Paper · PubMed

Development of a shoot-tip vitrification protocol and comparison with encapsulation-based procedures for plum (Prunus domestica L.) cryopreservation.

A De Carlo; C Benelli; M Lambardi

5
claims
10
verbatim quotes
29
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Cryopreservation of plum (Prunus domestica L.), cv Regina Claudia, was obtained by a vitrification/one-step cooling procedure of shoot tips from cold-hardened in vitro-grown plants. Best survival (57%) was obtained when the shoot tips were precultured at 4 degree C for 2 days on 0.09 M sucrose-containing Quoirin and Le Poivre medium, loaded for 30 min with a cryoprotectant (2 M glycerol and 0.4 M sucrose), incubated with the PVS2 solution at 0 C for 90 min, and directly plunged into liquid nitrogen. After re-warming in a waterbath at 40 degree C, the shoot tips were washed in a 1.2 M-sucrose MS solution for 20 min and finally plated on a regrowth medium. In comparison with the one-step cooling procedure, both the slow cooling (-0.5 degree C/min up to -45 degree C), and the two-step cooling (-160 degree C for 25 min, then -196 degree C) gave lower percentages of shoot-tip survival. Among the other cryogenic procedures tested, the performance of the encapsulation-vitrification method was similar to the vitrification protocol in terms of shoot-tip regrowth (47.5%), while encapsulation-dehydration was unsatisfactory.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 5

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The optimized vitrification protocol yielded 57% shoot-tip survival.

Organ / stage
shoot tipse0
Treatment
precultured at 4 degree C for 2 days on 0.09 M sucrose-containing Quoirin and Le Poivre mediume0
Outcome
survivale0
Direction
Beste0
Value
57%e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus domestica
Prunus domestica · TaxonYAMAMAYA · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Best survival (57%) was obtained when the shoot tips were precultured at 4 degree C for 2 days on 0.09 M sucrose-containing Quoirin and Le Poivre medium, loaded for 30 min with a cryoprotectant (2 M glycerol and 0.4 M sucrose), incubated with the PVS2 solution at 0 C for 90 min, and directly plunged into liquid nitrogen.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 182–504 · show in text ↑
t0

“plum (Prunus domestica L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 105–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Slow cooling gave lower shoot-tip survival than one-step cooling.

Treatment
slow cooling (-0.5 degree C/min up to -45 degree C)e0
Outcome
shoot-tip survivale0
Direction
lowere0
Comparator
one-step cooling proceduree0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus domestica
Prunus domestica · TaxonYAMAMAYA · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In comparison with the one-step cooling procedure, both the slow cooling (-0.5 degree C/min up to -45 degree C), and the two-step cooling (-160 degree C for 25 min, then -196 degree C) gave lower percentages of shoot-tip survival.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 663–893 · show in text ↑
t0

“plum (Prunus domestica L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 105–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Two-step cooling gave lower shoot-tip survival than one-step cooling.

Treatment
two-step cooling (-160 degree C for 25 min, then -196 degree C)e0
Outcome
shoot-tip survivale0
Direction
lowere0
Comparator
one-step cooling proceduree0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus domestica
Prunus domestica · TaxonYAMAMAYA · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In comparison with the one-step cooling procedure, both the slow cooling (-0.5 degree C/min up to -45 degree C), and the two-step cooling (-160 degree C for 25 min, then -196 degree C) gave lower percentages of shoot-tip survival.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 663–893 · show in text ↑
t0

“plum (Prunus domestica L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 105–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Encapsulation-vitrification gave 47.5% shoot-tip regrowth, similar to vitrification.

Treatment
encapsulation-vitrification methode0
Outcome
shoot-tip regrowthe0
Direction
similare0
Value
47.5%e0
Comparator
vitrification protocole0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus domestica
Prunus domestica · TaxonYAMAMAYA · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the performance of the encapsulation-vitrification method was similar to the vitrification protocol in terms of shoot-tip regrowth (47.5%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 939–1077 · show in text ↑
t0

“plum (Prunus domestica L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 105–131 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Encapsulation-dehydration gave unsatisfactory performance.

Treatment
encapsulation-dehydratione0
Outcome
unsatisfactorye0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus domestica
Prunus domestica · TaxonYAMAMAYA · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“while encapsulation-dehydration was unsatisfactory.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1079–1130 · show in text ↑
t0

“plum (Prunus domestica L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 105–131 · show in text ↑

in vitro · survival · Prunus domestica (plum)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.