Next Article in Journal
Estimation and Extrapolation of Tree Parameters Using Spectral Correlation between UAV and Pléiades Data
Previous Article in Journal
Culture and Density Effects on Tree Quality in Midrotation Non-Thinned Loblolly Pine Plantations
Previous Article in Special Issue
Application of Biotechnology in the Conservation of the Genus Castanea
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Tissue Culture of Corymbia and Eucalyptus

1
Genecology Research Centre, University of the Sunshine Coast, Maroochydore, QLD 4558, Australia
2
Faculty of Applied Sciences, Ton Duc Thang University, Ho Chi Minh City 10000, Vietnam
3
Embrapa Florestas, Colombo, CEP 83411-00, PR, Brazil
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Forests 2018, 9(2), 84; https://doi.org/10.3390/f9020084
Submission received: 15 December 2017 / Revised: 7 February 2018 / Accepted: 7 February 2018 / Published: 9 February 2018

Abstract

:
Eucalypts are among the world’s most widely planted trees, but the productivity of eucalypt plantations is limited by their often-low amenability to true-to-type propagation from cuttings. An alternative approach to cutting propagation is tissue culture, which can be used to micropropagate valuable genotypes rapidly while simultaneously preserving germplasm in vitro. This review describes the use of tissue culture methods such as shoot culture, organogenesis, and somatic embryogenesis for micropropagating eucalypts. This review also discusses the use of cool storage, encapsulation, and cryopreservation methods for preserving eucalypt germplasm and delaying tissue maturation under minimal-growth conditions.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Eucalypts are the world’s most widely planted hardwood trees, with more than 20 million hectares established in plantations because of their wide diversity of species, suitability of individual species for different climates and soils, fast growth rates, and multiple products such as timber, pulp, fodder, biofuel, essential oil, and bioactive chemicals [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11]. Eucalypt plantations are dominated by ten species, Corymbia citriodora (Hook.) K.D.Hill & L.A.S.Johnson, Eucalyptus camaldulensis Dehnh., E. dunnii Maiden, E. globulus Labill., E. grandis W.Hill, E. nitens (H.Deane & Maiden) Maiden, E. pellita F.Muell., E. saligna Sm., E. tereticornis Sm., and E. urophylla S.T.Blake, although well over 100 species have been planted globally for a range of forestry and horticultural purposes [4].
The productivity of eucalypt plantations has been limited by low amenability to clonal propagation from cuttings. Some species from high rainfall or riparian habitats, such as flooded gum (E. grandis), river red gum (E. camaldulensis), and rainbow gum (E. deglupta Blume), have long been considered amenable to cutting propagation [11,12,13,14,15,16]. Nonetheless, efficient commercial-scale propagation of these species has relied on the development of intensively managed ‘mini-cuttings’ or ‘micro-cuttings’ systems for maintaining stock plants and producing cuttings in the nursery (Figure 1a). The difference between these two systems is that nursery stock plants in the mini-cuttings system are raised from small and often serially-propagated rooted cuttings, whereas nursery stock plants in the micro-cuttings system are raised initially in tissue culture [16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26]. The species and hybrids that are propagated in these systems (e.g., many millions of E. grandis and E. grandis × E. urophylla plants per annum) are generally suited to high rainfall sites in the tropics or subtropics. Hardwood plantations are increasingly being established on drier and colder sites where land is more readily available and less expensive. These sites require other eucalypt species such as spotted gum (C. citriodora), Gympie messmate (E. cloeziana F.Muell.), southern blue gum (E. globulus), or shining leaf gum (E. nitens) that are more drought- or cold-tolerant, but which are also much more difficult to propagate from cuttings [14,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34]. One of the great challenges in hardwood forestry is to develop efficient methods for the clonal propagation of eucalypts, particularly for those species that are difficult to propagate from cuttings. One of the most promising approaches is tissue culture, which can be used to micropropagate valuable genotypes rapidly whilst simultaneously preserving germplasm in vitro (Figure 1b,c) [35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42].
This paper provides an overview of conventional techniques of shoot culture, node culture, organogenesis, and somatic embryogenesis that have been used for micropropagation of eucalypts. These methods allow rapid and true-to-type propagation of selected clones in a clonal plantation program or of seedlings from selected families in a vegetative family plantation program [42,43,44]. Shoot culture and node culture use primary explants with an intact shoot meristem or node, respectively, to proliferate shoots by stimulating the outgrowth of axillary shoots (Figure 1d) [35,45]. These two methods of shoot proliferation are, in practice, very similar, often differing only in the type of primary explant used for culture initiation. Many authors have used the term ‘shoot culture’ to describe both shoot culture and node culture and so, henceforth, we use the term ‘shoot culture’ to describe both of these methods for shoot proliferation. Organogenesis involves the induction de novo of adventitious shoots, often via an intervening callus phase (Figure 1e,f), from tissues such as internodes or cotyledons that would not otherwise have formed shoots [35,46,47]. The shoots produced by shoot culture and organogenesis often lack roots (i.e., they are unipolar) but, once a sufficient number of shoots has been multiplied, roots are induced on the shoots to produce plantlets; i.e., shoots with roots (Figure 1g). Somatic embryogenesis, in contrast, induces bipolar embryo-shaped structures, possessing both a shoot and a root meristem, often via an intervening phase of embryogenic callus [35,36,47,48,49].
This paper also discusses the use of cool storage (Figure 1h), encapsulation (Figure 1i), and cryopreservation techniques to preserve eucalypt clones under minimal-growth conditions. These in vitro techniques can be highly effective for archiving plant germplasm without the space requirements, fertiliser costs, and pest and disease risks associated with nursery or broad-acre clone banks [42,50,51,52,53,54]. These techniques also have the potential to maintain juvenile clones in vitro for many years with little or no maturation, ensuring that the propagules retain their juvenile characteristics of high propagation potential and maximal stem elongation for the duration of clonal archiving [39,40,42,48,54,55,56,57].
This review focusses primarily on techniques that have been developed since the last comprehensive review of eucalypt tissue culture over 25 years ago [58]. The review describes, wherever possible, the optimal treatment among all the treatments attempted in each previous study, although many studies described only one method for some phases of their tissue culture process. The review, firstly, describes methods for the establishment of eucalypt cultures in vitro before outlining the shoot culture, organogenesis, and somatic embryogenesis methods that have been used for eucalypt micropropagation. The review then describes methods for converting eucalypt shoots to plantlets and for improving their ex-flasking capacity. The review, finally, describes the cool storage, encapsulation, and cryopreservation methods that have been used to store eucalypt shoots and callus.

2. Establishment of Aseptic Cultures

Culture initiation is the first and often the limiting phase during in vitro propagation of trees because primary explants are typically non-aseptic and are, therefore, the main source of inoculum for microbial contamination in vitro. The initial explants for eucalypt tissue culture are typically seeds, shoot tips, nodes, or axillary buds (Table A1). Seeds do not provide true-to-type clonal propagation from a selected mother tree, but they can be used as the starting point for producing multiple clones from selected families in a vegetative family forestry program. Seeds are also an appropriate explant source for producing a genetically diverse collection of plants for conservation, revegetation, fodder production, or horticulture. Seeds are often the simplest explants to initiate into tissue culture because they are easy to decontaminate and because the juvenility of young seedlings makes them conducive to callogenesis or rapid shoot proliferation [35,45,54,55]. The use of shoot tips, nodes, or axillary buds as explants allows true-to-type propagation of selected trees, but these explants can be difficult to decontaminate, especially for eucalypts that are covered in hairs. The proliferation capacity of shoot tips, nodes, or axillary buds and the subsequent growth of their plantlets may also be influenced strongly by the position of the tree from which the explant was harvested. Maturation effects such as reduced rooting capacity, shorter internode length, and decreased stem growth [54,55,59,60,61,62] can become evident from very early stages (i.e., from relatively low explant positions) during the development of eucalypt trees [44,63,64,65,66,67].
Surface sterilisation of the initial explant is required for contaminant-free initiation into a tissue culture medium. However, non-aseptic shoot cultures of E. benthamii Maiden & Cambage have been maintained successfully by incorporating an active chlorine source into all stages of the tissue culture to suppress microbial growth [68]. Surface sterilisation of eucalypt explants typically involves rinsing in non-sterilised water or detergent solution, soaking in 70% ethanol for 30–60 s, immersing in a sterilant such as mercuric chloride (HgCl2), sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), or calcium hypochlorite (Ca(OCl)2) with constant agitation (Table A1), and then rinsing in sterile distilled water. Other surface sterilants such as hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), combinations of H2O2 and ethanol, and alkyldimethylbenzalkonium chloride have been used occasionally for decontaminating eucalypt explants [47,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76]. A drop of detergent or wetting agent such as Tween 20® is often added to the solution to improve contact between the sterilant and the explant surface, which is often hairy in the case of eucalypt shoots or leaves. The use of chlorine-based sterilants such as NaOCl or Ca(OCl)2 is strongly recommended over the use of HgCl2 because of the high mammalian toxicity and long-term environmental persistence of HgCl2 [35,77,78]. Eucalypt explants are generally treated with NaOCl at concentrations of 67–1340 mM for 1–30 min (Table A1). However, there can be a fine balance between applying sufficient sterilant to prevent microbial contamination and applying so much sterilant that it reduces seed germination or shoot growth. For example, raising the NaOCl concentration progressively from 134 to 402 to 670 mM reduced seed germination of C. torelliana (F.Muell.) K.D.Hill & L.A.S.Johnson × C. citriodora from 88% to 74% to 64%, respectively, and it reduced the percentage of plated seeds with shoots of sufficient length (>5 mm) for subculture from 78% to 65% to 52%, respectively [45].
An optimal balance of medium components including mineral salts, vitamins, organic supplements, and hormones contributes to the success of tissue culture for eucalypts and other plants. However, eucalypt explants are often placed initially onto simple culture media with minimal additives. Half- or full-strength Murashige and Skoog (MS) basal salts or media [79] are commonly used during culture establishment, typically with the addition of no organic additives other than 58.4 mM (2%) or 87.6 mM (3%) sucrose (Table A1). Establishment media sometimes include additives such as myo-inositol, thiamine, biotin, or calcium pantothenate, with or without hormones such as benzyladenine (BA), naphthalene acetic acid (NAA), or kinetin (Table A1). Reduced levels of mineral nutrients have also been used in some establishment media. For example, reduced levels of NH4NO3 and KNO3 have been used in MS-based establishment media for C. citriodora nodes [80] and greatly reduced CaCl2 levels have been used during in vitro germination of E. dunnii, E. globulus, and E. saligna seeds [81,82,83,84].
Eucalypt initiation and shoot proliferation are usually performed on semi-solid media that incorporate gelling agents such as 6–8 g L−1 agar, 1.5–4.0 g L−1 Gelrite, or 1.5–2.5 g L−1 Phytagel, which are adjusted to pH between 5.6 and 6.0 (Table A1). However, liquid media have been used to establish E. × phylacis L.A.S.Johnson & K.D.Hill nodes and shoot tips into culture [71]. Paper supports over liquid MS salts have been used during establishment of axillary shoot tips of C. citriodora trees into culture [69], while seeds of C. maculata (Hook.) K.D.Hill & L.A.S.Johnson, E. sideroxylon A.Cunn. ex Woolls, and E. urophylla have been germinated on sterile moistened filter paper prior to transfer to semi-solid media for shoot culture or callogenesis [85,86,87]. Anti-browning agents such as polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP), ascorbate, and activated charcoal are sometimes added to the establishment medium to improve eucalypt explant survival [16,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95]. Antibiotics can also be used during establishment to reduce bacterial or fungal contamination. Caution is warranted in the use of antibiotics because they may have only a bacteriostatic or fungistatic effect, with contaminants emerging at later and more-costly stages of the tissue culture process [96]. Establishment of eucalypt explants, including the germination of seeds, is usually performed in the light, although cultures are sometimes established in darkness if the primary explant is being used to induce callus.

3. Shoot Culture

Shoot culture relies on the capacity to promote the outgrowth of existing axillary and accessory buds that occur at the base of each leaf axil. Eucalypt shoots have mostly been proliferated on full-strength, or sometimes half-strength, MS media or MS salts (Table A1). Media that use MS salts are usually supplemented with organic additives, including some that are constituents of MS medium (e.g., 500–555 μM myo-inositol, 1–6.25 μM thiamine-HCl, 4.06 μM nicotinic acid, 2.43 μM pyridoxine-HCl, and/or 26.64 μM glycine) and some that are not (e.g., 0.4 μM biotin and/or 0.2 μM calcium pantothenate). Other proliferation media for eucalypts have included woody plant medium (WPM) [94,97], JADS media [98,99,100], DKW medium [101], mixtures of MS and de Fossard nutrients [102], and MS basal salts with either White vitamins or B5 vitamins [85,87,90,103]. Shoot proliferation is performed in the light, usually on semi-solid medium containing 58.4 mM or 87.6 mM sucrose (Table A1). Sucrose at 87.6 mM has been used in proliferation media for Corymbia species and hybrids even when 58.4 mM sucrose was used in the establishment medium [45,46,64,69,87]. A lowered sucrose level of 43.8 mM has been used during elongation [92] or both proliferation and elongation [93] of E. benthamii × E. dunnii shoots. The sucrose level has been dropped from 58.4 mM in the proliferation phase to 29.2 mM to promote elongation of E. grandis × E. urophylla shoots prior to transfer to root induction media [104].
Mineral nutrient levels have sometimes been adjusted in MS-based media for eucalypt shoot proliferation. The concentrations of KNO3 and NH4NO3 have been reduced by half in full-strength MS media for shoot culture of C. citriodora [80]. Shoots of C. torelliana × C. torelliana exhibit micronutrient deficiencies in half-strength MS medium, but shoot proliferation and shoot length are not increased by using full-strength MS medium or by doubling the micronutrient levels in half-strength MS medium [46]. A greatly decreased KNO3 concentration of 1.88 mM, but increased MgSO4·7H2O concentration of 3.76 mM, has been used during the establishment and proliferation of E. dunnii, E. grandis × E. camaldulensis, E. grandis × E. urophylla, and E. urophylla × E. grandis shoots [105]. Calcium chloride concentrations are often reduced to one-sixth of their full-strength MS levels, including for proliferation of E. globulus and E. saligna shoots [82,83].
Eucalypts have multiple buds within each leaf axil [106]. Outgrowth of these buds is promoted by cytokinins such as 0.44–6.66 μM BA and, occasionally, 0.23–9.29 μM kinetin that are added to the proliferation medium (Table A1). Cytokinins are sometimes supplemented with an auxin, usually 0.05–5.4 μM NAA. Auxins can promote eucalypt rooting and shoot elongation in cytokinin-free proliferation media [45,46]. However, cytokinins prevent adventitious rooting and so it is unclear why auxin rooting hormones are added to shoot proliferation media that contain cytokinins. Cytokinin levels are often reduced during long-term maintenance of cultures or for a single passage prior to root induction [80,92,93,107,108]. The gibberellins, GA3 at 0.29–0.58 μM or GA4 at 0.5 or 1 μM, have been added for a single passage to promote elongation of E. benthamii × E. dunnii and E. impensa Brooker & Hopper shoots, respectively, prior to root induction [70]. Shoot culture often provides lower plant production rates than alternative methods that include a callus phase, but the repeated use of intact organs is thought to minimize the risk of releasing or inducing somaclonal variation [35,45,46]. Genetic variation has been reported after shoot culture of E. camaldulensis and E. tereticornis clones, although much of this variation was attributed to mislabelling during the tissue culture process [16,109].

4. Organogenesis

Organogenesis involves the formation of adventitious buds in tissues that would not have otherwise formed buds. The production of adventitious eucalypt shoots usually seems to occur through an intervening callus phase (i.e., by indirect organogenesis) [35], although the anatomical origin and development of the new shoots is often not investigated thoroughly. Callus can be induced from eucalypt hypocotyls, cotyledons, nodes, internodes, shoot apices, leaves, immature flowers, and stamens (Table A1). Explants from the base of the seedling such as the hypocotyls and cotyledons are typically the most responsive because these organs contain juvenile cells that have undergone minimal ageing [44,54,55,67]. However, eucalypt shoots regenerating from the hypocotyls are often easier to proliferate subsequently than shoots regenerating from the cotyledons.
Eucalypt callogenesis and shoot regeneration are usually performed on full- or half-strength MS salts or MS medium (Table A1). However, SP medium [108,110,111,112], WPM minerals [113], WPM [114], B5 medium [115,116,117], N7 medium [86,118], JADS medium [98], EDM [119], and MS medium with White vitamins [89] have also been used. Callus is often induced in darkness, although basal organogenesis on shoots can occur in eucalypt shoot cultures that are maintained under light [45,46,64,98,120]. Callogenesis, shoot regeneration, and shoot elongation are performed on semi-solid media, typically containing 87.6 mM or, occasionally, 58.4 mM sucrose (Table A1). However, liquid MS media have been used to induce axillary bud-break on C. citriodora nodal explants, and to establish shoot tips and nodes of E. × phylacis, prior to callogenesis on semi-solid media [71,106].
Mineral nutrient levels have only occasionally been adjusted in MS-based media for eucalypt callogenesis and shoot regeneration. Half-strength KNO3 and NH4NO3 have been used in full-strength MS medium for E. microtheca F.Muell. organogenesis [121]. Standard and double MS concentrations of boron and calcium have both been used for organogenic culture of E. grandis [122], whereas CaCl2 has been eliminated from N7 medium during callogenesis, but incorporated during shoot regeneration, of E. urophylla [86]. An MS medium with 4.90 mM NH4NO3, 5.68 mM K2SO4, 1 μM CuSO4·5H2O, and no KNO3 has been employed for organogenesis and subsequent shoot development of E. grandis × E. urophylla [123].
Organogenesis from eucalypt explants is induced using plant growth regulators, particularly 0.05–5 μM BA or a combination of 0.22–5 μM BA with 0.05–16 μM NAA (Table A1). Low cytokinin concentrations tend to be used when the callogenesis medium is supplemented with additives such as 100 mL L−1 coconut water. Other cytokinin–auxin combinations have been used for organogenesis, including 1.1 μM BA with 28.5 μM IAA for E. grandis and E. grandis × E. urophylla [124], 5 μM BA with 1 μM 2,4-D for E. tereticornis [125], 4.65 μM kinetin with 5.4 μM NAA for E. microtheca [121], and 5 μM kinetin with 10 μM NAA for E. stricklandii Maiden [126]. Thidiazuron (TDZ) and 2-Cl-PBU (i.e., 1-phenyl-3-(1,2,3-thiadiazol-5-yl) urea and N-phenyl-N′-[6-(2-chlorobenzothiazol)-yl] urea, respectively) are potent promotors of callus formation in eucalypts. Organogenesis can be induced using 0.89 μM BA with 0.91 μM TDZ, or 0.5 μM TDZ with 0.2 μM 2,4-D for E. globulus [127,128], 2 μM TDZ, or 0.23 μM TDZ with 0.05 μM NAA, or 3 μM TDZ with 0.1 μM NAA for E. grandis × E. urophylla [89,123,128], and 2.27 μM TDZ with 0.54 μM NAA, or 1.14 μM 2-Cl-PBU with 0.57 μM IAA for E. urophylla [89,111,112]. Picloram (i.e., 4-Amino-3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinecarboxylic acid) has been used alone at 20.7 μM for E. urophylla organogenesis [86] or at 0.04 μM in combination with 2.25 μM BA for E. gunnii Hook.f. organogenesis [129].
Adventitious eucalypt shoots usually appear to form via an intervening callus phase, but some media formulations and explant types may favour direct organogenesis. For example, nodular regenerating structures form on the hypocotyls of E. globulus zygotic embryos plated onto MS medium containing 16.2 μM NAA [47]. These resemble somatic embryos, but microscopic examination demonstrates that they are formed via an organogenic, rather than an embryogenic, developmental pathway. These authors [47] suggested that the numerous reports of eucalypt somatic embryogenesis using similar protocols may, in fact, have described organogenesis, and that histological examination of numerous serial sections is required to confirm an embryogenic pathway. Similarly, some reports of eucalypt organogenesis from nodes must be treated with caution because eucalypt leaf axils contain multiple accessory buds, which may be released from dormancy by the same growth regulators, especially cytokinins, that induce callus formation. Callus overgrowth may conceal these growing buds, and so shoot formation could be occurring by either (or both) axillary shoot proliferation or adventitious shoot regeneration. The use of callus to regenerate shoots can provide very rapid plant production, but it also has the potential to release or induce somaclonal variation [35,45]. There are only two reports of possible somaclonal variation arising during organogenesis of eucalypts. Haploid and triploid variants have been identified following callogenesis and organogenesis of E. urophylla [130] and amplified fragment length polymorphism analysis has identified genetic variation within clones, without apparent phenotypic variation, following callogenesis and organogenesis of E. globulus [131].

5. Somatic Embryogenesis

Somatic embryogenesis involves the formation of bipolar structures (i.e., with both a shoot meristem and a root meristem), typically along a morphological and physiological pathway that resembles the development of zygotic embryos. Histological examination is required to ultimately confirm the developmental pathway of embryo-like structures, although this has not been attempted in many reports of eucalypt embryogenesis [47]. In practice, the morphology of the proliferative tissue might not be important provided that the tissue can be converted easily into either somatic emblings or plantlets.
Eucalypt somatic embryos appear to arise from zygotic embryos, hypocotyls, cotyledons, internodes, leaves, and shoot apices, although most studies have used zygotic embryos, hypocotyls, or cotyledons (Table A1), which are derived from the most-juvenile region of the plant [54,55]. Much research on eucalypt somatic embryogenesis has focused on species, particularly E. globulus and its related species, E. dunnii and E. nitens, that are difficult to propagate from cuttings [14,27,29,32,33,34].
Eucalypt somatic embryogenesis is initiated on semi-solid MS-based media typically with 87.6 mM or, sometimes, 58.4 mM sucrose (Table A1). However, B5 medium with 146 mM sucrose has been used for initiating somatic embryos on C. citriodora cotyledons [132], and N7 medium [118] has been used for callogenesis and somatic embryo formation from E. urophylla hypocotyls [86]. MS nutrient levels are generally not adjusted for somatic embryogenesis although half-strength MS medium with one-sixth CaCl2 has been used for E. dunnii [81] and MS medium with half-strength KNO3 and NH4NO3 has been used for E. microtheca [121]. Embryogenic callus is often, though not always, induced in darkness.
The induction of embryogenic tissue in eucalypts has been achieved using a diverse array of plant growth regulators (Table A1). NAA at concentrations between 10.8 and 81.0 μM has been used for somatic embryogenesis from C. citriodora, E. camaldulensis, E. dunnii, and E. globulus zygotic embryos, cotyledons, or germinating seedlings, sometimes with the addition of 100 mL L−1 coconut water or 0.5–1 g L−1 casein hydrolysate [73,74,75,76,81,132,133,134]. NAA at 5.4 μM has been used in combination with 2.22 μM BA or 4.52 μM 2,4-D for inducing embryogenic callus from zygotic embryos, hypocotyls, or cotyledons of E. globulus and E. nitens [134,135], with coconut water at 100 mL L−1 incorporated into the callogenesis medium for E. nitens [135]. Callogenesis has been induced using 100 μM indole-3-butyric acid (IBA) for E. globulus hypocotyls or cotyledons [136], while 2.22 μM BA has been used for callogenesis from E. camaldulensis hypocotyls [133]. Picloram at 20.7–50.0 μM induces somatic embryogenesis from E. grandis cotyledons, E. globulus hypocotyls and cotyledons, and E. globulus and E. saligna × E. maidenii F.Muell. shoot apices and leaf explants [136,137,138]. There are surprisingly few reports of TDZ-induced somatic embryogenesis in eucalypts, although a medium containing 2.37 μM kinetin, 21.6 μM NAA, and 0.45 μM TDZ induces embryogenic callus on E. microtheca internodes [121].
Embryogenic calli are typically transferred to standard shoot proliferation media for embryo development, including hormone-free media [81,86] and media containing 4.44–5 μM BA and 0.54–2.70 μM NAA [132,133,135,136]. Somatic embryos can then be germinated on hormone-free MS medium [73,74,75,76,132,134], MS medium with 0.89 μM BA, and 1.08 μM NAA [74], MS medium with 1.24 μM BA, 2.46 μM kinetin, and 2.48 μM NAA [74], or half-strength MS medium with 2.22 μM BA and 0.54 μM NAA [133]. Embryo germination has also been performed on filter paper suspended over liquid MS medium containing 0.44 μM BA [138].

6. Adventitious Root Formation

Germination of the bipolar structures formed during somatic embryogenesis requires media that stimulate growth from the existing root and shoot meristems. In contrast, the unipolar structures formed during shoot culture or organogenesis usually must be converted into plantlets by inducing adventitious roots at the base of the shoot. Root induction on eucalypt shoots is typically performed on semi-solid media similar to those used during the shoot establishment and proliferation phases (Table A1). However, the sucrose concentration is sometimes reduced from 87.6 mM to 58.4 mM or from 58.4 mM to 43.8 mM, and root induction is often performed in darkness. Glucose at 88 or 176 mM has been used, instead of sucrose, during root induction on E. globulus and E. saligna shoots [139]. Activated charcoal at 83.3–833 mM is often incorporated into the root induction media, including for E. camaldulensis, E. globulus, E. grandis, E. grandis × E. urophylla, E. regnans F.Muell., and E. saligna [14,82,83,84,88,139,140,141,142,143,144]. Activated charcoal may act by adsorbing inhibitory compounds, decreasing phenolic oxidation, altering medium pH, or reducing irradiance at the base of the shoot [145,146].
Levels of mineral nutrients are often reduced during the root induction phase for eucalypt shoots. Mineral adjustments have included the use of MS salts with 2.74 mM NaH2PO4, or a reduction in MS-medium strength to 1/10, for C. citriodora shoots [69,147]. They have also included the use of MS medium with half-strength macronutrients, or half-strength nitrates, for E. camaldulensis shoots [116,143], or the use of MS macronutrients with half-strength micronutrients for E. grandis × E. urophylla shoots [148]. More often, MS medium is simply reduced to half-strength during root induction, including for shoots of C. citriodora × C. torelliana, C. ptychocarpa (F.Muell.) K.D.Hill & L.A.S.Johnson,C. torelliana × C. citriodora, E. camaldulensis, E. camaldulensis × E. tereticornis, and E. grandis × E. urophylla [88,103,107,120,149,150]. Half-strength MS medium with 1/10 KNO3 and 2.5× MgSO4 has been used for E. grandis shoots [104], and half-strength MS medium with full-strength vitamins, 2.66 μM riboflavin, and 0.93 μM β-carotene has been used recently for E. grandis × E. urophylla shoots [114]. MS medium has also been reduced to quarter-strength during root induction, including for E. grandis, E. grandis × E. nitens, and E. grandis × E. urophylla shoots [124,151,152,153]. MS nutrients at quarter-strength, but with half- or three-quarters-strength CaCl2 and MgSO4, have been used for root induction on E. grandis × E. nitens and E. grandis × E. urophylla shoots [154,155]. MS macronutrients at quarter-strength but with one-eighth-strength nitrogen sources and full-strength micronutrients have been used for E. marginata Donn ex Sm. root induction [156].
MS-salt strength has been reduced from half to 3/10 for root induction on E. globulus, E. grandis, and E. saligna shoots [14,82,83,84,124,139,140]. This includes the use of 3/10-strength MS salts with no Fe, 3 mM Ca, 18 mM NO3, and 60 μM Zn for E. globulus shoots [84]. MS macro-salts at quarter-strength with full-strength micro-salts and 1/20-strength Fe.Na.EDTA have also been used for E. globulus, as have half-strength MS salts without NH4NO3 but with quarter-strength Fe.Na.EDTA [157,158]. Other media used for root induction have included WPM minerals or Knop’s medium [159] for E. camaldulensis [16,113], B5 medium for E. globulus [117], SP medium with MS micronutrients for E. grandis × E. urophylla [110], Knop macronutrients, MS micronutrients, and de Fossard organics without KI and riboflavin for E. nitens [101], half-strength DKW medium for E. pellita F.Muell. [100], Hoagland’s salts [160] for E. regnans [141], and SP medium for E. urophylla [111].
Eucalypt shoots sometimes produce roots spontaneously in hormone-free medium or potting mix [45,46,64,88,92,96,104,113,119,143,144,150,161]. However, adventitious rooting on eucalypt shoots is usually induced with an auxin rooting hormone, typically IBA at a concentration between 0.49 and 49 μM (Table A1). IBA has also been used in combination with NAA to induce adventitious eucalypt roots, including 5 μM IBA with 0.5 or 1.0 μM NAA for E. dolorosa Brooker & Hopper [162], 0.25 μM IBA with 0.25 μM NAA, or 0.5 μM IBA with 0.5 μM NAA, for E. drummondii Benth. × E. rudis Endl. [162], 0.25, 2.5, or 5 μM IBA with 0.25 or 0.5 μM NAA for E. impensa [70], and 2.5 μM IBA with 2.5 μM NAA for E. sideroxylon [85]. NAA has been used alone to induce roots at 10.8 μM for C. citriodora [69], 2.7 μM for E. grandis and E. grandis × E. urophylla [124], 1.1 or 2.7 μM for E. pellita [100], and 12.5 μM for E. urophylla × E. grandis [163]. IAA at 57 μM induces roots on E. globulus and E. grandis shoots [14]. Cytokinins are almost always excluded from media during the root induction phase because they are potent inhibitors of adventitious rooting in eucalypt shoots [45,46,64]. However, low levels of cytokinin have occasionally been incorporated with auxins in root induction media (e.g., 0.04 μM BA with 5.4 μM NAA for E. urophylla [130] and 0.4 μM BA with 5 μM IBA for E. urophylla × E. grandis [164]).
Eucalypt shoots are frequently transferred to auxin-free media after a short period on root induction medium (Table A1). This allows root and shoot elongation, which can be inhibited by long periods of exposure to exogenous auxin [165,166]. Alternatively, shoots can be transferred to potting medium immediately after auxin treatment, bypassing one of the culture passages typically associated with rooting and ex-flasking. For example, C. torelliana × C. citriodora shoots can be transferred after 3–7 days on IBA-containing medium to tubes containing sterile potting mix, with the tubes placed in sterile 1-L plastic containers that are covered initially with another container to create a humid sealed volume of 2 L [41,45,46,64,120]. Shoots of E. benthamii × E. dunnii, E. grandis × E. camaldulensis, E. grandis × E. tereticornis, and E. grandis × E. urophylla have been transferred directly ex vitro after auxin treatment [92,167]. Shoots of E. benthamii × E. dunnii and E. grandis × E. camaldulensis have also been transferred directly ex vitro without an auxin treatment, as have E. cloeziana and E. dunnii shoots [92,96,99,104,119].
The process of ex-flasking shoots and acclimatising them to nursery conditions is one of the limiting steps in the micropropagation of many plants. One of the innovations in tissue culture that has been expected to improve ex-flasking capacity of eucalypt shoots has been the use of temporary immersion systems that provide repeated cycles of shoot wetting and drying [95,161,168,169,170,171]. These systems have the potential to increase nutrient and hormone uptake by repeatedly refreshing the medium in contact with the shoot surface during the wetting cycles while also conditioning the shoot for ex vitro conditions during the drying cycles (e.g., by promoting cuticle formation [170,171,172]). Temporary immersion has increased proliferation more than 2-fold and increased nursery survival from 5% to 67% for shoots of E. grandis × E. nitens [168], and increased proliferation more than 5-fold for shoots of E. grandis × E. urophylla [171]. Temporary immersion and continuous immersion systems have both provided high rooting (100%) and nursery survival (76%) with E. camaldulensis shoots [161]. Another technique that supports the acclimatisation capacity of eucalypt shoots is photoautotrophic culture, in which shoots are maintained under conditions of high CO2 concentration, but low sugar concentration, to promote photosynthetic carbon fixation and transpiration [173,174,175,176,177]. Photoautotrophic culture has provided excellent nursery survival with shoots of E. camaldulensis (86–96%) and E. urophylla × E. grandis (100%) [175,176,177].

7. In Vitro Preservation

One of the advantages of tissue culture is the capacity to preserve germplasm in vitro for long periods without the large investments in land, labour, water, fertiliser, and pesticide that would be required for plantation- or nursery-based germplasm archives [42,51,52,53,178,179]. In vitro storage can also delay the maturation of valuable clones, especially if their shoots or callus are stored under minimal-growth or nil-growth conditions [39,40,42,180,181,182]. Plantation trees generally display higher adventitious rooting capacity, stem growth, internode length, and developmental commitment to vegetative growth when they are propagated from juvenile, rather than mature, explants or cuttings [54,55,61,62,183,184]. However, many eucalypt species progress through some of these juvenile-to-mature phase transitions at a very young age and low canopy height [11,39,40,44,63,64,67,185]. This may be the one of the reasons why seeds (or in vitro seedlings) have been the initial explant source in 54% of the eucalypt tissue-culture techniques in which an explant source has been stated (Table A1). Propagation of selected adult trees often relies on the ability to obtain juvenile tissue at the base of the tree by inducing coppice shoots or epicormic shoots [54,55]. Shoot tips, nodes, or axillary buds from nursery stock plants or adult trees have been the initial explant source in 46% of the eucalypt tissue-culture techniques in which an explant source has been stated (Table A1). This includes 24% of the techniques that used explants from nursery stock plants, 18% that used explants from the canopy of adult trees, and 4% that used explants from coppice shoots or epicormic shoots at the base of adult trees (Table A1). Coppice and basal epicormic shoots may be more juvenile than upper-canopy shoots but they are not as juvenile as seedling explants. Some plantation growers subculture difficult-to-root clones in vitro (e.g., for 10–12 passages) to rejuvenate their stock plant material prior to use in the nursery. Other plantation growers have moved away from employing clonal forestry programs that clonally propagate selected adult individuals to employing vegetative family forestry programs that propagate multiple clones from selected seedling families. Tissue culture techniques such as cool storage, synthetic seed preservation, and cryopreservation can preserve juvenile tissue in vitro with little or no growth. These techniques, therefore, have great potential to improve nursery efficiency and tree productivity in forestry plantation programs. Nonetheless, there are few reports of eucalypt germplasm storage under growth-limiting conditions.
Cool storage of shoots has been attempted for E. grandis and C. torelliana × C. citriodora. Storage at 10 °C and reduced irradiance (4 μmol m−2 s−1) allowed the preservation of E. grandis shoots on full-strength MS medium for 6 months, although shoots did not survive to 8 months [178]. However, E. grandis shoots could be stored for 10 months at 24–28 °C on half-strength MS medium, or on full-strength MS medium with 37.8 μM abscisic acid (ABA) [178]. Shoots of C. torelliana × C. citriodora have been stored on half-strength MS medium for 12 months at 14 °C and reduced irradiance (10 μmol m−2 s−1) [40]. These shoots were subsequently ex-flasked and their performance as nursery stock plants compared with plants of the same clones that had been stored for the same 12-month period either ex vitro in the nursery or in vitro at 25 °C. Cool storage at 14 °C delayed clonal maturation, with adventitious rooting and total root mass of many clones being higher after cool storage than after ex vitro nursery storage [40]. Adventitious rooting was sometimes also higher after cool storage at 14 °C than after storage at 25 °C [40], providing empirical evidence that minimal-growth storage can delay germplasm maturation and improve subsequent plant growth.
Synthetic seed preservation has also been attempted for E. grandis and C. torelliana × C. citriodora. Plant germplasm can generally be preserved, as synthetic seeds, by encapsulating small explant such as shoot tips, nodes, or axillary buds in calcium alginate [53,186,187,188,189,190,191]. Encapsulation can limit the size of the shoots, especially when the synthetic seeds are preserved under minimal-growth conditions of low temperature, reduced irradiance, or decreased nutrient supply [56,178,192,193,194,195,196]. Almost 50% of encapsulated axillary buds of E. grandis have been preserved successfully for 6 months at 10 °C and 4 μmol m−2 s−1 irradiance when the synthetic seeds, containing full-strength MS medium, were stored in jars containing a small volume of sterile distilled water [178]. Between 76% and 100% of encapsulated shoot tips or nodes of C. torelliana × C. citriodora have been preserved successfully for 12 months at 14 °C in darkness when the synthetic seeds, containing highly-diluted MS medium, were stored in Petri dishes containing either agar alone, agar with 29.2 mM sucrose, or MS medium with 29.2 nM sucrose [56]. The most effective storage substrate, MS medium with 29.2 mM sucrose, provided 92–100% regrowth capacity [56]. This high regrowth capacity after 12 months of storage means that synthetic seed techniques can provide major commercial advantages in managing the workflow requirements for propagule production in commercial laboratories. Synthetic seeds can be constructed and stored throughout the year and then retrieved in one large batch, without requiring a peak labour commitment in the weeks prior to despatch. Storage of synthetic seeds beyond 6 months or 12 months has not been tested for either E. grandis or C. torelliana × C. citriodora, respectively. Further research is warranted to determine whether synthetic seeds could be stored for much longer than 1 year. If this were the case, alginate encapsulation would provide an extremely convenient, low-cost, and space-effective means to preserve germplasm.
Cryopreservation has been attempted for E. globulus, E. grandis, E. grandis × E. camaldulensis, E. grandis × E. urophylla, E. gunnii, and E. gunnii × E. dalrympleana Maiden. Cryopreservation has proven challenging because of the desiccation sensitivity of eucalypt buds [52,197]. However, axillary buds of E. grandis × E. camaldulensis have been cryopreserved successfully, with 49% regrowth, by placing encapsulated explants on semi-solid MS media with progressively increasing sucrose and glycerol concentrations (each 0.4, 0.7 then 1.0 M), drying them in empty Petri dishes to a moisture content ≤25% before freezing, and re-growing them on media with progressively decreasing sucrose and glycerol concentrations [198]. E. gunnii has also been cryopreserved successfully, with 62–73% regrowth, by transferring encapsulated shoot tips into liquid media with progressively increasing sucrose concentrations (0.3, 0.5, 0.75 then 1.0 M), drying them over silica gel before freezing, and re-growing them on MS medium with BA, NAA, and 87.6 μM sucrose [199]. The same technique provided 43% and 13% regrowth from alginate-encapsulated shoot tips of E. gunnii × E. dalrympleana and E. globulus, respectively [199]. Shoot-tip and axillary-bud cryopreservation has proven challenging for some eucalypts, but it has a major advantage over cool storage and synthetic seed preservation in potentially being able to store plant germplasm for many years without the need for periodic subcultures for recovery and re-storage. Cryopreservation has been used very successfully to store embryogenic callus of other tree species [36,48], but there are no reports of embryogenic-callus cryopreservation for eucalypt species.

8. Conclusions

Tissue culture provides a means to rapidly propagate selected eucalypt trees, or their progeny, in a clonal forestry or vegetative family forestry program. Eucalypt tissue cultures are usually initiated from shoot tips, nodes, axillary buds, or seeds, typically after surface sterilisation using detergent, aqueous ethanol solution, and sterilants such as NaOCl or Ca(OCl)2. Eucalypt plants can be multiplied through: (1) shoot culture, by proliferating shoots from existing axillary and accessory buds in the leaf axils; (2) organogenesis, by inducing adventitious buds, often through an intervening callus phase; or (3) somatic embryogenesis, by forming bipolar structures with both a shoot and root meristem, often following formation of an embryogenic callus. Eucalypt tissue culture is often performed on semi-solid MS-based media, although a wide range of media formulations and support systems have been employed. Shoots arising from shoot culture or organogenic culture are converted into plantlets using an auxin such as IBA to induce adventitious roots, although some eucalypts form adventitious roots spontaneously in the absence of exogenous auxin. Ex-flasking capacity can be improved by techniques such as temporary immersion and photoautotrophic culture that pre-acclimatise shoots for transfer to nursery conditions. There are few reports of eucalypt germplasm conservation in vitro despite the multitude of techniques for eucalypt plantlet or embling production. Nonetheless, cool storage, synthetic seed storage, and cryopreservation have all been successful, albeit following attempts with only a few eucalypt species. These preservation techniques for eucalypt germplasm have been under-utilised, given that in vitro preservation can delay or prevent the maturation of juvenile clones prior to their mass-production for hardwood plantations. The development of efficient clonal-propagation methods for eucalypts has been one of the great challenges in hardwood forestry. Micropropagation and in vitro preservation are now contributing to provide the best-possible hardwood trees for the global plantation estate.

Acknowledgments

We thank Tracey McMahon for assistance in preparing the manuscript.

Author Contributions

S.J.T., C.D.H. and I.W. all contributed to writing this review.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

Table A1. Culture techniques, explants, and media used in the micropropagation of eucalypts. Media are aseptic and semi-solid unless stated otherwise.
Table A1. Culture techniques, explants, and media used in the micropropagation of eucalypts. Media are aseptic and semi-solid unless stated otherwise.
Taxon, TechniqueExplant, SterilisationEstablishment MediumProliferation MediumRooting MediumGelling Agent, pH
Corymbia citriodora
Shoot culture [69]Seeds
3.53 M H2O2 for 15 min
Murashige and Skoog (MS) salts with 58.4 mM sucroseMS salts with 555 μM myo-inositol, 2.96 μM thiamine, 26.7 μM benzyl adenine (BA), 5.4 μM 1-naphthalene acetic acid (NAA), and 87.6 mM sucroseMS salts with 2.74 mM NaH2PO4 or Schenk and Hildebrandt (SH) salts [200], each with 555 μM myo-inositol, 2.96 μM thiamine, 10.8 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose8 g L−1 agar
pH 5.5–5.7
Shoot culture [69]Axillary shoot tips from adult trees
1.84 mM HgCl2 for 10 min
Paper support over liquid MS salts with 555 μM myo-inositol, 2.96 μM thiamine, 26.7 μM BA, 2 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose MS salts with 555 μM myo-inositol, 2.96 μM thiamine, 26.7 μM BA, 5.4 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucroseMS salts with 2.74 mM NaH2PO4 or SH salts, each with 555 μM myo-inositol, 2.96 μM thiamine, 10.8 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose8 g L−1 agar
pH 5.5–5.7
Sugar-free shoot culture [173]Shoots from established in vitro cultures from 8-year-old treesModified liquid MS medium with 0.1 μM indole-3-butyric acid (IBA) and no sucrose, in a rockwool system with 3000 μmol mol−1 CO2
Shoot culture [80]Nodal segments from 7-year-old trees
67 mM NaOCl for 20 min
Modified MS medium with ½ NH4NO3, ½ KNO3, 0.9 μM BA, and 58.4 mM sucroseProliferation on modified MS medium with ½ NH4NO3, ½ KNO3, 10% coconut water, 4.4 μM BA, and 58.4 mM sucrose, followed by same medium but with 0.9 μM BAModified MS medium with ½ NH4NO3, ½ KNO3, 0.98 μM IBA, and 58.4 mM sucrose in a phenol resin foam2.5→2 g L−1 gellan gum
pH 5.8
Sugar-free shoot culture [174]Shoots from established in vitro culturesLiquid MS medium with 0.1 μM IBA and no sucrose, in a rockwool system under 80% red + 20% blue light emitting diodes (LEDs) and 3000 μmol mol−1 CO2
Shoot culture [147]Nodal segments from in vitro seedlingsMS medium with 9.3 μM kinetin1/10 MS medium with 9.84 or 14.76 μM IBA
Organogenesis from internodes [106]Axillary buds from mature trees
3.68 mM HgCl2 for 3 min, with pre-treatment using 0.8% polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) at 3–6 °C for 36–48 h
MS medium with 120 μM thiamine-HClBud break in liquid MS medium with 120 μM thiamine-HCl, 4.44 μM BA, and 5.37 μM NAA, then organogenesis on semi-solid ½ MS medium with 1.11 μM BA and 5.37 μM NAA8 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Somatic embryogenesis [132]Seeds
3.68 mM HgCl2 for 5 min
Embryo plated onto B5 medium with 16.2 μM NAA and 146 mM sucrose, and cotyledon-derived somatic embryos subcultured onto the same mediumB5 medium with 27 μM NAA, 500 mg L−1 casein hydrolysate, 3.42 mM glutamine, and 87.6 mM sucrose Germination in B5 medium with 58.4 mM sucrose1.5 g L−1 Gelrite
C. citriodora × C. torelliana
Shoot culture [107]Nodal segments from a 17-year-old tree
3.68 mM HgCl2 for 20 min
MS mediumMS medium with 6.67 μM BA, 5.4 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose, then long-term subculturing on MS medium with 4.44 μM BA and 87.6 mM sucrose½ MS medium with 24.6 or 49.2 mM IBA and 73 mM sucrose7 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
C. maculata
Shoot culture [87]Seeds
134 mM NaOCl for 20 min
Moistened filter paper, then germinants transferred to MS basal medium with 60 mM sucroseMS basal salts, Gamborg B5 vitamins [201], 1 μM BA, 0.05 μM NAA, 1.17 mM 2-(N-morpholino)ethanesulfonic acid (MES), and 90 mM sucroseMS basal salts, Gamborg B5 vitamins, 0.4 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.4 μM biotin, 30 μM IBA, 6–25 μM silver thiosulphate (STS), 1.17 μM MES, and 90 mM sucrose, followed by ½ MS basal salts, Gamborg B5 vitamins, 0.4 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.4 μM biotin, 1.17 μM MES, and 60 mM sucrose7 g L−1 agar
C. ptychocarpa
Shoot culture [103]Nodal segments from a 3-year-old tree
3.68 mM HgCl2 for 10 min
MS medium with 2.22 μM BA, 0.54 μM NAA, and 82.7 μM VB2MS medium with 6.67 μM BA, 1.1 μM NAA, and 82.7 μM VB2½ MS medium with 7.38 μM IBA
C. torelliana × C. citriodora
Shoot culture [45]Seeds
134 mM NaOCl for 10 min
½ MS basal salts with 58.4 mM sucrose½ MS medium with 0.05 or 0.27 μM NAA and 87.6 mM sucrose, then ½ MS medium with 87.6 mM sucrose½ MS medium with 4.9 μM IBA and 87.6 mM sucrose for 3 days, then sterile perlite and pine bark8 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Shoot culture [149]Nodes from 30–32-year-old trees
5.52 mM HgCl2 for 10 min
MS medium with 6.67 μM BA, 2.7 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucroseMS medium with 4.44 μM BA and 87.6 mM sucrose½ MS medium with 2.46 μM IBA and 87.6 mM sucrose6 g L−1 agar
Shoot culture [46,64]Seeds
134 mM NaOCl for 10 min
½ MS basal salts with 58.4 mM sucrose½ MS medium with 0 or 0.05 μM NAA and 87.6 mM sucrose ½ MS medium with 19.6 μM IBA and 58.4 mM sucrose for 7 days, then sterile vermiculite and perlite8 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Organogenesis [45]Seeds
134 mM NaOCl for 10 min
½ MS basal salts with 58.4 mM sucrose½ MS medium with 0 or 0.05 μM NAA and 87.6 mM sucrose, then ½ MS medium with 2.2 μM BA and 87.6 mM sucrose½ MS medium with 4.9 μM IBA and 87.6 mM sucrose, then sterile perlite and pine bark8 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Organogenesis [46,64]Seeds
134 mM NaOCl for 10 min
½ MS basal salts with 58.4 mM sucrose½ MS medium with 0 or 0.05 μM NAA and 87.6 mM sucrose, then MS medium with 2.2 μM BA, 0 or 0.05 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose½ MS medium with 19.6 μM IBA and 58.4 mM sucrose for 7 days, then sterile vermiculite and perlite8 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Organogenesis [120]Seeds
134 mM NaOCl for 10 min
½ MS basal salts with 58.4 mM sucroseMS medium with 87.6 mM sucrose, then proliferation on MS medium with 4.4 μM BA and 87.6 mM sucrose½ MS medium with 19.6 μM IBA and 58.4 mM sucrose for 7 days, then sterile vermiculite and perlite8 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Eucalyptus benthamii
Non-aseptic shoot culture [68]Nodal segments from nursery stock plants
201 mM NaOCl for 10 min
MS medium with 87.6 mM sucrose, incorporating 0.001 or 0.003% active chlorine7 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
E. benthamii × E. dunnii
Shoot culture [91]Nodal segments from nursery stock plants
67–268 mM NaOCl for 10 min
MS medium with 250 mg L−1 PVP and 87.6 mM sucroseProliferation on ½ MS medium with 1.11 μM BA, 0.054 μM NAA, 250 mg L−1 PVP, and 87.6 mM sucrose, then elongation in ½ MS medium with 0.22 μM BA, 1.35 μM NAA, 250 mg L−1 PVP, and 43.8 mM sucrose 6 g L−1 agar
pH 5.6
Shoot culture [92]Nodal segments from nursery stock plants
67–268 mM NaOCl for 10 min
MS medium with 250 mg L−1 PVP and 87.6 mM sucroseProliferation on ½ MS medium with 2.2 μM BA, 0.27 μM NAA, 250 mg L−1 PVP, and 43.8 mM sucrose, then elongation in ½ MS medium with 0.44 μM BA, 0.29–0.58 μM GA, 250 mg L−1 PVP, and 43.8 mM sucrose½ MS medium with 0 or 9.84 μM IBA, 210 μM calcium pantothenate, 409 μM biotin, 555 μM myo-inositol, and 43.8 mM sucrose, or ex vitro in carbonised rice bark/vermiculite (1/v, v/v) after treatment with 0 or 4.92 μM IBA6 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
E. × brachyphylla
Shoot culture [93]Nodal segments from nursery stock plants
201 mM NaOCl for 10 min
Woody Plant Medium (WPM) with 284 μM ascorbate, 400 μM cysteine, 400 mg L−1 PVP, 4.44 μM BA, 5.4 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose8 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
E. camaldulensis
Shoot culture [202]Nodes from 2-year-old nursery plants
630 mM Ca(OCl)2 for 20 min
MS medium with 5 μM IBA, 87.6 mM sucrose, and 0.2% charcoal5 g L−1 agar
pH 5.6
Shoot culture [203]Shoots from long-term in vitro culturesMS medium with 2.5 μM BA, 0.1 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose2.5 g L−1 agar + 2.5 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.8
Shoot culture [16]Nodal segments from coppice shoots of 10-year-old field ramets
80 mM NaOCl for 10 min
Initiation on MS medium with 400 mg L−1 PVP, 2.22 μM BA, 1.16 μM kinetin, 0.029 μM gibberellic acid (GA3), and 87.6 mM sucroseProliferation on MS medium with 400 mg L−1 PVP, 0.44 μM BA, 0.23 μM kinetin, 0.029 μM GA3, and 87.6 mM sucroseKnop’s medium [159] with 4.9 μM IBA and 43.8 mM sucrose6 g L−1 agar
pH 5.7–5.9
Organogenesis [113]Excised leaves from established culturesCallogenesis on WPM minerals [204] with 1 g L−1 casein, 0.44 μM BA, 16.2 μM NAA, and 146 mM sucroseShoot regeneration on WPM minerals with 1.33 μM BA and 146 mM sucroseWPM minerals with 146 mM sucrose5 g L−1 Phytagar
pH 5.9
Organogenesis from hypocotyl segments [116]Seeds
134 mM NaOCl for 15 min
MS mediumOrganogenesis on B5 medium [201] with 100 mL L−1 coconut milk, 1.37 mM glutamine, 100 mg L−1 casein hydrolysate, 4.44 μM BA, 16.2 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose Modified MS medium with half-strength macronutrients, 4.92 μM IBA, and 87.6 mM sucrose7.5 g L−1 agar
pH 5.7
Callogenesis [205]Immature flowers and stamens
10% commercial bleach for 4 min
MS medium with 0.01 or 0.1 μM BA, 0.01 or 0.05 μM 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D), and 58.4 mM sucrose8 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Organogenesis from cotyledons [143] Seeds
804 mM NaOCl for 20 min
½ MS medium with 58.4 mM sucroseMS medium with 4.44 μM BA, 5.4 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucroseMS medium with ½-strength nitrates and 0.2% charcoal7 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Organogenesis from cotyledons [150]Seeds
804 mM NaOCl for 20 min
½ MS medium with 58.4 mM sucroseOrganogenesis on MS medium or WPM with 4.44 μM BA, 2.7 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose, then multiplication on MS medium with 2.96 μM thiamine, 2.64 μM BA, 0.5 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose½ MS medium with 87.6 mM sucrose7→6→7 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Somatic embryogenesis from zygotic embryos [133]Seeds
134 mM NaOCl for 20 min
Zygotic embryos plated on MS medium with 10.8 μM NAA and 87.6 mM sucroseCallus transferred to MS medium with 4.44 μM BA, 0.54 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucroseGermination on ½ MS medium with 2.22 μM BA, 0.54 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose8 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Somatic embryogenesis from cotyledons [133]Seeds
134 mM NaOCl for 20 min
MS medium with 87.6 mM sucroseCotyledons plated on MS medium with 10.8 μM NAA and 87.6 mM sucrose, then calli transferred to MS medium with 4.44 μM BA, 0.54 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucroseGermination on ½ MS medium with 2.22 μM BA, 0.54 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose8 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Somatic embryogenesis from hypocotyls [133]Seeds
134 mM NaOCl for 20 min
MS medium with 87.6 mM sucroseHypocotyls plated on MS medium with 2.22 μM BA and 87.6 mM sucroseGermination on ½ MS medium with 2.22 μM BA, 0.54 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose8 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
E. camaldulensis × E. tereticornis
Shoot culture [149]Nodes from 30–32-year-old trees
5.52 mM HgCl2 for 12 min
MS medium with 4.44 μM BA and 58.4 mM sucroseMS medium with 4.44 μM BA, 0.49 μM IBA, and 58.4 mM sucrose½ MS medium with 4.92 μM IBA and 58.4 mM sucrose6 g L−1 agar
E. cloeziana
Shoot culture [96] Nodes from epicormic shoots on harvested branches of 26-year-old trees
134 mM NaOCl for 5 min
MS medium with 2.22 μM BA and 87.6 mM sucroseProliferation on WPM [204] with 2.22 μM BA, then on WPM with 3.33 μM BA, 0 or 0.27 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose, then elongation on WPM with 0.44 μM BA and 87.6 mM sucroseVermiculite and composted pine bark (2:1, v/v) ex vitro4 g L−1 agar
pH 5.75–5.85
E. dolorosa
Shoot culture [162]Shoots from wild adult trees½ MS medium with 0.25 μM BA and sucrose, with or without 0.25 μM NAA ½ MS medium with sucrose, 5 μM IBA, and 0.5 or 1 μM NAAAgar
E. drummondii × E. rudis
Shoot culture [162]Shoots from wild adult trees½ MS medium with sucrose, and either 0.25 μM BA and 2.5 μM kinetin or 0.5 μM BA ½ MS medium with sucrose and either 0.25 μM IBA and 0.25 μM NAA or 0.5 μM IBA and 0.5 μM NAAAgar
E. dunnii
Shoot culture [104]Shoots from established long-term cultures½ MS medium but with 1.88 mM KNO3 and 3.76 mM MgSO4, and with 0.18 μM BA, 87.6 mM sucrose, and 2 g L−1 Gelrite½ MS medium but with 1.88 mM KNO3 and 3.76 mM MgSO4, and with 0.04 μM BA, 87.6 mM sucrose, and either Gelrite (semi-solid) or EM2 or M-Gel (liquid)2→(2 or 0) g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.6
Shoot culture [94]Nodes from coppice of 3-year-old trees
201 mM NaOCl for 10 min
MS medium with 555 μM myo-inositol, 250 mg L−1 PVP, and 87.6 mM sucroseProliferation on ½ MS medium with 278 μM myo-inositol, 1.11–2.22 μM BA, and 87.6 mM sucrose6 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Shoot culture [99]1-m length epicormic shoots
201 mM NaOCl for 20 min
Eucalyptus dunnii medium (EDM) [119] with 58.4 mM sucroseModified EDM with 0.89 μM BA, 0.54 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucroseEx vitro in composted pine bark/perlite/vermiculite (2/1/1, v/v) with the mineral components of modified EDM6→5 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Organogenesis from hypocotyls [99]Seeds
268 mM NaOCl for 30 min
EDM without sucroseCallogenesis on EDM with 286 mg L−1 Basafer® as Fe source instead of Fe(SO4)2 and Na2.ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid (Na2EDTA), 0.44 or 2.22 μM BA, 0.54–5.40 μM NAA or indole acetic acid (IAA), and 87.6 mM sucrose, then multiplication on EDM with 286 mg L−1 Basafer ® instead of Fe(SO4)2 and Na2EDTA, 0.89 μM BA, 0.054 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucroseExcised shoots placed, without auxin treatment, in sterile mixture of composted pine bark, and perlite and vermiculite (2:1:1) ex vitro6→5 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Somatic embryogenesis [81]Seeds
16 mM NaOCl for 15 min
½ MS medium with 1/6 CaCl2 and 58.4 mM sucrose3-day-old seedlings to ½ MS medium with 1/6 CaCl2 and 5.5 or 16.5 μM NAA, 1 g L−1 casein hydrolysate or 10% coconut milk, and 58.4 mM sucrose, then to hormone-free medium 8 g L−1 agar
E. erythronema
Organogenesis from hypocotyls [126]Seeds
402 mM NaOCl for 20 min
MS medium with 5 μM BA, or 5 μM kinetin, or 1 μM BA and 5 μM NAA, or 1 μM and 10 μM NAA, each with 87.6 mM sucrose 7 g L−1 Phytagel
Organogenesis from cotyledons and youngest leaves [126]Seeds
402 mM NaOCl for 20 min
MS medium with 1 or 5 μM BA and 87.6 mM sucrose7 g L−1 Phytagel
Organogenesis from shoot apices [206]Seeds
402 mM NaOCl for 20 min
MS medium with 87.6 mM sucroseOrganogenesis on MS medium with 0.1 or 0.25 μM BA and 87.6 mM sucrose, then proliferation on Quoirin and Lepoivre (QL) medium [207] with 2.2 μM BA, 0.5 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose 7 g L−1 Phytagel
pH 5.7
E. erythronema × E. stricklandii
Organogenesis from hypocotyls and cotyledons [126]Seeds
402 mM NaOCl for 20 min
MS medium with 5 μM BA, 5 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose7 g L−1 Phytagel
Organogenesis from youngest expanding leaves [126]Seeds
402 mM NaOCl for 20 min
MS medium with 1 μM BA and 87.6 mM sucrose7 g L−1 Phytagel
Organogenesis from shoot apices [206]Seeds
402 mM NaOCl for 20 min
MS medium with 87.6 mM sucroseOrganogenesis on MS medium with 0.5 μM BA and 87.6 mM sucrose, then proliferation on QL medium with 2.2 μM BA, 0.5 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose7 g L−1 Phytagel
pH 5.7
Organogenesis from shoot apices [206]In vitro shoots established from an 18-month-old stock plantQL medium with 0.5 μM GA and 58.4 mM sucroseOrganogenesis on MS medium with 1 μM BA and 87.6 mM sucrose, then proliferation on QL medium with 2.2 μM BA, 0.5 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose7 g L−1 Phytagel
pH 5.7
Organogenesis from leaves [206]Seeds
402 mM NaOCl for 20 min
MS medium with 87.6 mM sucroseOrganogenesis on MS medium with 0.25, 0.5, or 1 μM BA and 87.6 mM sucrose, then proliferation on QL medium with 2.2 μM BA, 0.5 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose7 g L−1 Phytagel
pH 5.7
E. globulus
Shoot culture [157]Nodal segments from 4–5-year-old trees
134 mM NaOCl for 20 min
Establishment and maintenance on MS medium with 2.5 μM BA, 1.25 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucroseProliferation on MS medium that alternated 1.25 μM BA with 1.9, 2.2, or 2.5 μM kinetin from passage to passage, and 58.4 mM sucroseShoots from the medium with kinetin transferred to ¼-strength MS macro-salts, full-strength micro-salts, 50 μM Fe.Na.EDTA, 10 μM IBA, and 20 nM sucrose2.5 g L−1 agar + 2.5 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.8
Shoot culture [82,83]Seeds
201 mM NaOCl for 15 min
½ MS salts with 658 μM CaCl2 and 58.4 mM sucrose0.3× MS salts, 1.18 μM thiamine HCl, 555 μM myo-inositol, 10 or 492 μM IBA, and 87.6 mM sucrose, then the same medium without IBA but with 83.3 mM activated charcoal7.5 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Shoot culture [158]Nodal segments from 4–5-year old trees
134 mM NaOCl for 20 min
Establishment and maintenance on MS medium with 2.5 μM BA, 1.25 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucroseProliferation on MS medium that alternated 2.5 μM BA with 2.5 μM kinetin from passage to passage, and 58.4 mM sucroseShoots from the medium with kinetin transferred to ½ MS salts without NH4NO3, with ¼-strength MS Fe.Na.EDTA, 1, 2.5, or 5 μM IBA, and 58.4 mM sucrose2.5 g L−1 agar + 2.5 g L−1 Phytagel
pH 5.8→5.5
Shoot culture [140]Seeds
335 mM NaOCl for 15 min
½ MS salts with 58.4 mM sucrose0.3× MS salts, 1.18 μM thiamine, 2775 μM myo-inositol, 49.2 μM IBA, and 87.6 mM sucrose, then same medium without IBA but with 83.3 mM activated charcoal6 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Shoot culture [139]Seeds
335 mM NaOCl for 15 min
½ MS salts with 58.4 mM sucrose0.3× MS salts, 1.18 μM thiamine, 2775 μM myo-inositol, 49.2 μM IBA, and 88 or 176 mM glucose, then same medium without IBA but with 83.3 mM activated charcoal and 87.6 mM sucrose instead of glucose6 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Shoot culture [84]Seeds
201 mM NaOCl for 15 min
½ MS salts with 0.5 mM CaCl2 and 58.4 mM sucrose0.3× MS salts with no Fe, 3 mM Ca, 18 mM NO3, 60 μM Zn, 1.18 μM thiamine HCl, 555 μM inositol, 49.2 μM IBA, and 87.6 mM sucrose, then same medium with 30 μM Fe, 0.9 mM Ca, 18 mM NO3, 60 μM Zn, 83.3 mM activated charcoal, and no IBA 6 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Root induction on hypocotyls [208]Seeds
1.88 M NaOCl for 30 min
MS salts with 58.4 mM sucroseMS medium with 100 μM IBA2 g L−1 Phytagel
Root induction on seedling apical shoots [14]Seeds
201 mM NaOCl
½ MS salts with 58.4 mM sucrose0.3× MS salts with 1.18 μM thiamine, 555 μM inositol, 57 μM IAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose for 4 days then same medium without IAA but with 83.3 mM activated charcoal6 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Organogenesis from hypocotyls and cotyledons [127]Seeds
490 mM Ca(OCl)2 for 20 min
MS basal medium with 87.6 mM sucroseMS medium with 0.89 μM BA and 0.91 μM thidiazuron (TDZ)½ MS basal salts with White’s vitamins [209], 14.76 μM IBA, and 58.4 mM sucrose for 3–7 days, then the same medium but lacking IBA 7 g L−1 agar
pH 5.6
Organogenesis and occasional somatic embryogenesis from hypocotyl segments and cotyledons [135]Seeds
40% commercial bleach for 30 min
MS salts and 87.6 mM sucroseCallogenesis on MS nutrients with 10% coconut water, 2.22 μM BA, 5.4 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose, then shoot regeneration on the same medium but with 4.44 μM BA and 2.7 μM NAAMS medium with 14.76 μM IBA and 58.4 mM sucrose, then the same medium without IBA8 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Organogenesis from hypocotyls and cotyledons [128]Seeds
503 mM NaOCl for 30 min
MS mediumBud induction on MS medium with 0.05 μM TDZ and 0.2 μM 2,4-D, then shoot regeneration on MS medium with 5 μM BA, both with 87.6 mM sucrose2 g L−1 Phytagel
pH 5.8
Organogenesis from seeds [117]Seeds87.6 mM sucroseOrganogenesis on B5 medium with 10% coconut water, 0.22 μM BA, 2.7 μM NAA, and 87.6 or 146.0 mM sucrose, then B5 medium with 87.6 mM sucrose, then shoot regeneration on B5 medium with 0.22 μM BA and 87.6 mM maltoseB5 medium with 2.46 μM IBA and 87.6 mM sucrose6.5 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Organogenesis from hypocotyls [117] In vitro seedlingsOrganogenesis on B5 medium with 10% coconut water, 0.22–2.22 μM BA, 0–5.4 μM NAA, and 146 mM sucrose, then B5 medium with 87.6 mM sucrose, then shoot regeneration on B5 medium with 0.22 μM BA and 87.6 mM maltoseB5 medium with 2.46 μM IBA and 87.6 mM sucrose6.5 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Organogenesis from cotyledons [117]In vitro seedlingsOrganogenesis on B5 medium with 10% coconut water, 0.22 or 1.11 μM BA, 2.7 μM NAA, and 146 mM sucrose, then B5 medium with 87.6 mM sucrose, then shoot regeneration on B5 medium with 0.22 μM BA and 87.6 mM maltoseB5 medium with 2.46 μM IBA and 87.6 mM sucrose6.5 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Organogenesis from leaves [117] Established in vitro cultures of selected clonesOrganogenesis on B5 medium with 10% coconut water, 0.22 μM BA, 2.7 μM NAA, and 146 mM sucrose, then B5 medium with 87.6 mM sucrose, then shoot regeneration on B5 medium with 0.22 μM BA and 87.6 mM maltoseB5 medium with 2.46 μM IBA and 87.6 mM sucrose6.5 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Organogenesis [47]Seeds
Ethanol/8.83 M H2O2 (1/1, v/v)
Zygotic embryo plated on MS medium with 16.2 μM NAA and 87.6 mM sucroseMS medium with 87.6 mM sucrose to induce nodular structures from hypocotyls, which were transferred to fresh MS medium with 87.6 mM sucrose2.5 g L−1 Gelrite
Somatic embryogenesis [136]Seeds
503 mM NaOCl for 30 min
Cotyledon segments or hypocotyls plated onto MS medium with 50 μM picloram or 100 μM IBA, and 87.6 mM sucroseCallus transferred to MS medium with 5 μM BA and 1 μM NAA (cotyledons) or 10 μM IBA (cotyledons and hypocotyls), with 87.6 mM sucrose2 g L−1 Phytagel
Somatic embryogenesis from cotyledons [134]Seeds
0.1% Benlate®
MS medium with 58.4 mM sucroseEmbryogenesis on MS medium with either 5.4 μM NAA + 4.52 μM 2,4-D or 16.2–27.0 μM NAA or 27.0 μM NAA + 500 mg L−1 casein hydrolysate + 3.40 mM glutamate, each with 87.6 mM sucrose MS medium with 87.6 mM sucrose3 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.8
Somatic embryogenesis from zygotic embryos [134]Seeds
0.1% Benlate®
Embryogenesis on MS medium with either 5.4 μM NAA + 4.52 μM 2,4-D or 16.2–81.0 μM NAA or 27.0 μM NAA + 500 mg L−1 casein hydrolysate + 3.40 mM glutamate, each with 87.6 mM sucroseMS medium with 87.6 mM sucrose3 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.8
Somatic embryogenesis from zygotic embryos [73,75,76]Seeds
Ethanol/8.83 M H2O2 (1/1, v/v) for 15 min
Embryogenesis on MS medium with 16.1 μM NAA and 87.6 mM sucroseMS medium with 87.6 mM sucrose2.5 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.8
Somatic embryogenesis [74]Seeds
Ethanol/8.83 M H2O2 (1/1, v/v) for 15 min then 0.1% Benlate® for 15 min
Embryogenesis on MS medium with 16.1 μM NAA and 87.6 mM sucrose, then MS medium with 87.6 mM sucroseSecondary embryogenesis and germination on MS medium with or without 0.89 μM BA + 1.08 μM NAA or 1.24 μM BA + 2.46 μM kinetin + 2.48 μM NAA, each with 87.6 mM sucrose 2.5 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.8
Somatic embryogenesis [138]2-year established cultures from 12-year-old elite treesShoot apex and leaf explants plated on MS medium with 500 mg L−1 casein hydrolysate, 40 μM picloram, 40 mg L−1 gum Arabic, and 87.6 mM sucroseSecondary embryogenesis on MS medium with 16.11 μM NAA, 20 μM STS, and 87.6 mM sucroseGermination on filter paper over liquid MS medium with 0.44 μM BA and 87.6 mM sucrose6 g L−1 agar
pH 5.6–5.7
E. grandis
Shoot culture [210]Nodal segments from nursery and field stock plants
0.74 mM HgCl2 for 10 min then 70 mM Ca(OCl)2 for 2 min
MS nutrients and 58.4 mM sucroseMS nutrients, 0.89 μM BA, 0.054 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose4 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.6–5.8
Shoot culture [197]Nodal segments from nursery rooted cuttings
0.74 mM HgCl2 for 10 min then 70 mM Ca(OCl)2 for 10 min
MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 1.56 μM BA, 0.054 μM NAA, and 73 mM sucroseMS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 1.56 μM BA, 0.054 μM NAA, and 73 mM sucrose3 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.6–5.8
Shoot culture [152]Nodal segments from nursery stock plants
0.74 mM HgCl2 for 10 min then 70 mM Ca(OCl)2 for 10 min
Initiation on MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.44 μM BA, 0.23 μM kinetin, 0.21 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucroseProliferation on MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.21 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose, then elongation on MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.93 μM kinetin, 2.1 μM IAA, 0.25 μM IBA, 1.6 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose¼ MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, and 43.8 mM sucrose4 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.6–5.8
Shoot culture [93]Nodal segments from nursery stock plants
134 mM NaOCl for 5 min
MS mediumWPM with 284 μM ascorbate, 400 μM cysteine, 400 mg L−1 PVP, and 87.6 mM sucrose8 g L−1 agar
pH 5.7
Shoot culture [153]Nodal segments from nursery stock plants
0.74 mM HgCl2 for 10 min then 70 mM Ca(OCl)2 for 10 min
Initiation on MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.44 μM BA, 0.23 μM kinetin, 0.21 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucroseProliferation on the same medium used for initiation, then elongation on MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.93 μM kinetin, 0.49 μM IBA, 1.62 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose¼ MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, and 43.8 mM sucrose4 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.6–5.8
Shoot culture with basal organogenesis [98]Subapical nodes of in vitro seedlingsImmersion in 889 μM BA solution for 1–2 hJADS medium [97]
Root induction on seedling apical shoots [14]Seeds
201 mM NaOCl
½ MS salts with 58.4 mM sucrose0.3× MS salts with 1.18 μM thiamine, 555 μM inositol, 0 or 57 μM IAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose for 96 h, then the same medium without IAA but with 83.3 mM activated charcoal6 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Organogenesis [113]Excised leaves from established culturesCallogenesis on WPM minerals with 1 g L−1 casein, 0.44 μM BA, 16.2 μM NAA, and 146 mM sucroseShoot regeneration on WPM minerals with 1.33 μM BA and 146 mM sucrose5 g L−1 Phytagar
pH 5.9
Organogenesis [124]2–3 mm shoot segments from long-term in vitro cultures, with the apical and axillary buds removedCallogenesis on MS medium with 1.11 μM BA, 28.5 μM IAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose, then shoot regeneration on the same medium, then shoots conditioned for root induction in MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.89 μM BA, 0.054 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose followed by MS medium with 43.8 mM sucrose¼ MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 2.7 μM NAA, and 43.8 mM sucrose4 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.6–5.8
Organogenesis [122]Seeds
335 mM NaOCl for 20 min then 1% Benomyl® for 20 min
MS medium with 87.6 mM sucrose Nodal segments transferred to MS medium with 2.22 μM BA, 0.27 μM NAA, with or without 2× boron or calcium concentrations, and 87.6 mM sucrose9 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Somatic embryogenesis from cotyledons [137]Seeds
670 mM NaOCl for 15 min
½ MS medium with 278 μM myo-inositol and 43.8 mM sucroseEmbryogenesis on MS medium with 555 μM myo-inositol, 2.26 μM dicamba or 20.7 or 41.4 μM picloram, and 87.6 mM sucrose2.8 g L−1 Phytagel
pH 5.6–5.8
E. grandis × E. camaldulensis
Shoot culture [167]Nodal segments from 1-year-old trees
134 mM NaOCl for 20 min
MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 2.1 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.49 μM BA, 0.23 μM kinetin, 0.22 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucroseMS medium with 0.89 μM BA and 0.054 μM NAA, then elongation on MS medium with 0.47 μM kinetin, 1.89 μM NAA, and 0.25 μM IBAPasteurised bark ex vitro3.5 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.6
Shoot culture [104]Shoots from established long-term cultures½ MS medium but with 1.88 mM KNO3 and 3.76 mM MgSO4, and with 0.18 μM BA, 87.6 mM sucrose, and 2 g L−1 Gelrite½ MS medium but with 1.88 mM KNO3 and 3.76 mM MgSO4, and with 0.04 μM BA, 87.6 mM sucrose, and 5 g L−1 EM2 (liquid medium)½ MS medium but with 1.88 mM KNO3 and 3.76 mM MgSO4, and with 87.6 mM sucrose and 2 g L−1 Gelrite, or ex vitro in vermiculite2→(2 or 0)→2 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.6
Shoot culture [210]Nodes from nursery and field stock plants
0.74 mM HgCl2 for 10 min then 70 mM Ca(OCl)2 for 2 min
MS nutrients and 58.4 mM sucroseMS nutrients, 0.89 μM BA, 0.054 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose4 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.6–5.8
E. grandis × E. globulus
Shoot culture [90]Nodes from nursery stock plants
134 mM NaOCl for 15 min
MS medium with 555 μM myo-inositol, 800 mg L−1 PVP, 2.22 μM BA, 0.54 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucroseProliferation on MS medium with 555 μM myo-inositol, 800 mg L−1 PVP, 2.22 μM BA, 0.054 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose7 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
E. grandis × E. nitens
Shoot culture [154]Nodal segments from nursery stock plants
0.74 mM HgCl2 for 10 min then 70 mM Ca(OCl)2 for 10 min
MS nutrients with 0.4 μM biotin, 0.2 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.5 μM BA, 0.05 μM NAA, and 0.09 M sucrose, then elongation on MS nutrients with 0.4 μM biotin, 0.2 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.9 μM kinetin, 0.05 μM IBA, 0.05 μM NAA, and 0.07 M sucrose¼ MS nutrients but with ¾-strength CaCl2 and MgSO4, and with 0.4 μM biotin, 0.2 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.5 μM IBA, and 0.04 M sucrose4 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.8
Shoot culture [151]Nodal segments from nursery stock plants
0.74 mM HgCl2 for 10 min then 70 mM Ca(OCl)2 for 10 min
Initiation on MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.44 μM BA, 0.23 μM kinetin, 0.22 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucroseProliferation on MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 1.37 μM trans-zeatin, 0.23 μM IAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose, then elongation on MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.93 μM kinetin, 2.1 μM IAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose¼ MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.49 μM IBA, and 43.8 mM sucrose4 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.6–5.8
Shoot culture [155]Nodal segments from 1-year-old stock plants
0.74 mM HgCl2 for 10 min then 70 mM Ca(OCl)2 for 10 min
Initiation on MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.49 μM BA, 0.23 μM kinetin, 0.22 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucroseProliferation on MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.89 μM BA, 0.054 μM NAA, and 73 mM sucrose, then elongation on MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.47 μM kinetin, 0.49 μM IBA, 1.89 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose¼ MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.22 g L−1 CaCl2.2H20, 0.75 mM MgSO4, 0.49 μM IBA, and 43.8 mM sucrose3.5 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 6.2→5.8
E. grandis × E. tereticornis
Shoot culture [167]Nodal segments from 1-year-old trees
134 mM NaOCl for 20 min
MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 2.1 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.49 μM BA, 0.23 μM kinetin, 0.22 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucroseMS medium with 0.89 μM BA and 0.054 μM NAA, then elongation on MS medium with 0.47 μM kinetin, 1.89 μM NAA, and 0.25 μM IBAPasteurised bark ex vitro3.5 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.6
E. grandis × E. urophylla
Shoot culture [88]Nodal segments from nursery stock plants
7.36 mM HgCl2 for 15 min
½ MS medium with 1 g L−1 PVP, 0.44 μM BA, and 58.4 mM sucroseProliferation on ½ MS medium with 1 g L−1 PVP, 555 μM myo-inositol, 210 μM calcium pantothenate, 409 μM biotin, 0.89 μM BA, 0.047 μM kinetin, and 58.4 mM sucrose, then elongation on the same medium but with 0.93 μM kinetin instead of BA and NAA½ MS medium with 1 g L−1 PVP, 210 μM calcium pantothenate, 409 μM biotin, 833 mM activated charcoal, and 58.4 mM sucrose2→2.5 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.8
Shoot culture [167]Nodal segments from 1-year-old trees
134 mM NaOCl for 20 min
MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 2.1 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.49 μM BA, 0.23 μM kinetin, 0.22 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucroseMS medium with 0.89 μM BA and 0.054 μM NAA, then elongation on MS medium with 0.47 μM kinetin, 1.89 μM NAA, and 0.25 μM IBAPasteurised bark ex vitro3.5 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.6
Shoot culture [148]Apical shoots from nursery stock plants
84 mM Ca(OCl)2 for 10 min
MS mediumMS medium with 0.44 μM BA, 0.01 or 0.54 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose, followed by the same medium with ½-strength KNO3 and 29.2 mM sucrose to promote elongationFull-strength MS macro-salts and vitamins, ½-strength MS micro-salts, 1.48 μM IBA, and 29.2 mM sucrose
Shoot culture [142]Shoots from field stock plants
67 mM NaOCl
Custom multiplication medium with 1 mM BA, 1 mM NAA, 55 μM myo-inositol, 68 μM L-glutamic acid, 300 μM thiamine-HCl, 8 μM nicotinic acid, 50 μM pyridoxine-HCl, and 58.4 mM sucroseMS medium with 3 g L−1 charcoal7.25 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Shoot culture [104]Shoots from established long-term cultures
½ MS medium but with 1.88 mM KNO3 and 3.76 mM MgSO4, and with 0.18 μM BA, 87.6 mM sucrose, and 2 g L−1 Gelrite½ MS medium but with 1.88 mM KNO3 and 3.76 mM MgSO4, and with 0.04 μM BA, 87.6 mM sucrose, and either Gelrite (semi-solid) or EM2 or M-Gel (liquid)2→(2 or 0) g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.6
Shoot culture [210]Nodes from nursery and field stock plants
0.74 mM HgCl2 for 10 min then 70 mM Ca(OCl)2 for 2 min
MS nutrients and 58.4 mM sucroseMS nutrients, 0.89 μM BA, 0.054 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose4 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.6–5.8
Shoot culture [89]MS basal salts with White vitamins [209], 555 μM myo-inositol, 800 mg L−1 PVP, 1.33 μM BA, 0.054 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose5 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Shoot culture [211]Seeds
67 mM NaOCl for 5 min
MS basal medium with 555 μM myo-inositol, 4.06 μM nicotinic acid, 2.43 μM pyridoxine-HCl, 26.64 μM glycine, 6.25 μM thiamine-HCl, and 87.6 mM sucroseMS basal medium with 555 μM myo-inositol, 4.06 μM nicotinic acid, 2.43 μM pyridoxine-HCl, 26.64 μM glycine, 6.25 μM thiamine-HCl, 1 μM BA, 6 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose, with one dip in 20.9 μM 28-homocastasterone 6 g L−1 agar
pH 5.7
Shoot culture [155]Nodal segments from 1-year-old stock plants
0.74 mM HgCl2 for 10 min then 70 mM Ca(OCl)2 for 10 min
Initiation on MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.49 μM BA, 0.23 μM kinetin, 0.22 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucroseProliferation on MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.89 μM BA, 0.054 μM NAA, and 73 mM sucrose, then elongation on MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.47 μM kinetin, 0.49 μM IBA, 1.89 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose¼ MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.22 g L−1 CaCl2.2H20, 0.75 mM MgSO4, 0.49 μM IBA, and 43.8 mM sucrose3.5 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 6.2→5.8
Organogenesis from hypocotyls, cotyledons, cotyledonary nodes, and true leaves [110]Seeds
1.2 M NaOCl for 10 min
SP medium [108] Callogenesis on SP medium with 2 μM TDZ; regeneration on SP medium with 5 μM BA and 0.5 μM NAA; elongation on SP medium with 1 μM BA, 0.5 μM NAA, and 2 μM GA3, then SP medium with MS micro-nutrients, 833 mM activated charcoal, and 58.4 mM sucroseSP medium with full-strength MS micronutrients, 2.5 μM IBA, and 58.4 mM sucrose, then the same medium without IBA2 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 6.0
Organogenesis from nodal segments [89]Shoots from long-term in vitro culturesShoots elongated on MS basal salts with White vitamins, 555 μM myo-inositol, 800 mg L−1 PVP, 0.22 μM BA, 0.54 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucroseCallogenesis on MS medium with White vitamins, 555 μM myo-inositol, 800 mg L−1 PVP, 0.23 μM TDZ, 0.054 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose; regeneration on same medium but with 4.44 μM BA; elongation on same medium but with 0.22 μM BA, 0.54 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucroseMS basal salts with White vitamins, 555 μM myo-inositol, 800 mg L−1 PVP, 4.92 μM IBA, and 87.6 mM sucrose5 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8→5.6→5.8
Organogenesis [124]2–3 mm shoot segments from long-term in vitro cultures, with the apical and axillary buds removedCallogenesis on MS medium with 1.11 μM BA, 28.5 μM IAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose, then shoot regeneration on the same medium, then shoots conditioned for root induction in MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 0.89 μM BA, 0.054 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose followed by MS medium with 43.8 mM sucrose¼ MS medium with 0.41 μM biotin, 0.21 μM calcium pantothenate, 2.7 μM NAA, and 43.8 mM sucrose4 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.6–5.8
Organogenesis [123] Leaf segments from established in vitro culturesMS medium with 5.68 mM K2SO4, 18.79 mM KCl, no KNO3, 29.28 mM NH4NO3, 1 μM BA, 0.5 μM 2,4-D, and 87.6 mM sucrose, then the same medium but with 2 μM NAA and no 2,4-D Organogenesis on MS medium with no COCl2, 1 μM CuSO4, 5.68 mM K2SO4, no KI, no KNO3, 4.9 mM NH4NO3, 2.44 mM (NH4)2SO4, 339 μM arginine, 10% coconut water, 0.1 μM NAA, 3 μM TDZ, 500 μM putrescine, 100 μM spermidine, and 87.6 mM sucrose; shoot development on same medium with no arginine, coconut water or TDZ but with 2 μM BA, 0.5 μM NAA, 100 μM putrescine, and 10 μM spermidine
Organogenesis [114]Leaves from established in vitro culturesCallogenesis on WPM with 0.25–0.5 μM TDZ and 0.1 μM NAAShoot induction on WPM with 5 μM BA and 0.5 μM NAA½ MS medium with full-strength vitamins, 2.66 μM riboflavin, 0.93 μM β-carotene, 2.46 μM IBA, and 43.8 mM sucrose6 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
E. gunnii
Organogenesis [129]Leaves, nodes, and internodes from long-term shoot cultures MS salts with 555 μM myo-inositol, 26.6 μM glycine, 8.1 μM nicotinic acid, 4.9 μM pyridoxine-HCl, 2.96 μM thiamine-HCl, 1 μM BA, 0.04 μM picloram, and 87.6 mM sucrose for 1 weekMS salts with 555 μM myo-inositol, 26.6 μM glycine, 8.1 μM nicotinic acid, 4.9 μM pyridoxine-HCl, 2.96 μM thiamine-HCl, 2.25 μM BA, and 0.04 μM picloram, then elongation on MS salts with 555 μM myo-inositol, 0.81 μM nicotinic acid, 0.49 μM pyridoxine-HCl, 1.48 μM thiamine-HCl, and 0.45 μM BA, both with 87.6 mM sucrose2.5 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.5
E. impensa
Shoot culture [70]20–40-mm long stem segments from wild plants
63 mM alkyl-dimethyl-benzalkonium chloride for 20 min and then again for 5–20 s
½ MS medium with 100 μM Na.EDTA, 1 μM thiamine, 2.5 μM pyridoxine, 4 μM nicotinic acid, 500 μM myo-inositol, 0.5 μM BA, and 60 mM sucroseProliferation in ½ MS medium with 100 μM Na.EDTA, 1 μM thiamine, 2.5 μM pyridoxine, 4 μM nicotinic acid, 500 μM myo-inositol, 0.25 μM BA, 2.5 μM kinetin, and 60 mM sucrose, with 0.5 μM zeatin and 0.5 or 1 μM GA4 used for a single passage to promote elongation½ MS medium with 100 μM Na.EDTA, 1 μM thiamine, 2.5 μM pyridoxine, 4 μM nicotinic acid, 500 μM myo-inositol, 0.25, 2.5 or 5 μM IBA, 0.25 or 0.5 μM NAA, and 60 mM sucrose9 g L−1 agar
pH 5.9
E. marginata
Shoot culture [156]Shoots from established culturesMS medium with 2.5 μM BA, 1.25 μM NAA, 10 mM MES, and 58.4 mM sucrose¼ MS macronutrients with 1/8 nitrogen sources, full-strength MS micronutrients, 10 μM IBA, 10 mM MES, and 58.4 mM sucrose2.5 g L−1 agar + 2.5 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.8 → 5.5
Organogenesis [113]Excised leaves from established culturesCallogenesis on WPM minerals with 1 g L−1 casein, 0.44 μM BA, 16.2 μM NAA, and 146 mM sucroseShoot regeneration on WPM minerals with 1.33 μM BA and 146 mM sucrose5 g L−1 Phytagar
pH 5.9
E. microcorys
Shoot culture [212]Apical shoots from nursery seedlings and in vitro seedlings
34 mM NaOCl for 1 min
MS or ½ MS medium with 0.5–1.0 μM BA and 58.4 mM sucroseMS medium with 5–10 μM IBA and 58.4 mM sucrose7 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Organogenesis [212]Apical shoots from nursery seedlings and in vitro seedlings
34 mM NaOCl for 1 min
MS medium with 0.25 μM BA and 58.4 mM sucroseMS medium with 5–10 μM IBA and 58.4 mM sucrose7 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
E. microtheca
Shoot culture [121]Internodes from 1-year-old nursery seedlings
0.37 mM HgCl2 for 30 s
MS medium with 4.65 μM kinetin, 5.4 μM NAA, and ½ strength KNO3 and NH4NO3MS medium with 4.65 μM kinetin, 5.4 μM NAA, and ½ strength KNO3 and NH4NO3
Organogenesis [113] Excised leaves from established culturesCallogenesis on WPM minerals with 1 g L−1 casein, 0.44 μM BA, 16.2 μM NAA, and 146 mM sucroseShoot regeneration on WPM minerals with 1.33 μM BA and 146 mM sucrose5 g L−1 Phytagar
pH 5.9
Organogenesis [121]Internodes from 1-year-old nursery seedlings
0.37 mM HgCl2 for 30 s
MS medium with 4.65 μM kinetin, 5.4 μM NAA, and ½ strength KNO3 and NH4NO3MS medium with 4.65 μM kinetin, 5.4 μM NAA, 0.05 or 2.27 μM TDZ, and ½ strength KNO3 and NH4NO3
Somatic embryogenesis [121]Internodes from 1-year-old nursery seedlings
0.37 mM HgCl2 for 30 s
MS medium with 2.32 μM kinetin, 20.8 μM NAA, and ½ strength KNO3 and NH4NO3MS medium with 2.32 μM kinetin, 20.8 μM NAA, 0.45 μM TDZ, and ½ strength KNO3 and NH4NO3
E. nitens
Shoot culture [101]Seeds
Ca(OCl)2 for 20 min
Modified MS medium with half-strength macronutrients and 58.4 mM sucroseProliferation on MS medium with half-strength macronutrients, de Fossard organics [213], 0.9 μM BA, 0.05 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose, then elongation on the same medium but with 0.45 μM BA and 0.05 μM NAAKnop macronutrients, MS micronutrients without KI, de Fossard organics without riboflavin, and 4.9, 9.8 or 14.8 μM IBA, then the same medium without hormones7.5 g L−1 agar
pH 5.7
Shoot culture [101]Shoot tips from 1-year-old stock plants
Ca(OCl)2 for 20 min
De Fossard macronutrients, MS micronutrients, de Fossard organics, 0.9 μM BA, 0.05 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose, then elongation on the same medium but with 0.45 μM BA and 0.05 μM NAA7.5 g L−1 agar
pH 5.7
Organogenesis and occasional somatic embryogenesis from hypocotyl segments and cotyledons [135]Seeds
40% commercial bleach for 30 min
MS salts and 87.6 mM sucroseCallogenesis on MS nutrients with 10% coconut water, 2.22 μM BA, 5.4 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose, then shoot regeneration on the same medium but with 4.44 μM BA and 2.7 μM NAAMS medium with 14.76 μM IBA and 58.4 mM sucrose, then the same medium without IBA8 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
E. ochrophloia
Organogenesis [113]Excised leaves from established culturesCallogenesis on WPM minerals with 1 g L−1 casein, 0.44 μM BA, 16.2 μM NAA, and 146 mM sucroseShoot regeneration on WPM minerals with 1.33 μM BA and 146 mM sucrose5 g L−1 Phytagar
pH 5.9
E. pellita
Shoot culture [100]Nodes from stock plants
268 mM NaOCl for 5 min
MS mediumProliferation on Driver and Kuniyuki woody plant (DKW) medium [214] with 0.44 μM BA, 16.66 mM activated charcoal, and 87.6 mM sucrose½ DKW medium with 1.08 or 2.70 μM NAA and 58.4 mM sucrose3 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.6
Non-aseptic shoot culture [102]Nodes from in vitro seedling shootsMS salts, White vitamins, 555 μM inositol, 9.87 μM BA, 11.4 μM IAA, 8.86 μM IBA, and 87.6 mM sucrose, incorporating 0.67 or 0.94 mM NaOCl1.5 g L−1 Phytagel
pH 6.0
E. × phylacis
Organogenesis [71]Single nodes and shoot tips from the only wild tree
63 mM alkyl-dimethyl-benzalkonium chloride for 10 min and 9.2 mM HgCl2 for 30 s
Liquid ½ MS medium with 100 μM Na.EDTA, 1 μM thiamine HCl, 2.5 μM pyridoxine HCl, 4 μM nicotinic acid, 500 μM myo-inositol, 100 mg L−1 MES buffer, 0.01% potassium citrate:citrate (10:1), 416.5 mM activated charcoal, and 1 μM zeatin, followed by semi-solid medium with the same organic compounds and 0.5 μM zeatinNodular callogenesis on ½ MS medium with 100 μM Na.EDTA, 1 μM thiamine HCl, 2.5 μM pyridoxine HCl, 4 μM nicotinic acid, 500 μM myo-inositol, 100 mg L−1 MES buffer, and 5 μM TDZ, then shoot regeneration and development on the same medium but with 1 μM GA4, then with 0.5 μM zeatin and 1 μM GA4, then with 0.1 μM BA and 1 μM zeatin, then with 0.5 μM zeatin and 2 μM IAA, then with either 0.5 μM zeatin and 0.5 μM GA4 or 1 μM zeatin and 0.5 μM IAA½ MS medium with 100 μM Na.EDTA, 1 μM thiamine HCl, 2.5 μM pyridoxine HCl, 4 μM nicotinic acid, 500 μM myo-inositol, 100 mg L−1 MES buffer, and 5 μM IBApH 5.8
7 g L−1 agar
E. polybractea
Shoot culture [72]Nodal segments from nursery seedlings, field saplings, and field coppice shoots
3.1 mM alkyl-dimethyl-benzyl-ammonium chloride for 30 min
Initiation on ½ MS nutrients, 2.5 μM zeatin, 5 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucroseProliferation on 2.3 g L−1 WPM basal salts, 1 mL L−1 MS modified vitamins, 4.5 μM BA, 16 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose, then elongation on the same medium but with 3 μM 2iP instead of BA and NAA2.3 g L−1 WPM basal salts, 1 mL L−1 MS modified vitamins, 100 μM IBA, and 87.6 mM sucrose7 g L−1 agar
pH 5.6
E. regnans
Shoot culture [141]Seeds
4.02 M then 1.34 M NaOCl, each for 30 min
½ MS nutrients and 87.6 mM sucrose, then to filter paper over ½ MS nutrients without sucroseProliferation on MS medium with 2.28 μM zeatin, 0.27 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucroseHoagland’s salts [160] with 98 μM IBA and 58.4 mM sucrose, then to the same medium without IBA but with 416.5 mM activated charcoal4→2.2 g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.7
E. saligna
Shoot culture [82,83]Seeds
201 mM NaOCl for 15 min
½ MS salts with 658 μM CaCl2 and 58.4 mM sucrose0.3× MS salts, 1.18 μM thiamine HCl, 555 μM myo-inositol, 4.92, 49.2 or 492 μM IBA, and 87.6 mM sucrose, then the same medium without IBA but with 83.3 mM activated charcoal7.5 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Shoot culture [140]Seeds
335 mM NaOCl for 15 min
½ MS salts with 58.4 mM sucrose0.3× MS salts, 1.18 μM thiamine, 2775 μM myo-inositol, 49.2 μM IBA, and 87.6 mM sucrose, then the same medium without IBA but with 83.3 mM activated charcoal6 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Shoot culture [139]Seeds
335 mM NaOCl for 15 min
½ MS salts with 58.4 mM sucrose0.3× MS salts, 1.18 μM thiamine, 2775 μM myo-inositol, 49.2 μM IBA, and 88 mM glucose, then the same medium without IBA, with 83.3 mM activated charcoal and with 87.6 mM sucrose instead of glucose6 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Shoot culture and organogenesis from cotyledonary nodes [144]Seeds
804 mM NaOCl for 30 min
½ MS medium with 58.4 mM sucroseCotyledonary nodes transferred to MS medium with 10% coconut water, 4.4 μM BA, 3.6 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose in dark, then to MS medium with 1.1 μM BA, 2.7 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose in light, then shoot proliferation on MS medium with 1.1 μM BA and 87.6 mM sucrose, then elongation on MS medium with 208.3 mM activated charcoal and 87.6 mM sucroseMS medium with 208.3 mM activated charcoal and 87.6 mM sucrose7 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
E. saligna × E. maidenii
Somatic embryogenesis [138]2-year established cultures from 12-year-old elite treesShoot apex and leaf explants plated on MS medium with 500 mg L−1 casein hydrolysate, 40 μM picloram, 40 mg L−1 gum Arabic, and 87.6 mM sucroseSecondary embryogenesis on MS medium with 16.11 μM NAA, 20 μM STS, and 87.6 mM sucroseEmblings used to establish shoot cultures and then plantlets 6 g L−1 agar
pH 5.6–5.7
E. sideroxylon
Shoot culture [85]Seeds
335 mM NaOCl for 20 min
Moist filter paper½ MS salts, B5 vitamins, and 58.4 mM sucrose½ MS salts, B5 vitamins, 2.5 μM IBA, 2.5 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose 6 g L−1 Phytagar
pH 5.8
E. stricklandii
Organogenesis from hypocotyls [126]Seeds
402 mM NaOCl for 20 min
MS medium with 1 or 5 μM BA with or without 5 μM NAA, or with 5 μM kinetin and 10 μM NAA, each with 87.6 mM sucrose7 g L−1 Phytagel
Organogenesis from cotyledons [126]Seeds
402 mM NaOCl for 20 min
MS medium with 1 or 5 μM BA each with 5 μM NAA, or with 5 μM BA and 10 μM NAA, each with 87.6 mM sucrose7 g L−1 Phytagel
Organogenesis from youngest expanding leaves [126]Seeds
402 mM NaOCl for 20 min
MS medium with 1 μM BA, or with 5 μM BA and 5 μM NAA, each with 87.6 mM sucrose 7 g L−1 Phytagel
Organogenesis from shoot apices [206]Seeds
402 mM NaOCl for 20 min
MS medium with 87.6 mM sucroseOrganogenesis on MS medium with 0.5 or 1 μM BA and 87.6 mM sucrose; proliferation on QL medium with 2.2 μM BA, 0.5 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose 7 g L−1 Phytagel
pH 5.7
E. tereticornis
Shoot culture [215]Nodes from mature trees
3.68 mM HgCl2 for 10 min
Das and Mitra nutrient medium [216] with 4.44 μM BA, 0.54 or 5.4 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucroseShoot multiplied and elongated on Das and Mitra nutrient medium with 0.44 μM BA, 0.54 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucroseModified MS medium (e.g., no NH4NO3) with 4.9 μM IBA8 g L−1 agar
Organogenesis from hypocotyls [115]Seeds
7.36 mM HgCl2 for 2 min
B5 medium [201]Hypocotyl segments transferred to B5 medium with 2.22 μM BA WPM with 2.46 μM IBA10 g L−1 agar
pH 5.5
Organogenesis from leaves [125]Nodal segments from coppice shoots of 12-year-old trees
114 mM NaOCl for 15 min
MS medium with 2.5 μM BA, 0.5 μM NAA, and 58 mM sucrose, then MS medium with 0.1 μM BA and 0.5 μM NAA Organogenesis on MS medium with 5 μM BA and 1 μM 2,4-D7 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
E. urophylla
Organogenesis from hypocotyls [162]Seeds
375 mM NaOCl for 30 min
MS medium with 58.4 mM sucroseOrganogenesis on MS medium with 0.89 μM BA, 1.08 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose, then shoot regeneration on MS medium with 0.46 μM zeatin and 58.4 mM sucroseMS medium with 0.044 μM BA, 5.4 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose8 g L−1 agar → 2 g L−1 Phytagel
pH 5.6
Organogenesis from hypocotyls [86]Seeds
1.34 M NaOCl for 20 min
Moistened filter paper Callogenesis on N7 medium [118] without CaCl2 but with 21.7 μM picloram, then organogenesis on N6 medium with 6.12 mM CaCl2
Organogenesis from hypocotyls [111]Seeds
2.68 M NaOCl for 20 min
½ MS mediumCallogenesis on SP medium [110] with 6.12 mM CaCl2, 4.9, 6.6, or 8.2 μM N-phenyl-N′-[6-(2-chlorobenzothiazol)-yl] urea (2-Cl-PBU) and 0.57 μM IAA; regeneration on SP medium with 6.12 mM CaCl2, 3.52 μM BA, and 0.28 μM NAA; proliferation and elongation on SP medium with 6.12 mM CaCl2, 0.44 μM BA, 0.54 μM NAA, and 0.3 μM GA3, then SP medium with 58.4 mM sucroseSP medium with 2.5 μM IBA
Organogenesis from hypocotyls [112]Seeds½ MS medium Callogenesis on SP medium with 6.12 mM CaCl2, 1.14 μM 2-Cl-PBU, and 0.57 μM IAA; shoot regeneration on SP medium with 6.12 mM CaCl2, 3.52 μM BA, and 0.28 μM NAA
Somatic embryogenesis from hypocotyls [86]Seeds
1.34 M NaOCl for 20 min
Moistened filter paperCallogenesis on N7 medium with 21.7 μM picloram but no CaCl2; somatic embryogenesis on N7 medium with 6.62 mM CaCl2
E. urophylla × E. globulus
Shoot culture [90]Nodes from nursery stock plants
134 mM NaOCl for 15 min
MS medium with 555 μM myo-inositol, 800 mg L−1 PVP, 2.22 μM BA, 0.54 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucroseProliferation on MS medium with 555 μM myo-inositol, 800 mg L−1 PVP, 2.22 μM BA, 0.054 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose 7 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
E. urophylla × E. grandis
Shoot culture [217]Shoots from long-term in vitro cultures SEM [217] with 58.4 mM sucroseSEM or modified SEM [217] with 58.4 mM sucrose6.5 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Shoot culture [104]Shoots from established long-term cultures½ MS medium but with 1.88 mM KNO3 and 3.76 mM MgSO4, and with 0.18 μM BA and 87.6 mM sucrose½ MS medium but with 1.88 mM KNO3, 3.76 mM MgSO4, 0.04 μM BA, 87.6 mM sucrose, and Gelrite (semi-solid) or EM2 or M-Gel (liquid)2→(2 or 0) g L−1 Gelrite
pH 5.6
Shoot culture [89]MS basal salts with White vitamins, 555 μM myo-inositol, 800 mg L−1 PVP, 1.33 μM BA, 0.054 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose5 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8
Shoot culture [163]Shoots from long-term in vitro cultures from mature trees½ MS medium with 278 μM myo-inositol, 26.6 μM glycine, 2.96 μM thiamine, 4.9 μM pyridoxine-HCl, 8.1 μM nicotinic acid, 0.4 μM BA, 0.05 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose½ MS medium with 278 μM myo-inositol, 26.6 μM glycine, 2.96 μM thiamine, 4.9 μM pyridoxine-HCl, 8.1 μM nicotinic acid, 5 μM IBA or 12.5 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose2.5 g L−1 Phytagel
pH 5.6–5.8
Shoot culture [164]Nodal segments from nursery stock plants and an in vitro-germinated seed½ MS basal salts with 278 μM myo-inositol, 26.6 μM glycine, 2.96 μM thiamine, 4.9 μM pyridoxine-HCl, 8.1 μM nicotinic acid, 0.4 μM BA, 0.05 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucrose½ MS basal salts with 278 μM myo-inositol, 26.6 μM glycine, 2.96 μM thiamine, 4.9 μM pyridoxine-HCl, 8.1 μM nicotinic acid, 5 μM IBA, 0 or 0.4 μM BA, and 87.6 mM sucrose2.5 g L−1 Phytagel
pH 5.6–5.8
Organogenesis [89]Shoots from long-term in vitro culturesShoots elongated on MS basal salts with White vitamins, 555 μM myo-inositol, 800 mg L−1 PVP, 0.22 μM BA, 0.54 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucroseCallogenesis on MS medium with White vitamins, 555 μM, 800 mg L−1 PVP, 2.77 μM TDZ, 0.54 μM NAA, and 58.4 mM sucrose, then shoot regeneration on the same medium but with 0.89 μM BA and 1.08 μM NAA, then elongation on the same medium but with 0.22 μM BA, 0.54 μM NAA, and 87.6 mM sucroseMS basal salts with White vitamins, 555 μM myo-inositol, 800 mg L−1 PVP, 4.9 μM IBA, and 87.6 mM sucrose5 g L−1 agar
pH 5.8→5.6→5.8

References

  1. Turnbull, J.W. Eucalypt plantations. New For. 1999, 17, 37–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Teulières, C.; Bossinger, G.; Moran, G.; Marque, C. Stress studies in Eucalyptus. Plant Stress 2007, 1, 197–215. [Google Scholar]
  3. Shepherd, M.; Bartle, J.; Lee, D.; Brawner, J.; Bush, D.; Turnbull, P.; Macdonell, P.; Brown, T.R.; Simmons, B.; Henry, R. Eucalypts as a biofuel feedstock. Biofuels 2011, 2, 639–657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Booth, T.H. Eucalypt plantations and climate change. For. Ecol. Manag. 2013, 301, 28–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Trueman, S.J.; McMahon, T.V.; Grant, E.L.; Walton, D.A.; Elliott, B.B.; Wallace, H.M. Designing food and habitat trees for urban koalas: Identifying short ecotypes of Corymbia intermedia. Aust. J. Bot. 2017, 65, 384–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Trueman, S.J.; McMahon, T.V.; Grant, E.L.; Walton, D.A.; Theilemann, P.H.; McKinnon, A.J.; Wallace, H.M. Designing food and habitat trees for urban koalas: Tree height, foliage palatability and clonal propagation of Eucalyptus kabiana. Urban For. Urban Green. 2017, 27, 196–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Trueman, S.J.; McMahon, T.V.; Grant, E.L.; Walton, D.A.; Wallace, H.M. Designing food and habitat trees for urban koalas: Graft compatibility, survival and height of tall eucalypt species grafted onto shorter rootstocks. Aust. J. Bot. 2014, 62, 196–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Nobakht, M.; Trueman, S.J.; Wallace, H.M.; Brooks, P.R.; Katouli, M. Antibacterial activity of eucalypt gum. Acta Hortic. 2016, 1125, 71–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Nobakht, M.; Trueman, S.J.; Wallace, H.M.; Brooks, P.R.; Streeter, K.J.; Katouli, M. Antibacterial properties of flavonoids from kino of the eucalypt tree, Corymbia torelliana. Plants 2017, 6, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Kainer, D.; Bush, D.; Foley, W.J.; Külheim, C. Assessment of a non-destructive method to predict oil yield in Eucalyptus polybractea (blue mallee). Ind. Crop. Prod. 2017, 102, 32–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Eldridge, K.; Davidson, J.; Harwood, C.; van Wyk, G. Eucalypt Domestication and Breeding; Clarendon Press: Oxford, UK, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  12. Chinnaraj, S.; Malimuthu, C. Development of micro-propagation and mini cutting protocol for fast growing Melia, Dalbergia and Eucalyptus clones for pulpwood and bio-energy plantations. BMC Proc. 2011, 5, 131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Shanmugapriya, A.; Bachpai, V.K.W.; Ganesan, M.; Yasodha, R. Association analysis for vegetative propagation traits in Eucalyptus tereticornis and Eucalyptus camaldulensis using simple sequence repeat markers. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. India Sect. B Biol. Sci. 2015, 85, 653–658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Almeida, M.R.; Bastiani, D.; Gaeta, M.L.; Mariath, J.E.A.; Costa, F.; Retallick, J.; Nolan, L.; Tai, H.H.; Strömvik, M.V.; Fett-Neto, A.G. Comparative transcriptional analysis provides new insights into the molecular basis of adventitious rooting recalcitrance in Eucalyptus. Plant Sci. 2015, 239, 155–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Bryant, P.H.; Trueman, S.J. Stem anatomy and adventitious root formation in cuttings of Angophora, Corymbia and Eucalyptus. Forests 2015, 6, 1227–1238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Shanthi, K.; Bachpai, V.K.W.; Anisha, S.; Ganesan, M.; Anithaa, R.G.; Subashini, V.; Chakravarthi, M.; Sivakumar, V.; Yasodha, R. Micropropagation of Eucalyptus camaldulensis for the production of rejuvenated stock plants for microcuttings propagation and genetic fidelity assessment. New For. 2015, 46, 357–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Titon, M.; Xavier, A.; Otoni, W.C. Dinâmica do enraizamento de microestacas e miniestacas de clones de Eucalyptus grandis. Rev. Árvore 2002, 26, 665–673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Titon, M.; Xavier, A.; Otoni, W.C. Clonal propagation of Eucalyptus grandis using the mini-cutting and micro-cuttings techniques. Sci. For. 2006, 71, 109–117. [Google Scholar]
  19. Titon, M.; Xavier, A.; Otoni, W.C.; Reis, G.G. Efeito do AIB no enraizamento de miniestacas e microestacas de clones de Eucalyptus grandis W. Hill ex Maiden. Rev. Árvore 2003, 27, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Assis, T.F.; Fett-Neto, A.G.; Alfenas, A.C. Current techniques and prospects for the clonal propagation of hardwoods with emphasis on Eucalyptus. In Plantation Forest Biotechnology for the 21st Century; Walter, C., Carson, M., Eds.; Research Signpost: Kerala, India, 2004; pp. 303–333. [Google Scholar]
  21. Oliveira, M.L.; Xavier, A.; Santos, A.P.; Andrade, H.B. Efeito da estaquia, miniestaquia, microestaquia e micropropagação no desempenho silvicultural de clones híbridos de Eucalyptus spp. Rev. Árvore 2006, 4, 503–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Xavier, A.; Wendling, I.; Silva, R.L. Silvicultura Clonal—Princípios e Técnicas; Editora UFV: Viçosa, Brazil, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  23. Brondani, G.E.; Wendling, I.; Brondani, A.E.; Araujo, M.A.; Silva, A.L.L.; Gonçalves, A.N. Dynamics of adventitious rooting in mini-cuttings of Eucalyptus benthamii × Eucalyptus dunnii. Acta Sci. Agron. 2012, 34, 169–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Brondani, G.E.; Wendling, I.; Grossi, F.; Dutra, L.F.; Araujo, M.A. Miniestaquia de Eucalyptus benthamii × Eucalyptus dunnii: (II) Sobrevivência e enraizamento de miniestacas em função das coletas e estações do ano. Ciênc. Florest. 2010, 20, 453–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Brondani, G.E.; Wendling, I.; Grossi, F.; Dutra, L.F.; Araujo, M.A. Miniestaquia de Eucalyptus benthamii × Eucalyptus dunnii: (I) Sobrevivência de minicepas e produção de miniestacas em função das coletas e estações do ano. Ciênc. Florest. 2012, 22, 11–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Kratz, D.; Wendling, I.; Pires, P.P. Miniestaquia de Eucalyptus benthamii × E. dunnii em substratos a base de casca de arroz carbonizada. Sci. For. 2012, 40, 547–556. [Google Scholar]
  27. Thumma, B.R.; Baltunis, B.S.; Bell, J.C.; Emebiri, L.C.; Moran, G.F.; Southerton, S.G. Quantitative trait locus (QTL) analysis of growth and vegetative propagation traits in Eucalyptus nitens full-sib families. Tree Genet. Genomes 2010, 6, 877–889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Dickinson, G.R.; Wallace, H.M.; Lee, D.J. Reciprocal and advanced generation hybrids between Corymbia citriodora and C. torelliana: Forestry breeding and the risk of gene flow. Ann. For. Sci. 2013, 70, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Trueman, S.J.; McMahon, T.V.; Bristow, M. Production of cuttings in response to stock plant temperature in the subtropical eucalypts, Corymbia citriodora and Eucalyptus dunnii. New For. 2013, 44, 265–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Trueman, S.J.; McMahon, T.V.; Bristow, M. Nutrient partitioning among the roots, hedge and cuttings of Corymbia citriodora stock plants. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2013, 13, 977–989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Trueman, S.J.; McMahon, T.V.; Bristow, M. Production of Eucalyptus cloeziana cuttings in response to stock plant temperature. J. Trop. For. Sci. 2013, 25, 60–69. [Google Scholar]
  32. Trueman, S.J.; McMahon, T.V.; Bristow, M. Biomass partitioning in Corymbia citriodora, Eucalyptus cloeziana and E. dunnii stock plants in response to temperature. J. Trop. For. Sci. 2013, 25, 504–509. [Google Scholar]
  33. Batista, A.F.; Santos, G.A.; Silva, L.D.; Quevedo, F.F.; Assis, T.F. The use of mini-tunnels and the effects of seasonality in the clonal propagation of Eucalyptus in a subtropical environment. Aust. For. 2015, 78, 65–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Ruedell, C.M.; Almeida, M.R.; Fett-Neto, A.G. Concerted transcription of auxin and carbohydrate homeostasis-related genes underlies improved adventitious rooting of microcuttings derived from far-red treated Eucalyptus globulus Labill mother plants. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2015, 97, 11–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. George, E.F. Plant Propagation by Tissue Culture. Part 1. The Technology; Exegetics Ltd.: Edington, UK, 1993. [Google Scholar]
  36. Klimaszewska, K.; Trontin, J.-F.; Becwar, M.R.; Devillard, C.; Park, Y.-S.; Lelu-Walter, M.-A. Recent progress in somatic embryogenesis of four Pinus spp. Tree For. Sci. Biotechnol. 2007, 1, 11–25. [Google Scholar]
  37. Thorpe, T.A. History of plant tissue culture. Mol. Biotechnol. 2007, 37, 169–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Trueman, S.J.; Pegg, G.S.; King, J. Domestication for conservation of an endangered species: The case of the Wollemi pine. Tree For. Sci. Biotechnol. 2007, 1, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  39. McMahon, T.V.; Hung, C.D.; Trueman, S.J. In vitro storage delays the maturation of African mahogany (Khaya senegalensis) clones. J. Plant Sci. 2013, 8, 31–38. [Google Scholar]
  40. McMahon, T.V.; Hung, C.D.; Trueman, S.J. Clonal maturation of Corymbia torelliana × C. citriodora is delayed by minimal-growth storage. Aust. For. 2014, 77, 9–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Dwan, B.E.; Trueman, S.J. Propagation methods for environmental offset planting of the Kogan waxflower (Philotheca sporadica) (Rutaceae). J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 7, 347–353. [Google Scholar]
  42. Trueman, S.J. Clonal propagation and storage of subtropical pines in Queensland, Australia. South. Afr. For. J. 2006, 208, 49–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Lee, D.J. Achievements in forest tree genetic improvement in Australia and New Zealand 2: Development of Corymbia species and hybrids for plantations in eastern Australia. Aust. For. 2007, 70, 11–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Wendling, I.; Brooks, P.R.; Trueman, S.J. Topophysis in Corymbia torelliana × C. citriodora seedlings: Adventitious rooting capacity, stem anatomy, and auxin and abscisic acid concentrations. New For. 2015, 46, 107–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Trueman, S.J.; Richardson, D.M. In vitro propagation of Corymbia torelliana × C. citriodora (Myrtaceae) via cytokinin-free node culture. Aust. J. Bot. 2007, 55, 471–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Hung, C.D.; Trueman, S.J. Nutrient responses differ between node and organogenic cultures of Corymbia torelliana × C. citriodora (Myrtaceae). Aust. J. Bot. 2010, 58, 410–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Dobrowolska, I.; Andrade, G.M.; Clapham, D.; Egertsdotter, U. Histological analysis reveals the formation of shoots rather than embryos in regenerating cultures of Eucalyptus globulus. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2017, 128, 319–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Klimaszewska, K.; Hargreaves, C.; Lelu-Walter, M.-A.; Trontin, J.-F. Advances in conifer somatic embryogenesis since year 2000. Methods Mol. Biol. 2016, 1359, 131–166. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  49. Pinto, G.; Araújo, C.; Santos, C.; Neves, L. Plant regeneration by somatic embryogenesis in Eucalyptus spp.: Current status and future perspectives. South. For. J. For. Sci. 2013, 75, 59–69. [Google Scholar]
  50. Lynch, P.T.; Benson, E.E.; Harding, K. Climate change: The role of ex situ and cryo-conservation in the future security of economically important, vegetatively propagated plants. J. Hortic. Sci. Biotechnol. 2007, 82, 157–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Benson, E.E. Cryopreservation of phytodiversity: A critical appraisal of theory and practice. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 2008, 27, 141–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Padayachee, K.; Watt, M.P.; Edwards, N.; Mycock, D.J. Cryopreservation as a tool for the conservation of Eucalyptus genetic variability: Concepts and challenges. South. For. 2009, 71, 165–170. [Google Scholar]
  53. Sharma, S.; Shahzad, A.; Teixeira da Silva, J.A. Synseed technology—A complete synthesis. Biotechnol. Adv. 2013, 31, 186–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Wendling, I.; Trueman, S.J.; Xavier, A. Maturation and related aspects in clonal forestry—Part II: Reinvigoration, rejuvenation and juvenility maintenance. New For. 2014, 45, 473–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Wendling, I.; Trueman, S.J.; Xavier, A. Maturation and related aspects in clonal forestry—Part I: Concepts, regulation and consequences of phase change. New For. 2014, 45, 449–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Hung, C.D.; Trueman, S.J. Preservation of encapsulated shoot tips and nodes of the tropical hardwoods Corymbia torelliana × C. citriodora and Khaya senegalensis. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2012, 109, 341–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Gantait, S.; Sinniah, U.R. Storability, post-storage conversion and genetic stability assessment of alginate-encapsulated shoot tips of monopodial orchid hybrid Aranda Wan Chark Kuan ‘Blue’ × Vanda coerulea Grifft. ex. Lindl. Plant Biotechnol. Rep. 2013, 7, 257–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Le Roux, J.J.; van Staden, J. Micropropagation and tissue culture of Eucalyptus—A review. Tree Physiol. 1991, 9, 435–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Greenwood, M.S. Juvenility and maturation in conifers: Current concepts. Tree Physiol. 1995, 15, 433–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Aimers-Halliday, J.; Menzies, M.I.; Faulds, T.; Holden, D.G.; Low, C.B.; Dibley, M.J. Nursery systems to control maturation in Pinus radiata cuttings, comparing hedging and serial propagation. N. Z. J. For. Sci. 2003, 33, 135–155. [Google Scholar]
  61. Mitchell, R.G.; Zwolinski, J.; Jones, N.B. A review on the effects of donor maturation on rooting and field performance of conifer cuttings. South. Afr. For. J. 2004, 201, 53–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Rasmussen, A.; Hunt, M.A. Ageing delays the cellular stages of adventitious root formation in pine. Aust. For. 2010, 73, 41–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Paton, D.M.; Willing, R.R.; Nicholls, W.; Pryor, L.D. Rooting of stem cuttings of Eucalyptus: A rooting inhibitor in adult tissue. Aust. J. Bot. 1970, 18, 175–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Hung, C.D.; Trueman, S.J. Topophysic effects differ between node and organogenic cultures of the eucalypt Corymbia torelliana × C. citriodora. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2011, 104, 69–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Abu-Abied, M.; Szwerdszarf, D.; Mordehaev, I.; Levy, A.; Rogovoy, O.; Belausov, E.; Yaniv, Y.; Uliel, S.; Katzenellenbogen, M.; Riov, J.; et al. Microarray analysis revealed upregulation of nitrate reductase in juvenile cuttings of Eucalyptus grandis, which correlated with increased nitric oxide production and adventitious root formation. Plant J. 2012, 71, 787–799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Abu-Abied, M.; Szwerdszarf, D.; Mordehaev, I.; Yaniv, Y.; Levinkron, S.; Rubinstein, M.; Riov, J.; Ophir, R.; Sadot, E. Gene expression profiling in juvenile and mature cuttings of Eucalyptus grandis reveals the importance of microtubule remodeling during adventitious root formation. BMC Genom. 2014, 15, 826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Wendling, I.; Warburton, P.M.; Trueman, S.J. Maturation in Corymbia torelliana × C. citriodora stock plants: Effects of pruning height on shoot production, adventitious rooting capacity, stem anatomy, and auxin and abscisic acid concentrations. Forests 2015, 6, 3763–3778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Brondani, G.E.; Oliveira, L.S.; Bergonci, T.; Brondani, A.E.; França, F.A.M.; Silva, A.L.L.; Gonçalves, A.N. Chemical sterilization of culture medium: A low cost alternative to in vitro establishment of plants. Sci. For. 2013, 41, 257–264. [Google Scholar]
  69. Rojas Caballero, A.; Gil Díaz, V.; Pérez Bravo, C.; Darias, M.L. Resultados de la micropropagacion in vitro del Eucalyptus citriodora Hook. Cent. Agrícola 1993, 20, 73–75. [Google Scholar]
  70. Bunn, E. Development of in vitro methods for ex situ conservation of Eucalyptus impensa, an endangered mallee from southwest Western Australia. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2005, 83, 97–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Bunn, E.; Senaratna, T.; Sivasithamparam, K.; Dixon, K.W. In vitro propagation of Eucalyptus phylacis L. Johnson and K. Hill., a critically endangered relict from Western Australia. In Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. Plant 2005, 41, 812–815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Goodger, J.Q.D.; Heskes, A.M.; King, D.J.; Gleadow, R.M.; Woodrow, I.E. Micropropagation of Eucalyptus polybractea selected for key essential oil traits. Funct. Plant Biol. 2008, 35, 247–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Pinto, G.; Park, Y.-S.; Neves, L.; Araújo, C.; Santos, C. Genetic control of somatic embryogenesis induction in Eucalyptus globulus Labill. Plant Cell Rep. 2008, 27, 1093–1101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Pinto, G.; Park, Y.-S.; Silva, S.; Neves, L.; Araújo, C.; Santos, C. Factors affecting maintenance, proliferation, and germination of secondary somatic embryos of Eucalyptus globulus Labill. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2008, 95, 69–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Pinto, G.; Silva, S.; Park, Y.-S.; Neves, L.; Araújo, C.; Santos, C. Factors influencing somatic embryogenesis induction in Eucalyptus globulus Labill.: Basal medium and anti-browning agents. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2008, 95, 79–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Pinto, G.; Silva, S.; Neves, L.; Araújo, C.; Santos, C. Histocytological changes and reserve accumulation during somatic embryogenesis in Eucalyptus globulus. Trees 2010, 24, 763–769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Ansar, S.; Iqbal, M. Effect of dietary antioxidant on mercuric chloride induced lung toxicity and oxidative stress. Toxin Rev. 2015, 34, 168–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Gloël, J.; Robinson, C.; Tilstone, G.H.; Tarran, G.; Kaiser, J. Technical note: Could benzalkonium chloride be a suitable alternative to mercuric chloride for preservation of seawater samples? Ocean Sci. 2015, 11, 947–952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  79. Murashige, T.; Skoog, F. A revised medium for rapid growth and bio assays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol. Plant. 1962, 15, 473–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Tanabe, T.; Murakami, A.; Tachikawa, H.; Izumi, M.; Shimizu, T.; Murakami, K. Practical micropropagation of eucalypt species for the pulp and paper industry. In Environmental Management: The Role of Eucalypts and Other Fast Growing Species; Eldridge, K.G., Ed.; CSIRO Publishing: Collingwood, Australia, 1996; pp. 53–64. [Google Scholar]
  81. Termignoni, R.R.; Wang, P.-J.; Hu, C.-Y. Somatic embryo induction in Eucalyptus dunnii. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 1996, 45, 129–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Fett-Neto, A.G.; Fett, J.; Goulart, L.W.V.; Pasquali, G.; Termignoni, R.R.; Ferreira, A.G. Distinct effects of auxin and light on adventitious root development in Eucalyptus saligna and Eucalyptus globulus. Tree Physiol. 2001, 21, 457–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Fogaça, C.M.; Fett-Neto, A.G. Role of auxin and its modulators in the adventitious rooting of Eucalyptus species differing in recalcitrance. Plant Growth Regul. 2005, 45, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Schwambach, J.; Fadanelli, C.; Fett-Neto, A.G. Mineral nutrition and adventitious rooting in microcuttings of Eucalyptus globulus. Tree Physiol. 2005, 25, 487–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Cheng, B.; Peterson, C.M.; Mitchell, R.J. The role of sucrose, auxin and explant source on in vitro rooting of seedling explants of Eucalyptus sideroxylon. Plant Sci. 1992, 87, 207–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Arruda, S.C.C.; Souza, G.M.; Almeida, M.; Gonçalves, A.N. Anatomical and biochemical characterization of the calcium effect on Eucalyptus urophylla callus morphogenesis in vitro. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2000, 63, 143–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Steinitz, B.; Barr, N.; Tabib, Y.; Vaknin, Y.; Bernstein, N. Control of in vitro rooting and plant development in Corymbia maculata by silver nitrate, silver thiosulfate and thiosulfate ion. Plant Cell Rep. 2010, 29, 1315–1323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Jones, N.B.; van Staden, J. Micropropagation and establishment of Eucalyptus grandis hybrids. S. Afr. J. Bot. 1994, 60, 122–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Alves, E.C.S.C.; Xavier, A.; Otoni, W.C. Organogênese in vitro a partir de explante caulinar na regeneração de clones de Eucalyptus grandis W. Hill ex Maiden × E. urophylla S. T. Blake. Rev. Árvore 2004, 28, 643–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Borges, S.R.; Xavier, A.; Oliveira, L.S.; Lopes, A.P.; Otoni, W.C. Multiplicação in vitro de clones híbridos de Eucalyptus globulus. Rev. Árvore 2011, 35, 173–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Brondani, G.E.; Dutra, L.F.; Grossi, F.; Wendling, I.; Hornig, J. Estabelecimento, multiplicação, e alongamento in vitro de Eucalyptus benthamii Maiden & Cambage x Eucalyptus dunnii Maiden. Rev. Árvore 2009, 33, 11–19. [Google Scholar]
  92. Brondani, G.E.; Dutra, L.F.; Wendling, I.; Grossi, F.; Hansel, F.A.; Araujo, M.A. Micropropagation of an Eucalyptus hybrid (Eucalyptus benthamii × Eucalyptus dunnii). Acta Sci. Agron. 2011, 33, 655–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Levy, A.; Szwerdszarf, D.; Abu-Abied, M.; Mordehaev, I.; Yaniv, Y.; Riov, J.; Arazi, T.; Sadot, E. Profiling microRNAs in Eucalyptus grandis reveals no mutual relationship between alterations in miR156 and miR172 expression and adventitious root induction during development. BMC Genom. 2014, 15, 524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Navroski, M.C.; Reiniger, L.R.S.; Araújo, M.M.; Curti, A.R.; Pereira, M.O. In vitro establishment and multiplication of genotypes of Eucalyptus dunnii Maiden. Cerne 2014, 20, 139–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Watt, M.P.; Banasiak, M.; Nicholson, T.; McAlister, B. Strategies for the selection of uncontaminated Eucalyptus explants for shoot multiplication in a temporary immersion system (RITA®) in a commercial laboratory. South. Afr. For. J. 2006, 206, 13–21. [Google Scholar]
  96. Oliveira, L.S.; Brondani, G.E.; Batagin-Piotto, K.D.; Calsavara, R.; Gonçalves, A.N.; Almeida, M. Micropropagation of Eucalyptus cloeziana mature trees. Aust. For. 2015, 78, 219–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Correia, D.; Gonçalves, A.N.; Couto, H.T.Z.; Ribeiro, M.C. Efeito do meio de cultura líquido e sólido no crescimento e desenvolvimento de gemas de Eucalyptus grandis × Eucalyptus urophylla na multiplicação in vitro. IPEF 1995, 48/49, 107–116. [Google Scholar]
  98. Andrade, W.F.; Almeida, M.; Gonçalves, A.N. Multiplicação in vitro de Eucalyptus grandis sob estímulo com benzilaminopurina. Pesqui. Agropecu. Bras. 2006, 41, 1715–1719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Oberschelp, G.P.J.; Gonçalves, A.N. Assessing the effects of basal media on the in vitro propagation and nutritional status of Eucalyptus dunnii Maiden. In Vitro Cell Dev. Biol. Plant 2016, 52, 28–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Moon, H.K.; Kim, J.A.; Lee, H.S.; Kang, H.D. Micropropagation via axillary bud induction of Eucalyptus pellita. Korean J. Plant Biotechnol. 2003, 30, 269–273. [Google Scholar]
  101. Gomes, F.; Canhoto, J.M. Micropropagation of Eucalyptus nitens Maiden (shining gum). In Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. Plant 2003, 39, 316–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Teixeira, S.L.; Ribeiro, J.M.; Teixeira, M.T. Utilização de hipoclorito de sódio na esterilização de meio de cultura para multiplicação in vitro de Eucalyptus pellita L. Ciênc. Florest. 2008, 18, 185–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Yang, Y.; Wang, R.; Jiang, L.; Li, C. Multiplication of Corymbia ptychocarpa subsp. aptycha via tissue culture. Aust. For. 2016, 79, 59–62. [Google Scholar]
  104. Whitehouse, A.B.; Marks, T.R.; Edwards, G.A. Control of hyperhydricity in Eucalyptus axillary shoot cultures grown in liquid medium. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2002, 71, 245–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Burrows, G.E. Buds, bushfires and resprouting in the eucalypts. Aust. J. Bot. 2013, 61, 331–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Jasrai, Y.T.; Remakanthan, A.; Pandya, C.H.; Subramani, J.; Bhatt, D.P. Multiplication of Eucalyptus citriodora (L.) Hook through shoot bud induction on the internodal portions of mature tree explants. J. Plant Biochem. Biotechnol. 1999, 8, 103–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Bisht, P.; Sharma, V.K.; Uniyal, D.P. In Vitro clonal propagation of mature Eucalyptus F1 hybrid (E. citriodora Hook. × E. torelliana F.V. Muell.). Indian J. For. 2002, 25, 481–485. [Google Scholar]
  108. Cid, L.P.B.; Illg, R.D.; Piedrabuena, A.E. Regeneration of garlic plants (Allium sativum L., cv. “Chonan”) via cell culture in liquid medium. In Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. Plant 1994, 30, 150–155. [Google Scholar]
  109. Triparthi, S.B.; Mathish, N.V.; Gurumurthi, K. Use of genetic markers in the management of micropropagated Eucalyptus germplasm. New For. 2006, 31, 361–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Cid, L.P.B.; Machado, A.C.M.G.; Carvalheira, S.B.R.C.; Brasileiro, A.C.M. Plant regeneration from seedling explants of Eucalyptus grandis × E. urophylla. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 1999, 56, 17–23. [Google Scholar]
  111. Huang, Z.-C.; Zeng, F.-H.; Lu, X.-Y. Efficient regeneration of Eucalyptus urophylla from seedling-derived hypocotyls. Biol. Plant. 2010, 54, 131–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Huang, Z.; Ouyang, L.; Li, Z.; Zeng, F. A urea-type cytokinin, 2-Cl-PBU, stimulates adventitious bud formation of Eucalyptus urophylla by repressing transcription of rboh1 gene. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2014, 119, 359–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Mullins, K.V.; Llewellyn, D.J.; Hartney, V.J.; Strauss, S.; Dennis, E.S. Regeneration and transformation of Eucalyptus camaldulensis. Plant Cell Rep. 1997, 16, 787–791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Oliveira, C.; Degenhardt-Goldbach, J.; Bettencourt, G.M.F.; Amano, E.; Franciscon, L.; Quoirin, M. Micropropagation of Eucalyptus grandis × E. urophylla AEC 224 clone. J. For. Res. 2017, 28, 29–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Subbaiah, M.M.; Minocha, S.C. Shoot regeneration from stem and leaf callus of Eucalyptus tereticornis. Plant Cell Rep. 1990, 9, 370–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  116. Ho, C.-K.; Chang, S.-H.; Tsay, J.-Y.; Tsai, C.-J.; Chiang, V.L.; Chen, Z.-Z. Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated transformation of Eucalyptus camaldulensis and production of transgenic plants. Plant Cell Rep. 1998, 17, 675–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Trindade, H.; Pais, M.S. Meristematic nodule culture: A new pathway for in vitro propagation of Eucalyptus globulus. Trees 2003, 17, 308–315. [Google Scholar]
  118. Simola, L.K. Propagation of plantlets from leaf callus of Betula pendula purpurea. Sci. Hortic. 1985, 26, 77–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Oberschelp, G.P.J.; Gonçalves, A.N.; Meneghetti, E.C.; Graner, E.M.; Almeida, M. Eucalyptus dunnii plant regeneration via shoot organogenesis on a new basal medium based on the mineral composition of young stump shoots. Vitr. Cell. Dev. Biol. Plant 2015, 51, 626–636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Hung, C.D.; Trueman, S.J. Cytokinin concentrations for optimal micropropagation of Corymbia torelliana × C. citriodora. Aust. For. 2012, 75, 233–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Mamaghani, M.S.; Assareh, M.H.; Omidi, M.; Matinizadeh, M.; Ghamari-Zare, A.; Shahrzad, S.; Forootan, M. The effect of thidiazuron level on in vitro regeneration type and peroxidase profile in Eucalyptus microtheca F. Muell. Plant Growth Regul. 2009, 59, 199–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Brondani, G.E.; Araujo, M.A.; Alcântara, B.K.; Carvalho, J.G.; Gonçalves, A.N.; Almeida, M. In vitro organogenesis of Eucalyptus grandis: Effects of boron and calcium. Acta Sci. Agron. 2012, 34, 403–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  123. Alcantara, G.B.; Filho, J.C.B.; Quoirin, M. Organogenesis and transient genetic transformation of the hybrid Eucalyptus grandis × Eucalyptus urophylla. Sci. Agric. 2011, 68, 246–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Hajari, E.; Watt, M.P.; Mycock, D.J.; McAlister, B. Plant recognition from induced callus of improved Eucalyptus clones. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2006, 72, 195–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Aggarwal, D.; Kumar, A.; Reddy, M.S. Shoot organogenesis in elite clones of Eucalyptus tereticornis. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2010, 102, 45–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Glocke, P.; Collins, G.; Sedgley, M. In vitro organogenesis from seedling explants of the ornamentals Eucalyptus erythronema, E. stricklandii and the interspecific hybrid E. erythronema × E. stricklandii cv. ‘Urrbrae Gem’. J. Hortic. Sci. Biotechnol. 2005, 80, 97–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Azmi, A.; Noin, M.; Landré, P.; Prouteau, M.; Boudet, A.M.; Chriqui, D. High frequency plant regeneration from Eucalyptus globulus Labill. hypocotyls: Ontogenesis and ploidy level of the regenerants. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 1997, 51, 9–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Nugent, G.; Chandler, S.F.; Whiteman, P.; Stevenson, T.W. Adventitious bud induction in Eucalyptus globulus Labill. In Vitro Cell Dev. Biol. Plant. 2001, 37, 388–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Hervé, P.; Jauneau, A.; Pâques, M.; Marien, J.-N.; Boudet, A.M.; Teulières, C. A procedure for shoot organogenesis in vitro from leaves and nodes of an elite Eucalyptus gunnii clone: Comparative histology. Plant Sci. 2001, 161, 645–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Tibok, A.; Blackhall, N.W.; Power, J.B.; Davey, M.R. Optimized plant regeneration from callus derived from seedling hypocotyls of Eucalyptus urophylla. Plant Sci. 1995, 110, 139–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Mo, X.Y.; Long, T.; Liu, Z.; Lin, H.; Liu, X.Z.; Yang, Y.M.; Zhang, H.Y. AFLP analysis of somaclonal variations in Eucalyptus globulus. Biol. Plant. 2009, 53, 741–744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Muralidharan, E.M.; Gupta, P.K.; Mascarenhas, A.F. Plantlet production through high frequency somatic embryogenesis in long term cultures of Eucalyptus citriodora. Plant Cell Rep. 1989, 8, 41–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  133. Prakash, M.G.; Gurumurthi, K. Effects of type of explant and age, plant growth regulators and medium strength on somatic embryogenesis and plant regeneration in Eucalyptus camaldulensis. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2010, 100, 13–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Pinto, G.; Santos, C.; Neves, L.; Araújo, C. Somatic embryogenesis and plant regeneration in Eucalyptus globulus Labill. Plant Cell Rep. 2002, 21, 208–213. [Google Scholar]
  135. Bandyopadhyay, S.; Cane, K.; Rasmussen, G.; Hamill, J.D. Efficient plant regeneration from seedling explants of two commercially important temperate eucalypt species—Eucalyptus nitens and E. globulus. Plant Sci. 1999, 140, 189–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Nugent, G.; Chandler, S.F.; Whiteman, P.; Stevenson, T.W. Somatic embryogenesis in Eucalyptus globulus. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2001, 67, 85–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Titon, M.; Xavier, A.; Otoni, W.C.; Motoike, S.Y. Efeito dos reguladores de crescimento dicamba e picloram na embriogênese somática em Eucalyptus grandis. Rev. Árvore 2007, 31, 417–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Corredoira, E.; Ballester, A.; Ibarra, M.; Vieitez, A.M. Induction of somatic embryogenesis in explants of shoot cultures established from adult Eucalyptus globulus and E. saligna × E. maidenii trees. Tree Physiol. 2015, 35, 678–690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  139. Corrêa, L.R.; Paim, D.C.; Schwambach, J.; Fett-Neto, A.G. Carbohydrates as regulatory factors on the rooting of Eucalyptus saligna Smith and Eucalyptus globulus Labill. Plant Growth Regul. 2005, 45, 63–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Corrêa, L.R.; Fett-Neto, A.G. Effects of temperature on adventitious root development in microcuttings of Eucalyptus saligna Smith and Eucalyptus globulus Labill. J. Therm. Biol. 2004, 29, 315–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Blomstedt, C.; Cameron, J.; Whiteman, P.; Chandler, S.F. Micropropagation of juvenile Eucalyptus regnans (mountain ash). Aust. J. Bot. 1991, 39, 179–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Louro, R.P.; Santos, A.V.; Machado, R.D. Ultrastructure of Eucalyptus grandis × Eucalyptus urophylla. I. Shoots cultivated in vitro in multiplication and elongation-rooting media. Int. J. Plant Sci. 1999, 160, 217–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Dibax, R.; Eisfeld, C.L.; Cuquel, F.L.; Koehler, H.; Quoirin, M. Plant regeneration from cotyledonary explants of Eucalyptus camaldulensis. Sci. Agric. 2005, 62, 406–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Silva, A.L.L.; Gollo, A.L.; Brondani, G.E.; Horbach, M.A.; Oliveira, L.S.; Machado, M.P.; Lima, K.K.D.; Costa, J.L. Micropropagation of Eucalyptus saligna Sm. from cotyledonary nodes. Pak. J. Bot. 2015, 47, 311–318. [Google Scholar]
  145. Pan, M.J.; van Staden, J. The use of charcoal in in vitro culture—A review. Plant Growth Regul. 1998, 26, 155–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Thomas, T.D. The role of activated charcoal in plant tissue culture. Biotechnol. Adv. 2008, 26, 618–631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  147. Koriesh, E.M.; Abd El-Fattah, Y.M.; Abd El-Dayem, M.; El-Etriby, M.A. Micropropagation of juvenile Eucalyptus citriodora. Acta Hortic. 2003, 625, 283–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Yang, J.-C.; Chung, J.-D.; Chen, Z.-Z. Vegetative propagation of adult Eucalyptus grandis × urophylla and comparison of growth between micropropagated plantlets and rooted cuttings. Plant Cell Rep. 1995, 15, 170–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  149. Arya, I.D.; Sharma, S.; Chauhan, S.; Arya, S. Micropropagation of superior eucalyptus hybrids FRI-5 (Eucalyptus camaldulensis Dehn × E. tereticornis Sm) and FRI-14 (Eucalyptus torelliana F.V. Muell × E. citriodora Hook): A commercial multiplication and field evaluation. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 2009, 8, 5718–5726. [Google Scholar]
  150. Dibax, R.; Quisen, R.C.; Bona, C.; Quoirin, M. Plant regeneration from cotyledonary explants of Eucalyptus camaldulensis Dehn and historical study of organogenesis in vitro. Braz. Arch. Biol. Technol. 2010, 53, 311–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Nakhooda, M.; Rambaran, N.; Mokotedi, M.E.O.; Watt, M.P. Sensitivity and response of Eucalyptus grandis × E. nitens cuttings to auxin treatment for rooting is consistent with, and can be predicted by in vitro morphogenesis. J. Hortic. Sci. Biotechnol. 2014, 89, 215–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Nakhooda, M.; Watt, M.P.; Mycock, D. Auxin stability and accumulation during in vitro shoot morphogenesis influences subsequent root induction and development in Eucalyptus grandis. Plant Growth Regul. 2011, 65, 263–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Nakhooda, M.; Watt, M.P.; Mycock, D. The choice of auxin analogue for in vitro root induction influences post-induction root development in Eucalyptus grandis. Turk. J. Agric. For. 2013, 37, 258–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Mokotedi, M.E.O.; Watt, M.P.; Pammenter, N.W. In vitro rooting and subsequent survival of two clones of a cold-tolerant Eucalyptus grandis × E. nitens hybrid. HortScience 2000, 35, 1163–1165. [Google Scholar]
  155. Watt, M.P. Genotypic-unspecific protocols for the commercial micropropagation of Eucalyptus grandis × nitens and E. grandis × urophylla. Turk. J. Agric. For. 2014, 38, 125–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Woodward, A.J.; Bennett, I.J.; Pusswonge, S. The effect of nitrogen source and concentration, medium pH and buffering on in vitro shoot growth and rooting in Eucalyptus marginata. Sci. Hortic. 2006, 110, 208–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Bennett, I.J.; McComb, J.A.; Tonkin, C.M.; McDavid, D.A.J. Alternating cytokinins in multiplication media stimulates in vitro shoot growth and rooting of Eucalyptus globulus Labill. Ann. Bot. 1994, 74, 53–58. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  158. Bennett, I.J.; McDavid, D.A.J.; McComb, J.A. The influence of ammonium nitrate, pH and indole butyric acid on root induction and survival in soil of micropropagated Eucalyptus globulus. Biol. Plant. 2003, 47, 355–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Gautheret, R.J. La Culture des Tissus Végétaux; Masson & Cie: Paris, France, 1959. [Google Scholar]
  160. Janick, J. Horticultural Science; W.H. Freeman: New York, NY, USA, 1986. [Google Scholar]
  161. Mendonça, E.G.; Stein, V.C.; Carvalho, H.H.; Santos, B.R.; Beijo, L.A.; Paiva, L.V. The use of continuous temporary immersion bioreactor system and semisolid culture medium for the production of Eucalyptus camaldulensis clones. Ciênc. Florest. 2016, 26, 1211–1224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Bunn, E.; Turner, S.; Panaia, M.; Dixon, K.W. The contribution of in vitro technology and cryogenic storage to conservation of indigenous plants. Aust. J. Bot. 2007, 55, 345–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Nourissier, S.; Monteuuis, O. In vitro rooting of two Eucalyptus urophylla X Eucalyptus grandis mature clones. In Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. Plant 2008, 44, 263–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Mankessi, F.; Saya, A.; Baptiste, C.; Nourissier, S.; Monteuuis, O. In vitro rooting of genetically related Eucalyptus urophylla × Eucalyptus grandis clones in relation to the time spent in culture. Trees 2009, 23, 931–940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Kristiansen, K.; Bredmose, N.; Nielsen, B. Influence of propagation temperature, photosynthetic photon flux density, auxin treatment and cutting position on root formation, axillary bud and shoot development in Schlumbergera ‘Russian Dancer’. J. Hortic. Sci. Biotechnol. 2005, 80, 297–302. [Google Scholar]
  166. Hunt, M.A.; Trueman, S.J.; Rasmussen, A. Indole-3-butyric acid accelerates adventitious root formation and impedes shoot growth of Pinus elliottii var. elliottii × P. caribaea var. hondurensis cuttings. New For. 2011, 41, 349–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Watt, M.P.; Duncan, E.A.; Ing, M.; Blakeway, F.C.; Herman, B. Field performance of micropropagated and macropropagated Eucalyptus hybrids. South. Afr. For. J. 1995, 173, 17–21. [Google Scholar]
  168. McAlister, B.; Finnie, J.; Watt, M.P.; Blakeway, F. Use of the temporary immersion bioreactor system (RITA®) for production of commercial Eucalyptus clones in Mondi Forests (SA). Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2005, 81, 347–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Nakhooda, M.; Jain, S.M. A review of Eucalyptus propagation and conservation. Propag. Ornam. Plants 2016, 16, 101–119. [Google Scholar]
  170. Watt, M.P. The status of temporary immersion system (TIS) technology for plant micropropagation. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 2012, 11, 14025–14035. [Google Scholar]
  171. Businge, E.; Trifonova, A.; Schneider, C.; Rödel, P.; Egertsdotter, U. Evaluation of a new temporary immersion bioreactor system for micropropagation of cultivars of eucalyptus, birch and fir. Forests 2017, 8, 196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Etienne, H.; Berthouly, M. Temporary immersion systems in plant micropropagation. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2002, 69, 215–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Nagae, S.; Takamura, T.; Tanabe, T.; Murakami, A.; Murakami, K.; Tanaka, M. In vitro shoot development of Eucalyptus citriodora on rockwool in the film culture vessel under CO2 enrichment. J. For. Res. 1996, 1, 227–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Nhut, D.T.; Takamura, T.; Watanabe, H.; Murakami, A.; Murakami, K.; Tanaka, A. Sugar-free micropropagation of Eucalyptus citriodora using light-emitting diodes (LEDs) and film-rockwool culture system. Environ. Control Biol. 2002, 40, 147–155. [Google Scholar]
  175. Kirdmanee, C.; Kitaya, Y.; Kozai, T. Rapid acclimatisation of Eucalyptus plantlets by controlling photosynthetic photon flux density and relative humidity. Environ. Control Biol. 1995, 33, 123–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Zobayed, S.M.A.; Afreen-Zobayed, F.; Kubota, C.; Kozai, T. Mass propagation of Eucalyptus camaldulensis in a scaled-up vessel under in vitro photoautotrophic condition. Ann. Bot. 2000, 85, 587–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Tanaka, M.; Giang, D.T.T.; Murakami, A. Application of a novel disposable film culture system to photoautotrophic micropropagation of Eucalyptus uro-grandis (urophylla × grandis). In Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. Plant 2005, 41, 173–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Watt, M.P.; Thokoane, N.L.; Mycock, D.; Blakeway, F. In vitro storage of Eucalyptus grandis germplasm under minimal growth conditions. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2000, 61, 161–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Gomes, F.; Clemente, M.; Figueiredo, P.; Plácito, F.; Machado, H.; Santos, C.; Costa, R. Castanea spp. hybrid clones in vitro conservation: Synthetic seeds vs. slow growth storage. Acta Hortic. 2017, 1155, 37–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Park, Y.S.; Barrett, J.D.; Bonga, J.M. Application of somatic embryogenesis in high-value clonal forestry: Deployment, genetic control, and stability of cryopreserved clones. In Vitro Cell Dev. Biol. Plant 1998, 34, 231–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Bonga, J.M. A comparative evaluation of the application of somatic embryogenesis, rooting of cuttings, and organogenesis of conifers. Can. J. For. Res. 2015, 45, 379–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Nunes, S.; Marum, L.; Farinha, N.; Pereira, V.T.; Almeida, T.; Dias, M.C.; Santos, C. Plant regeneration from ploidy-stable cryopreserved embryogenic lines of the hybrid Pinus elliottii × P. caribaea. Ind. Crop. Prod. 2017, 105, 215–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Pijut, P.M.; Wowste, K.E.; Michler, C.H. Promotion of adventitious root formation of difficult-to-root hardwood tree species. Hortic. Rev. 2011, 38, 213–251. [Google Scholar]
  184. McCown, B. A perspective on the importance of managing juvenility in plants: Focus on plant improvement and propagation. Acta Hortic. 2016, 1140, 225–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Aumond, M.L., Jr.; Araujo, A.T., Jr.; Junkes, C.F.O.; Almeida, M.R.; Matsuura, H.N.; Costa, F.; Fett-Neto, A.G. Events associated with early age-related decline in adventitious rooting competence of Eucalyptus globulus Labill. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 1734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  186. Rai, M.K.; Asthana, P.; Singh, S.K.; Jaiswal, V.S.; Jaiswal, U. The encapsulation technology in fruit plants—A review. Biotechnol. Adv. 2009, 27, 671–679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  187. Gantait, S.; Kunda, S.; Ali, N.; Sahu, N.C. Synthetic seed production of medicinal plants: A review on influence of explants, encapsulation agent and matrix. Acta Physiol. Plant 2015, 37, 98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  188. Hung, C.D.; Dung, C.D. Production of chrysanthemum synthetic seeds under non-aseptic conditions for direct transfer to commercial greenhouses. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2015, 122, 639–648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Shaheen, A.; Shahzad, A. Nutrient encapsulation of nodal segments of an endangered white cedar for studies of regrowth, short term conservation and ethylene inhibitors influenced ex vitro rooting. Ind. Crop. Prod. 2015, 69, 204–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  190. Javed, S.B.; Alater, A.A.; Anis, M.; Faisal, M. Synthetic seeds production and germination studies, for short term storage and long distance transport of Erythrina variegate L.: A multipurpose tree legume. Ind. Crop. Prod. 2017, 105, 41–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  191. Rihan, H.Z.; Kareem, F.; El-Mahrouk, M.E.; Fuller, M.P. Artificial seeds (principle, aspects and applications). Agronomy 2017, 7, 71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  192. Nunes, E.C.; Benson, E.E.; Oltramari, A.C.; Araujo, P.S.; Moser, J.R.; Viana, A.M. In vitro conservation of Cedrela fissilis (Meliaceae), a native tree of the Brazilian Atlantic forest. Biodivers. Conserv. 2003, 12, 837–848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  193. Maruyama, E.; Kinoshita, I.; Ishii, K.; Ohba, K.; Saito, A. Germplasm conservation of the tropical forest trees, Cedrela odorata L., Guazuma crinita Mart., and Jacaranda mimosaefolia D. Don., by shoot tip encapsulation in calcium-alginate and storage at 12–25 °C. Plant Cell Rep. 1997, 16, 393–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  194. Maruyama, E.; Kinoshita, I.; Ishii, K.; Shigenaga, H.; Ohba, K.; Saito, A. Alginate encapsulation technology for the propagation of the tropical forest trees: Cedrela odorata L., Guazuma crinita Mart., and Jacaranda mimosaefolia D. Don. Silvae Genet. 1997, 46, 17–23. [Google Scholar]
  195. Hung, C.D.; Trueman, S.J. Encapsulation technology for short-term preservation and germplasm distribution of the African mahogany Khaya senegalensis. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2011, 107, 397–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  196. Hung, C.D.; Trueman, S.J. Alginate encapsulation of shoot tips and nodal segments for short-term storage and distribution of the eucalypt Corymbia torelliana × C. citriodora. Acta Physiol. Plant. 2012, 34, 117–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  197. Padayachee, K.; Watt, M.P.; Edwards, N.; Mycock, D.J. Physiological responses of Eucalyptus in vitro axillary buds to cryopreparative desiccation and osmotic preculture: Effects of abscisic acid. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2008, 74, 639–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  198. Blakesley, D.; Kiernan, R.J. Cryopreservation of axillary buds of a Eucalyptus grandis × Eucalyptus camaldulensis hybrid. Cryo Lett. 2001, 22, 13–18. [Google Scholar]
  199. Pâques, M.; Monod, V.; Poissonnier, M.; Dereuddre, J. Cryopreservation of Eucalyptus sp. shoot tips by the encapsulation-dehydration procedure. In Biotechnology in Agriculture and Forestry, Vol. 50. Cryopreservation of Plant Germplasm II; Towill, L.E., Bajaj, Y.P.S., Eds.; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2002; pp. 234–245. [Google Scholar]
  200. Schenk, R.U.; Hildebrandt, A.C. Medium and techniques for induction and growth of monocotyledonous and dicotyledonous plant cell cultures. Can. J. Bot. 1972, 50, 199–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  201. Gamborg, O.L.; Miller, R.A.; Ojima, K. Nutrient requirements of suspension cultures of soybean root cells. Exp. Cell Res. 1968, 50, 151–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  202. Arezki, O.; Boxus, P.; Kevers, C.; Gaspar, T. Hormonal control of proliferation in meristematic agglomerates of Eucalyptus camaldulensis Dehn. In Vitro Cell Dev. Biol. Plant 2000, 36, 398–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  203. Woodward, A.J.; Bennett, I.J. The effects of salt stress and abscisic acid on proline production, chlorophyll content and growth of in vitro propagated shoots of Eucalyptus camaldulensis. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2005, 82, 189–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  204. Lloyd, G.; McCown, B. Commercially feasible micropropagation of mountain laurel, Kalmia latifolia, by use of shoot tip culture. Comb. Proc. Int. Plant Propag. Soc. 1980, 30, 421–427. [Google Scholar]
  205. Giamakis, A.; Kretsi, O.; Chinou, I.; Spyropoulos, C.G. Eucalyptus camaldulensis: Volatiles from immature flowers and high production of 1,8-cineole and β-pinene by in vitro cultures. Phytochemistry 2001, 58, 351–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  206. Glocke, P.; Collins, G.; Sedgley, M. 6-Benzylamino purine stimulates in vitro shoot organogenesis in Eucalyptus erythronema, E. stricklandii and their interspecific hybrids. Sci. Hortic. 2006, 109, 339–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  207. Quoirin, M.; Lepoivre, P. Improved media for in vitro culture of Prunus sp. Acta Hortic. 1977, 78, 437–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  208. Pelosi, A.; Marcus, C.S.; Chandler, S.F.; Hamill, J.D. Hormonal control of root primordia differentiation and root formation in cultured explants of Eucalyptus globulus seedlings. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 1995, 22, 409–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  209. White, P.R. A Handbook of Plant Tissue Culture; The Jacques Catlell Press: Lancaster, PA, USA, 1943. [Google Scholar]
  210. Watt, M.P.; Berjak, P.; Makhathini, A.; Blakeway, F. In vitro field collection techniques for Eucalyptus micropropagation. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2003, 75, 233–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  211. Pereira-Netto, A.B.; Carvalho-Oliveira, M.M.C.; Ramírez, J.A.; Galagovsky, L.R. Shooting control in Eucalyptus grandis × E. urophylla hybrid: Comparative effects of 28-homocastasterone and a 5α-monofluoro derivative. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 2006, 86, 329–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  212. Niccol, R.J.; Regan, P.A.; De Filippis, L.F. Simplified protocol for the micropropagation of selected Eucalyptus and Banksia species. Aust. For. 1994, 57, 143–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  213. De Fossard, R.A. Tissue culture of Eucalyptus. Aust. For. 1974, 37, 43–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  214. Driver, J.A.; Kuniyuki, A.H. In vitro propagation of paradox walnut rootstock. HortScience 1984, 19, 507–509. [Google Scholar]
  215. Sharma, S.K.; Ramamurthy, V. Micropropagation of 4-year-old elite Eucalyptus tereticornis trees. Plant Cell Rep. 2000, 19, 511–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  216. Das, T.; Mitra, G.C. Micropropagation of Eucalyptus tereticornis Smith. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. 1990, 22, 95–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  217. Gribble, K.; Holford, P.; Milham, P. In vitro uptake of minerals by Gypsophila paniculata and hybrid eucalypts, and relevance to media mineral formulation. Aust. J. Bot. 2002, 50, 713–723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Eucalypt propagation and germplasm preservation: (a) Eucalyptus grandis × E. urophylla cuttings in a commercial nursery; (bi) Corymbia torelliana × C. citriodora: (b,c) shoots in tissue culture; (d) axillary bud outgrowth in shoot culture; (e) callogenesis at the base of a shoot; (f) multiple shoot production in organogenic culture; (g) a plantlet; i.e., a shoot with adventitious roots; (h) shoots in cool storage; and (i) alginate-encapsulated shoot tips and nodes; i.e., synthetic seeds. Photographs: (a) I. Wendling, (b,h) S.J. Trueman, and (cg,i) C.D. Hung.
Figure 1. Eucalypt propagation and germplasm preservation: (a) Eucalyptus grandis × E. urophylla cuttings in a commercial nursery; (bi) Corymbia torelliana × C. citriodora: (b,c) shoots in tissue culture; (d) axillary bud outgrowth in shoot culture; (e) callogenesis at the base of a shoot; (f) multiple shoot production in organogenic culture; (g) a plantlet; i.e., a shoot with adventitious roots; (h) shoots in cool storage; and (i) alginate-encapsulated shoot tips and nodes; i.e., synthetic seeds. Photographs: (a) I. Wendling, (b,h) S.J. Trueman, and (cg,i) C.D. Hung.
Forests 09 00084 g001

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Trueman, S.J.; Hung, C.D.; Wendling, I. Tissue Culture of Corymbia and Eucalyptus. Forests 2018, 9, 84. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9020084

AMA Style

Trueman SJ, Hung CD, Wendling I. Tissue Culture of Corymbia and Eucalyptus. Forests. 2018; 9(2):84. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9020084

Chicago/Turabian Style

Trueman, Stephen J., Cao Dinh Hung, and Ivar Wendling. 2018. "Tissue Culture of Corymbia and Eucalyptus" Forests 9, no. 2: 84. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9020084

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop