentin, and cultured at 28°C under a light intensity of 150 μE/m2/s.
BLT was performed as described by Altpeter and Sandhu (2010). The MC was precipitated onto gold particles as described previously (Taparia et al. 2012a) at a concentration of 54.6 ng per 100 μl of the final particle suspension, resulting in 2.73 ng of MC per shot.
PCR amplification of transgenic nptII.
Genomic DNA was extracted from 200 mg young leaf tissue following a modified CTAB protocol (Porebski et al. 1997). DNA was quantified using a NanoDrop (Thermo Scientific Inc., Wilmington, DE) spectrophotometer, and 50 ng genomic DNA was used as template for PCR with 30 cycles of 95°C 20 s, 57°C 30 s, and 72°C 30 s using the following nptII-specific primers: forward primer 5′-tgctcctgccgagaaagtat-3′ and reverse primer 5′-catgtgtcacgacgagatcc-3′.
nptII Immuno-chromatography (Immunostrip®) assay.
Young leaves (60 mg) of putative transgenic lines were ground in 1 ml of the extraction buffer provided with the NPTII ImmunoStrip® kit (Cat# STX 73000, Agdia Inc., Elkhart, IN). Samples were centrifuged at 16,000g at room temperature for 2 min. The supernatant was transferred into a clean microfuge tube where it was absorbed by ImmunoStrip®. A positive reaction for NPTII was indicated by the development of two purple lines.
qRT-PCR analysis of transgene copy number.
DNA was isolated as reported by Murray and Thompson (1980) with modifications. The pelleted DNA was resuspended in Tris-EDTA, pH 8.0 for TaqMan copy call estimation. The quantitative TaqMan assay for copy number was adapted from methods previously described (Ingham et al. 2001). Master mix (3 μl/well; 2× JumpStart Taq ReadyMix, primer for the crop-specific endogenous gene (Glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase), and 2× primer set stock assay target (nptII) were combined in 384-well plates with 3 μl genomic DNA, or with the DNA samples for the copy control. The copy control is a transgenic sugarcane event that was previously confirmed by Southern blot for carrying a single copy of the nptII gene.
NPTII expression analysis.
The NPTII ELISA kit (Cat# PSP73000, Agdia Inc., Elkhart, IN) was used to evaluate NPTII expression. Protein was extracted from the midsection of the first dewlap leaf following the manufacturer’s instructions. Extracted protein samples were quantified by the Bradford assay (Bradford 1976), utilizing Coomassie Plus Protein Assay reagent (Cat# 23238, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., Rockford, IL). A total of 20 μg of soluble protein per plant extract were loaded into wells of ELISA plates. ELISA was performed following the manufacturer’s instructions. Absorbance readings were recorded with a Synergy™ H1 Hybrid multi-mode microplate reader (BioTek, Winooski, VT).
Southern blot analysis of transgene copy number.
Total genomic DNA was extracted from 2 g leaf tissue following a modified CTAB protocol (Porebski et al. 1997). DNA (20 μg) was digested with EcoRI (Cat# R0101M, New England Biolabs, Ipswich, MA), electrophoresed overnight on an agarose gel (agarose 0.8% [w/v]; 1× TAE), and blotted onto Hybond-N+ nylon membranes (Cat# RPN87B, Amersham Biosciences, Piscataway, NJ) by capillary transfer overnight in 10× SSC. After air drying, the membranes were exposed to UV light in a crosslinker (Select™ XLE-Series, Spectroline®, Westbury, NY) and prehybridized in 6× SSC, 1× Denhardt’s Solution with 100 mg l−1 denatured herring sperm DNA, and 1% SDS at 42°C for 3 h. A 688-bp PCR product amplified from the nptII coding region using forward primer 5′-ggctattcggctatgactgg-3′ and reverse primer 5′-gcgataccgtaaagcacgag-3′(PCR conditions: 30 cycles of 95°C 20 s, 58°C 30 s, and 72°C 60 s) was then labeled for use as a probe using (α-32P) dCTP (Cat# NEG013H250UC, Perkin Elmer Inc., Waltham, MA) with a Prime-It II Random Primer Labeling Kit (Cat#300385, Stratagene Inc., La Jolla, CA). The membranes were hybridized with the denatured probe in 6× SSC, 50% formamide, 500 mg l−1 denatured herring sperm DNA, and 1% SDS at 42°C overnight; rinsed once in 0.1× SSC and 0.1% SDS for 30 s; and then washed twice with 50 ml of 0.1× SSC and 0.1% SDS at 65°C for 20 min each wash. Hybridization signals were visualized by autoradiography on x-ray film following a 2-d exposure to the membranes at −80°C.
Statistical analysis.
For the analysis of transgene copy number, the chi-square test was performed with one degree of freedom at the 5% probability level. All other statistical analyses were performed using SAS version 9.3 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC). Means were compared by the t test, and values are considered as significantly different if P < 0.05.
Results
Transformation efficiency.
PCR analysis of genomic DNA using nptII-specific primers identified 312 transgenic lines following AMT and 250 lines derived from BLT in 12 independent experiments (Table 1). The transformation efficiency was not significantly different (P < 0.05) between AMT and BLT with 1.82 ± 0.09 lines/g callus for AMT and 1.76 ± 0.25 lines/g callus for BLT (Table 1). The frequency of non-transgenic regenerated lines escaping the selection was not significantly different (P > 0.05) between AMT (1%) and BLT (4%). Expression of the nptII gene was confirmed by ELISA in 99% of the lines generated by AMT and 100% of the lines generated by BLT that showed positive PCR reactions.
Transgene integration complexity.
qPCR Taqman® assays for determination of transgene copy number were carried out on 513 transgenic lines, including 279 lines from AMT and 234 lines from BLT. There was no significant difference between the two methods for the frequency of single-copy transgene integration events. A single-copy event was detected in 49.2% of the BLT-derived lines and 35.5% of the AMT-derived lines (Table 2). Southern blot analysis was carried out on 34 AMT-derived lines (22 single-copy and 12 multiple-copy lines) and 28 BLT-derived lines (18 single-copy and 10 multiple-copy lines). Figure 1b shows representative Southern blots. The correlations between copy number estimates based on Southern blot and qPCR analysis were 0.90 (AMT-derived lines) and 0.98 (BLT-derived lines) (Fig. 1c ).
Transgene expression analysis.
NPTII ELISA for quantification of transgene expression was carried out with 243 AMT-derived and 221 BLT-derived lines. Of the 243 analyzed AMT-derived lines, 94 carried single-copy transgenes and 149 carried multiple-copy transgenes. The 221 BLT lines included 114 lines with single-copy inserts and 107 lines with multiple-copy inserts. There was no significant difference (P > 0.05) in the frequency of transgene expression between the two transformation methods among single-copy lines or among multiple-copy lines. However, a highly significant difference (P < 0.01) was found for the frequency of transgene expression between single- vs. multiple-copy lines irrespective of the transformation method (Table 3). For AMT-derived lines, mean NPTII for multiple-copy lines was 11.17 ng/20 μg soluble protein, 37% higher than observed for single-copy lines (7.01 ng/20 μg soluble protein). Similarly, for BLT-derived lines, mean NPTII for multiple-copy lines was 13.21 ng/20 μg soluble protein, 48.4% higher than observed for single-copy lines (6.82 ng/20 μg soluble protein).
Analysis of transgene expression stability.
ELISA was used to compare NPTII levels in primary transgenic plants and their vegetative progeny lines. Three biological replicates representing three individual progeny plants were analyzed for vegetative progeny lines for each primary transgenic plant. For primary transgenic plants, two replicates, each from different tillers of the same plant, were tested. A total of 120 vegetative progeny lines were tested, representing 20 primary transgenic lines from AMT and 20 primary transgenic lines from BLT. The results are shown in Fig. 2. The majority of transgenic lines displayed similar levels of NPTII expression between primary transgenic plants and their vegetative progeny lines. Overall, there was no significant difference (P > 0.05) in expression levels between primary transgenic plants and their respective vegetative progeny lines for both transformation methods or single-copy vs. multiple-copy lines (Table 4). However, there were exceptions. For two single-copy lines (line #110 from AMT and line #428 from BLT) and two multiple-copy lines (both from AMT, line #27 and line #82), NPTII expression in primary transgenic plants was more than twice as high as that of their respective vegetative progeny lines. For three single-copy lines (line #75 from AMT, and lines # 406 and #588 from BLT), NPTII expression in vegetative progeny lines was approximately twice as high as that of their respective primary transgenic plants.
Discussion
Here, we directly compared the transformation efficiency, number of integrated transgene copies, and transgene expression stability following AMT and BLT MC in the commercially important sugarcane cultivar CP88-1762. Very few studies have directly compared integration complexity and expression levels following AMT vs. BLT in crops. Most of these studies have compared both methods side-by-side using genotypes that were amenable to both gene transfer systems but lacking commercial importance and/or based the comparison on a small number of transgenic lines (Snyder et al. 1999; Dai et al. 2001; Shou et al. 2004; Travella et al. 2005; Zalewski et al. 2012; Jackson et al. 2013; Joyce et al. 2014).
The transformation efficiency following AMT or BLT MC did not significantly differ in 12 independent experiments that generated 562 transgenic plants from the sugarcane cultivar CP88-1762. This is in agreement with the results of Jackson et al. (2013) for the cultivar Q117, suggesting that the genotype is not a major factor for this outcome. Travella et al. (2005) and Khanna and Raina (2002) observed, for barley and rice, respectively, that transformation efficiency of AMT was twice as high as BLT. Others reported that BLT was 2.2- to 3.1-fold more efficient than AMT for maize (Shou et al. 2004) and rice (Dai et al. 2001), respectively. Beside tissue culture and selection parameters, A. tumefaciens strains, co-cultivation conditions, attenuation of plant defense responses, and control of A. tumefaciens overgrowth determine the efficiency of AMT (Gelvin 2003; Zhang et al. 2013). For the efficiency of BLT, osmotic treatment prior to gene transfer (Vain et al. 1993; Altpeter et al. 1996; Kemper et al. 1996) and the biolistic gene transfer parameters play important roles (Altpeter et al. 2005; Taparia et al. 2012b). Higher DNA concentrations during particle coating increase the transformation efficiency but also result in complex transgene integration patterns (Lowe et al. 2009).
Earlier reports in sugarcane (Jackson et al. 2013; Joyce et al. 2014) and other crops (Kohli et al. 1999; Loc et al. 2002; Beltrán et al. 2009) described a lack of correlation between copy number and transgene expression level. In contrast, our results indicated that transgenic sugarcane with multiple transgene copies displayed significantly higher transgene expression than those with a single transgene copy. These discrepancies can be caused by a smaller number of lines evaluated in the earlier reports or by truncated expression cassettes in a higher proportion of the multiple copy lines in the earlier reports. To avoid the bias of small sample sizes, we analyzed 216 single-copy and 169 multiple-copy lines for transgene expression. Following selection and regeneration, the transgenic lines displayed a wide range of transgene expression. This suggest that only events with no or very low transgene expression were eliminated due to the selection process. Our study evaluated the expression of the selectable marker nptII instead of a non-selected transgene. The selection process with geneticin for expression of nptII ensured that events with truncations in the transgene constructs or gene silencing during the tissue culture process were not considered for further analysis. For practical applications, elite events identified after tissue culture need to have a consistent and predictable performance. Therefore, it is most relevant to evaluate gene silencing after the tissue culture process and not during the tissue culture process. Such evaluation is facilitated for a large number of events with a selectable transgene.
The transgenic sugarcane lines from both AMT and BLT MC did not differ significantly for the level of transgene expression. This is consistent with the recent findings of Jackson et al. (2013) with cultivar Q117. However, earlier results in rice (Dai et al. 2001; Breitler et al. 2004), barley (Travella et al. 2005; Zalewski et al. 2012), maize (Shou et al. 2004), and fescue (Gao et al. 2008) showed that AMT transformants displayed higher expression than those of BLT. The main reason for the conflicting reports appears to be the use of small amounts of minimal expression cassettes by Jackson et al. (2013), which dramatically increased the frequency of simple integration events. We observed single-copy events in 49.2% of the BLT MC-derived lines and 35.5% of the AMT-derived lines. Jackson et al. (2013) did not evaluate transgene expression stability, and our data indicated no significant difference in transgene expression stability between AMT- and BLT MC-derived vegetative progenies. This was consistent with the findings of Joyce et al. (2014), who also used small amounts of MC for BLT, and in contrast to earlier reports using large amounts of full plasmids for BLT (Dai et al. 2001; Shou et al. 2004; Travella et al. 2005).
We conclude that both BLT MC and AMT represent alternative means to generate transgenic sugarcane with simple transgene integration pattern and stable transgene expression.
References
Agrawal PK, Kohli A, Twyman RM, Christou P (2005) Transformation of plants with multiple cassettes generates simple transgene integration patterns and high expression levels. Mol Breed 16:247–260
Altpeter F, Oraby H (2010) Sugarcane. In: Kempken F, Jung C (eds) Genetic modification of plants. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 453–472
Altpeter F, Sandhu S (2010) Genetic transformation–biolistics. In: Davey MR, Anthony P (eds) Plant cell culture: essential methods. Scion Publishing Ltd, Oxfordshire, pp 217–240
Altpeter F, Vasil V, Srivastava V, Stöger E, Vasil IK (1996) Accelerated production of transgenic wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) plants. Plant Cell Rep 16:12–17
Altpeter F, Baisakh N, Beachy R, Bock R, Capell T, Christou P, Daniell H, Datta K, Datta S, Dix PJ (2005) Particle bombardment and the genetic enhancement of crops: myths and realities. Mol Breed 15:305–327
Arencibia AD, Carmona ER, Tellez P, Chan M-T, Yu S-M, Trujillo LE, Oramas P (1998) An efficient protocol for sugarcane (Saccharum spp. L.) transformation mediated by Agrobacterium tumefaciens. Transgenic Res 7:213–222
Beltrán J, Jaimes H, Echeverry M, Ladino Y, López D, Duque MC, Chavarriaga P, Tohme J (2009) Quantitative analysis of transgenes in cassava plants using real-time PCR technology. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 45:48–56
Bower R, Birch RG (1992) Transgenic sugarcane plants via microprojectile bombardment. Plant J 2:409–416
Bradford MM (1976) A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal Biochem 72:248–254
Breitler JC, Labeyrie A, Meynard D, Legavre T, Guiderdoni E (2002) Efficient microprojectile bombardment-mediated transformation of rice using gene cassettes. Theor Appl Genet 104:709–719
Breitler JC, Vassal JM, Del Mar CM, Meynard D, Marfà V, Melé E, Royer M, Murillo I, San Segundo B, Guiderdoni E (2004) Bt rice harbouring cry genes controlled by a constitutive or wound-inducible promoter: protection and transgene expression under Mediterranean field conditions. Plant Biotechnol J 2:417–430
Chengalrayan K, Gallo-Meagher M (2001) Effect of various growth regulators on shoot regeneration of sugarcane. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 37:434–439
Christensen AH, Sharrock RA, Quail PH (1992) Maize polyubiquitin genes: structure, thermal perturbation of expression and transcript splicing, and promoter activity following transfer to protoplasts by electroporation. Plant Mol Biol 18:675–689
Dai S, Zheng P, Marmey P, Zhang S, Tian W, Chen S, Beachy RN, Fauquet C (2001) Comparative analysis of transgenic rice plants obtained by Agrobacterium-mediated transformation and particle bombardment. Mol Breed 7:25–33
Fu X, Fontana S, Bong BB, Tinjuangjun P, Sudhakar D, Twyman RM, Christou P, Kohli A (2000) Linear transgene constructs lacking vector backbone sequences generate low-copy-number transgenic plants with simple integration patterns. Transgenic Res 9:11–19
Gao C, Long D, Lenk I, Nielsen KK (2008) Comparative analysis of transgenic tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.) plants obtained by Agrobacterium-mediated transformation and particle bombardment. Plant Cell Rep 27:1601–1609
Gelvin SB (2003) Agrobacterium-mediated plant transformation: the biology behind the “gene-jockeying” tool. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 67:16–37
Hajdukiewicz P, Svab Z, Maliga P (1994) The small, versatile pPZP family of Agrobacterium binary vectors for plant transformation. Plant Mol Biol 25:989–994
Ingham DJ, Beer S, Money S, Hansen G (2001) Quantitative real-time PCR assay for determining transgene copy number in transformed plants. Biotechniques 31:132–141
Jackson MA, Anderson DJ, Birch RG (2013) Comparison of Agrobacterium and particle bombardment using whole plasmid or minimal cassette for production of high-expressing, low-copy transgenic plants. Transgenic Res 22:143–151
Jayaraj J, Liang GH, Muthukrishnan S, Punja ZK (2008) Generation of low copy number and stably expressing transgenic creeping bentgrass plants using minimal gene cassette bombardment. Biol Plant 52:215–221
Joyce P, Hermann S, O’Connell A, Dinh Q, Shumbe L, Lakshmanan P (2014) Field performance of transgenic sugarcane produced using Agrobacterium and biolistics methods. Plant Biotechnol J 12:411–424
Kemper EL, Joséda Silva M, Arruda P (1996) Effect of microprojectile bombardment parameters and osmotic treatment on particle penetration and tissue damage in transiently transformed cultured immature maize (Zea mays L.) embryos. Plant Sci 121:85–93
Khanna HK, Raina SK (2002) Elite indica transgenic rice plants expressing modified Cry1Ac endotoxin of Bacillus thuringiensis show enhanced resistance to yellow stem borer (Scirpophaga incertulas). Transgenic Res 11:411–423
Kohli A, Gahakwa D, Vain P, Laurie DA, Christou P (1999) Transgene expression in rice engineered through particle bombardment: molecular factors controlling stable expression and transgene silencing. Planta 208:88–97
Liu M, Yang J, Cheng Y, An L (2009) Optimization of soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merrill) in planta ovary transformation using a linear minimal gus gene cassette. J of Zhejiang Univ-Sc B 10:870–876
Loc NT, Tinjuangjun P, Gatehouse AMR, Christou P, Gatehouse JA (2002) Linear transgene constructs lacking vector backbone sequences generate transgenic rice plants which accumulate higher levels of proteins conferring insect resistance. Mol Breed 9:231–244
Lowe BA, Prakash NS, Way M, Mann MT, Spencer TM, Boddupalli RS (2009) Enhanced single copy integration events in corn via particle bombardment using low quantities of DNA. Transgenic Res 18:831–840
Meng L, Ziv M, Lemaux PG (2006) Nature of stress and transgene locus influences transgene expression stability in barley. Plant Mol Biol 62:15–28
Meyer P (1995) Understanding and controlling transgene expression. Trends Biotechnol 13:332–337
Murashige T, Skoog F (1962) A revised medium for rapid growth and bio assays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol Plant 15:473–497
Murray MG, Thompson WF (1980) Rapid isolation of high molecular weight plant DNA. Nucleic Acids Res 8:4321–4326
Porebski S, Bailey LG, Baum BR (1997) Modification of a CTAB DNA extraction protocol for plants containing high polysaccharide and polyphenol components. Plant Mol Biol Report 15:8–15
Prakash NS, Bhojaraja R, Shivbachan SK, Priya GGH, Nagraj TK, Prasad V, Babu VS, Jayaprakash TL, Dasgupta S, Spencer TM (2009) Marker-free transgenic corn plant production through co-bombardment. Plant Cell Rep 28:1655–1668
Que Q, Elumalai S, Li X, Zhong H, Nalapalli S, Schweiner M, Fei X, Nuccio M, Kelliher T, Gu W, Chen Z, Chilton M-DM (2014) Maize transformation technology development for commercial event generation. Front Plant Sci 5:379. doi:10.3389/fpls.2014.00379
Romano A, Raemakers K, Bernardi J, Visser R, Mooibroek H (2003) Transgene organisation in potato after particle bombardment-mediated (co-) transformation using plasmids and gene cassettes. Transgenic Res 12:461–473
Sandhu S, Altpeter F (2008) Co-integration, co-expression and inheritance of unlinked minimal transgene expression cassettes in an apomictic turf and forage grass (Paspalum notatum Flugge). Plant Cell Rep 27:1755–1765
Schubert D, Lechtenberg B, Forsbach A, Gils M, Bahadur S, Schmidt R (2004) Silencing in Arabidopsis T-DNA transformants: the predominant role of a gene-specific RNA sensing mechanism versus position effects. The Plant Cell 16:2561–2572
Shou H, Frame BR, Whitham SA, Wang K (2004) Assessment of transgenic maize events produced by particle bombardment or Agrobacterium-mediated transformation. Mol Breed 13:201–208
Snyder GW, Ingersoll JC, Smigocki AC, Owens LD (1999) Introduction of pathogen defense genes and a cytokinin biosynthesis gene into sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris L.) by Agrobacterium or particle bombardment. Plant Cell Rep 18:829–834
Stoger E, Williams S, Keen D, Christou P (1998) Molecular characteristics of transgenic wheat and the effect on transgene expression. Transgenic Res 7:463–471
Taparia Y, Fouad WM, Gallo M, Altpeter F (2012a) Rapid production of transgenic sugarcane with the introduction of simple loci following biolistic transfer of a minimal expression cassette and direct embryogenesis. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 48:15–22
Taparia Y, Gallo M, Altpeter F (2012b) Comparison of direct and indirect embryogenesis protocols, biolistic gene transfer and selection parameters for efficient genetic transformation of sugarcane. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 111:131–141
Travella S, Ross SM, Harden J, Everett C, Snape JW, Harwood WA (2005) A comparison of transgenic barley lines produced by particle bombardment and Agrobacterium-mediated techniques. Plant Cell Rep 23:780–789
Vain P, McMullen MD, Finer JJ (1993) Osmotic treatment enhances particle bombardment-mediated transient and stable transformation of maize. Plant Cell Rep 12:84–88
Vianna GR, Albino MMC, Dias BBA, Silva LD, Rech EL, Aragao FJL (2004) Fragment DNA as vector for genetic transformation of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Sci Hortic 99:371–378
Vidal JR, Kikkert JR, Donzelli BD, Wallace PG, Reisch BI (2006) Biolistic transformation of grapevine using minimal gene cassette technology. Plant Cell Rep 25:807–814
Wu H, Altpeter F (2015) Sugarcane (Saccharum Spp. Hybrids). In: Wang K (ed) Agrobacterium protocols. Springer, Heidelberg, Germany, pp 307–316
Yao Q, Cong L, Chang JL, Li KX, Yang GX, He GY (2006) Low copy number gene transfer and stable expression in a commercial wheat cultivar via particle bombardment. J Exp Bot 57:3737–3746
Yao Q, Cong L, He G, Chang J, Li K, Yang G (2007) Optimization of wheat co-transformation procedure with gene cassettes resulted in an improvement in transformation frequency. Mol Biol Rep 34:61–67
Zalewski W, Orczyk W, Gasparis S, Nadolska-Orczyk A (2012) HvCKX2 gene silencing by biolistic or Agrobacterium-mediated transformation in barley leads to different phenotypes. BMC Plant Biol 12:206
Zhang W-J, Dewey RE, Boss W, Phillippy BQ, Qu R (2013) Enhanced Agrobacterium-mediated transformation efficiencies in monocot cells is associated with attenuated defense responses. Plant Mol Biol 81:273–286
Zhao Y, Qian Q, Wang H-Z, Huang D-N (2007) Co-transformation of gene expression cassettes via particle bombardment to generate safe transgenic plant without any unwanted DNA. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 43:328–334
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Syngenta for financial support, Dr. Robert Gilbert (Everglades Research and Educational Center, UF-IFAS, Belle Glade, FL) for providing tops of sugarcane cultivar CP88-1762 and Sun Gro Horticulture, Apopka, FL for donation of the Fafard # 2 potting mix.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Editor: John Finer
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wu, H., Awan, F.S., Vilarinho, A. et al. Transgene integration complexity and expression stability following biolistic or Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of sugarcane. In Vitro Cell.Dev.Biol.-Plant 51, 603–611 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11627-015-9710-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11627-015-9710-0