Next Article in Journal
Molecular Alterations Associated with Histologically Overt Stromal Response in Patients with Prostate Cancer
Previous Article in Journal
High-Frequency Imaging Reveals Synchronised Delta- and Theta-Band Ca2+ Oscillations in the Astrocytic Soma In Vivo
Previous Article in Special Issue
A Common Molecular Signature Indicates the Pre-Meristematic State of Plant Calli
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Editorial

Recent Advances in Plant Somatic Embryogenesis: Where We Stand and Where to Go?

by
MªTeresa Martínez
and
Elena Corredoira
*
Misión Biológica de Galicia, Sede Santiago de Compostela, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (MBG-CSIC), Avda Vigo s/n, 15705 Santiago de Compostela, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25(16), 8912; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25168912
Submission received: 24 May 2024 / Revised: 11 July 2024 / Accepted: 7 August 2024 / Published: 16 August 2024
Somatic embryogenesis (SE) is a fascinating example of the plant cellular totipotency concept [1,2,3]. During this regeneration process, one or more somatic cells are subjected to favorable in vitro experimental conditions and undergo morphological and biochemical changes that induce the formation of bipolar structures, known as somatic embryos [4]. Although gamete fusion does not occur, somatic embryos resemble zygotic embryos and have the capacity to germinate and develop into somatic seedlings [5]. In addition to their evident application in clonal propagation, somatic embryos represent excellent target material for the insertion of isolated gene sequences in somatic cells and the subsequent production of genetically modified plants [6]. This classic engineering technology is expected to be replaced by the emerging field of plant genome editing, which will probably require embryogenic cultures as a means of regenerating edited plants [7,8]. In addition, the application of synthetic seed technology to somatic embryos is being considered with regard to storage and handling [9]. Somatic embryogenic lines can be subjected to well-developed cryopreservation techniques for the long-term conservation of plant diversity or conservation during field testing of regenerated plants and subsequent retrieval of superior lines from liquid nitrogen (LN) for exploitation [10,11]. Finally, SE is an ideal system for studying the molecular mechanisms that regulate developmental plasticity in plants [12,13].
Many of these aspects of SE are examined in this Special Issue. Four of the papers report studies of different aspects of the induction step, with special emphasis on the molecular mechanisms involved in the acquisition of embryogenic cell competence. Understanding the molecular mechanisms underlying SE is essential for resolving the problems related to the low induction rate and the difficulty in inducing somatic embryos in recalcitrant species/genotypes or in explants derived from adult trees [13,14]. Thus, for example, Ref. [15] reviewed the various in vitro plant regeneration processes that can converge in callus induction and analyzed the role of plant growth regulators (PGRs) in diverting callus formation from normal development. Furthermore, this author summarized the available information on the 21 genes, which indicates the pre-meristematic nature underlying the broad plant regeneration potential of callus tissue.
During the induction of SE, cells must acquire a state of embryogenic competence, a process that is usually governed by hundreds of genes [16]. In this respect, Ref. [17] identified the HD-ZIP genes that play an important role in embryonic development across the entire genome of oil palm species. The total of 26 EgHDZIP genes identified was divided into four subfamilies based on similarities in gene structures and conserved protein motifs. The expression profiles are displayed during somatic and zygotic embryogenesis, and the expression patterns appear to be the opposite of those of BABY BOOM (BBM), a SE-marker gene. Thus, results revealed that EgHDZIPIV genes were up-regulated at the late stages of SE (torpedo and cotyledon), whereas the BBM gene was up-regulated at the globular stage of SE. These findings suggest that the manipulation of EgHD-ZIPs and BBM expression will facilitate and accelerate SE during oil palm tissue culture.
Transcriptional regulation is known to play an essential role in SE, with transcriptional initiation by transcription factors (TFs) being the principal means of regulating gene expression during the SE process [12,13,18]. In their review paper [19], the authors discuss the functions and role of the WUSCHEL-RELATED HOMEOBOX (WOX) transcription factors in inducing cell totipotency and in regulating SE, while also considering the interactions of WOX with other TFs, PGRs, and epigenetic signals. These authors conclude that WOX genes are involved in the in vitro regeneration of plants and, more generally, in the manifestation of cellular totipotency.
Among PGRs, auxins are considered key factors in SE induction [14]. Exogenous auxin treatment and endogenous auxin levels are determining factors in SE induction [20,21,22]. Following this idea, the action of auxin was the subject of research conducted by Ref. [23]. These authors studied the dynamics of endogenous auxin during in vivo gametophytic development relative to the profile during in vitro microspore reprogramming and embryogenesis induction and progression in Brassica napus. The study findings led these authors to infer that auxin plays a key role in the change in the developmental pathway of the microspore, where the opposite auxin dynamics determine the change in microspore cell fate, with auxin biosynthesis being required for induction of microspore embryogenesis and during subsequent embryo development.
Another group of papers report different practical applications of SE. Somatic embryogenesis is, for instance, of great importance in forest management and breeding programs [24,25], which face the enormous limitation of the long generation time of tree species [26]. The application of SE enables faster generation of new improved genotypes through classic genetic transformation, genome editing tools, priming, or stress memory [27,28]. Priming is defined as an imprint left on plants when exposed to stress, after which they become more tolerant to future similar or different types of stress [28,29]. In this Special Issue, two papers describe the application of priming to embryogenic cultures to produce plants with enhanced tolerance to drought and heat stress. In the first paper by Ref. [30], the authors analyzed epigenetic changes in 3-year-old priming-derived plants of maritime pine (Pinus pinaster) growing in the greenhouse and subjected to 30-day drought stress. The authors demonstrated that high-temperature pulses during SE produce epigenetic marks in primed somatic plants and result in transcriptomic and physiological changes in plants. Such changes can increase plant resilience to drought stress since heat-primed plants exhibit permanent activation of cell protection mechanisms and overexpress stress pathways that pre-adapt them to respond more efficiently to soil water deficits. These changes consist of higher constitutive contents of osmoprotectant compounds such as proline, soluble proteins, glutathione, and starch in needles, as well as increased expression of genes coding for transcription factors involved in the early stress response of genes coding for proteins known to prevent cell damage and of genes coding for enzymes involved in an oxidative stress response. In the second paper, Ref. [31] found that applying heat stress to embryogenic cultures of Pinus halepensis during the SE induction phase led to proteomic and metabolomic reorganization. These authors observed that several enzymes directly involved in metabolic pathways and proteins previously found to be involved in temperature stress response, such as histones and ribosomal proteins, occurred in higher amounts at higher temperatures. These findings seem to reinforce the idea that a temperature priming effect during the initial stages of SE can trigger long-lasting effects in the mechanisms involved in heat stress response.
As mentioned above, genome editing is another way of generating improved genotypes. As in the classic genetic transformation, a procedure for regenerating plants from the modified cells is required [6], with plant regeneration from protoplasts being the preferred method [32]. In this respect, Ref. [33] investigated the production of protoplasts from embryogenic and non-embryogenic cells in carrots, a model plant. The results obtained showed that the protoplast isolation process and plant regeneration were more efficient when embryogenic cells were used as explants to establish cell suspension cultures. These authors also confirmed that the expression of specific genes, such as SOMATIC EMBRYOGENESIS RECEPTOR-LIKE KINASE (SERK), WUSCHEL, BBM, and LEAFY COTYLEDON, involved in the SE process were maintained after protoplast isolation.
Cryopreservation is a very useful procedure in SE, as it reduces the costs associated with maintaining embryogenic cultures [34,35]. However, the investment required for maintaining cryobanks and the continuous supply of LN greatly limit the use of this technique. The use of ultra-low temperature freezers (−80 °C) is a simple and economical alternative to LN for conserving embryogenic lines previously dehydrated to prevent cell damage, although this conservation technique has scarcely been used to date [36]. In this regard, Ref. [37] attempted to reduce the cost of previously defined cryopreservation procedures for conserving embryogenic cultures of Picea abies L. Karst. These authors first investigated whether it was possible to store embryogenic cultures of Norway spruce (originating from elite trees obtained in the Finnish tree breeding program) in freezers (at −80 °C) instead of in LN, concluding that frozen storage of embryogenic cultures at −80 °C was not feasible. However, they managed to simplify the previously used cryopreservation protocol by using only one pre-treatment and post-thawing medium with high sucrose content instead of two pre-treatment steps, thereby reducing the cost of the technique.
Finally, in a review article, Ref. [38] summarizes the advances in SE in banana, with special emphasis on the molecular basis underlying the process and on the potential application of this knowledge to optimize the induction step in recalcitrant banana cultivars.
In summary, all nine papers published in this Special Issue deal with very different aspects of SE, covering different plant species, including several woody species. The editors consider that all articles published in this Special Issue provide useful information on the molecular mechanisms underlying the acquisition of embryogenic competence and on the application of SE in plant breeding and conservation. Although SE is considered a powerful tool in plant biotechnology [39], interdisciplinary research and technological efforts must be continued in order to address the remaining challenges [40].

Author Contributions

M.M. and E.C. co-wrote this editorial based on the contributions to this Special Issue on somatic embryogenesis. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación, y Universidades (MICIU, Spain) through the project PID2020-112627RB-C33 (AEI/10.13039/501100011033).

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the journal editors, the peer reviewers, and the authors who submitted their excellent research for this Special Issue.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Magnani, E.; Jiménez-Gómez, J.M.; Soubigou-Taconnat, L.; Lepiniec, L.; Fiume, E. Profiling the onset of somatic embryogenesis in Arabidopsis. BMC Genom. 2017, 18, 998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Tang, L.P.; Zhang, X.S.; Su, Y.H. Regulation of cell reprogramming by auxin during somatic embryogenesis. aBIOTECH 2020, 1, 185–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Guan, Y.; Li, S.-G.; Fan, X.-F.; Su, Z.-H. Application of Somatic Embryogenesis in Woody Plants. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Aguilar, M.E.; Wang, X.-Y.; Escalona, M.; Yan, L.; Huang, L.-F. Somatic embryogenesis of Arabica coffee in temporary immersion culture: Advances, limitations, and perspectives for mass propagation of selected genotypes. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 994578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Corredoira, E.; Merkle, S.A.; Martínez, M.T.; Toribio, M.; Canhoto, J.M.; Correia, S.I.; Ballester, A.; Vieitez, A.M. Non-Zygotic Embryogenesis in Hardwood Species. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 2019, 38, 29–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ochoa-Alejo, N. The Uses of Somatic Embryogenesis for Genetic Transformation. In Somatic Embryogenesis: Fundamental Aspects and Applications; Loyola-Vargas, V., Ochoa-Alejo, N., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 415–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Pavese, V.; Moglia, A.; Corredoira, E.; Martínez, M.T.; Torello Marinoni, D.; Botta, R. First Report of CRISPR/Cas9 Gene Editing in Castanea sativa Mill. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 728516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Olivares, F.; Loyola, R.; Olmedo, B.; Miccono, M.A.; Aguirre, C.; Vergara, R.; Riquelme, D.; Madrid, G.; Plantat, P.; Mora, R.; et al. CRISPR/Cas9 Targeted Editing of Genes Associated with Fungal Susceptibility in Vitis vinifera L. cv. Thompson Seedless Using Geminivirus-Derived Replicons. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 791030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Abbas, M.K.; Mahood, H.E.; Alhasan, A.S. Production of Synthetic Seeds in Vegetable Crops: A Review. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2022; Volume 1060, p. 012099. [Google Scholar]
  10. Salaj, T.; Klubicová, K.; Matusova, R.; Salaj, J. Somatic Embryogenesis in Selected Conifer Trees Pinus nigra Arn. and Abies Hybrids. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Ballesteros, D.; Martínez, M.T.; Sánchez-Romero, C.; Montalbán, I.A.; Sales, E.; Moncaleán, P.; Arrillaga, I.; Corredoira, E. Current status of the cryopreservation of embryogenic material of woody species. Front. Plant Sci. 2024, 14, 1337152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Salaün, C.; Lepiniec, L.; Dubreucq, B. Genetic and Molecular Control of Somatic Embryogenesis. Plants 2021, 10, 1467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Pais, M.S. Somatic Embryogenesis Induction in Woody Species: The Future After OMICs Data Assessment. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Fehér, A. Callus, Dedifferentiation, Totipotency, Somatic Embryogenesis: What These Terms Mean in the Era of Molecular Plant Biology? Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Fehér, A. A Common Molecular Signature Indicates the Pre-Meristematic State of Plant Calli. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 13122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Gulzar, B.; Mujib, A.; Malik, M.Q.; Sayeed, R.; Mamgain, J.; Ejaz, B. Genes, proteins and other networks regulating somatic embryogenesis in plants. J. Genet. Eng. Biotechnol. 2020, 18, 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Khianchaikhan, K.; Aroonluk, S.; Vuttipongchaikij, S.; Jantasuriyarat, C. Genome-Wide Identification of Homeodomain Leucine Zipper (HD-ZIP) Transcription Factor, Expression Analysis, and Protein Interaction of HD-ZIP IV in Oil Palm Somatic Embryogenesis. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 5000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Horstman, A.; Bemer, M.; Boutilier, K.A. transcriptional view on somatic embryogenesis. Regeneration 2017, 4, 201–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Fambrini, M.; Usai, G.; Pugliesi, C. Induction of Somatic Embryogenesis in Plants: Different Players and Focus on WUSCHEL and WUS-RELATED HOMEOBOX (WOX) Transcription Factors. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 15950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Su, Y.H.; Zhao, X.Y.; Liu, Y.B.; Zhang, C.L.; O’Neill, S.D.; Zhang, X.S. Auxin-induced WUS expression is essential for embryonic stem cell renewal during somatic embryogenesis in Arabidopsis. Plant J. 2009, 59, 448–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Méndez-Hernández, H.A.; Ledezma-Rodríguez, M.; Avilez-Montalvo, R.N.; Juárez-Gómez, Y.L.; Skeete, A.; Avilez-Montalvo, J.; De-La-Peña, C.; Loyola-Vargas, V.M. Signaling overview of plant somatic embryogenesis. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Wójcikowska, B.; Małgorzata, D.G. Expression profling of AUXIN RESPONSE FACTOR genes during somatic embryogenesis induction in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell Rep. 2017, 36, 843–858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Pérez-Pérez, Y.; Solís, M.T.; Albacete, A.; Testillano, P.S. Opposite Auxin Dynamics Determine the Gametophytic and Embryogenic Fates of the Microspore. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 11177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Park, Y.-S.; Beaulieu, J.; Bousquet, J. Multi-Varietal Forestry Integrating Genomic Selection and Somatic Embryogenesis. In Vegetative Propagation of Forest Trees; Park, Y.S., Bonga, J.M., Moon, H.-K., Eds.; National Institute of Forest Science (Nifos): Seoul, Republic of Korea, 2016; pp. 302–318. [Google Scholar]
  25. Lelu-Walter, M.-A.; Thompson, D.; Harvengt, L.; Sanchez, L.; Toribio, M.; Pâques, L.E. Somatic embryogenesis in forestry with a focus on Europe: State-of-the-art, benefits, challenges and future direction. Tree Genet. Genomes 2013, 9, 883–899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Vieitez, A.M.; Corredoira, E.; Martínez, M.T.; San-José, M.C.; Sánchez, C.; Valladares, S.; Vidal, N.; Ballester, A. Application of biotechnological tools to Quercus improvement. Eur. J. For. Res. 2012, 131, 519–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Giri, C.C.; Shyamkumar, B.; Anjaneyulu, C. Progress in tissue culture, genetic transformation and applications of biotechnology to trees: An overview. Trees 2004, 18, 115–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Liu, X.; Quan, W.; Bartels, D. Stress memory responses and seed priming correlate with drought tolerance in plants: An overview. Planta 2022, 255, 45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Kambona, C.M.; Koua, P.A.; Léon, J.; Ballvora, A. Stress memory and its regulation in plants experiencing recurrent drought conditions. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2023, 136, 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Pérez-Oliver, M.A.; González-Mas, M.d.C.; Renau-Morata, B.; Arrillaga, I.; Sales, E. Heat-Priming during Somatic Embryogenesis Increased Resilience to Drought Stress in the Generated Maritime Pine (Pinus pinaster) Plants. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 9299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Pereira, C.; Castander-Olarieta, A.; Montalbán, I.A.; Mendes, V.M.; Correia, S.; Pedrosa, A.; Manadas, B.; Moncaleán, P.; Canhoto, J. Proteomic and Metabolic Analysis of Pinus halepensis Mill. Embryonal Masses Induced under Heat Stress. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 7211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Yue, J.-J.; Yuan, J.-L.; Wu, F.-H.; Yuan, Y.-H.; Cheng, Q.-W.; Hsu, C.-T.; Lin, C.-S. Protoplasts: From Isolation to CRISPR/Cas Genome Editing Application. Front. Genome Ed. 2021, 3, 717017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Han, J.-E.; Lee, H.-S.; Lee, H.; Cho, H.; Park, S.-Y. Embryogenic Stem Cell Identity after Protoplast Isolation from Daucus carota and Recovery of Regeneration Ability through Protoplast Culture. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 11556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Bradaï, F.; Almagro-Bastante, J.; Sánchez-Romero, C. Effect of sucrose preculture and culture inoculum density on cryopreservation of olive somatic embryos. Sci. Hortic. 2023, 322, 112385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Ozudogru, E.A.; Lambardi, M. Cryotechniques for the long-term conservation of embryogenic cultures from woody plants. Methods Mol. Biol. 2016, 1359, 537–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Montalbán, I.A.; Moncaleán, P. Long term conservation at –80 °C of Pinus radiata embryogenic cell lines: Recovery, maturation and germination. CryoLetters 2017, 38, 202–209. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  37. Varis, S.A.; Virta, S.; Montalbán, I.A.; Aronen, T. Reducing Pre- and Post-Treatments in Cryopreservation Protocol and Testing Storage at −80ºC for Norway Spruce Embryogenic Cultures. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 15516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Adero, M.; Tripathi, J.N.; Tripathi, L. Advances in Somatic Embryogenesis of Banana. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 10999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Campos, N.A.; Panis, B.; Carpentier, S.C. Somatic Embryogenesis in Coffee: The Evolution of Biotechnology and the Integration of Omics Technologies Offer Great Opportunities. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 1460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Ballester, A.; Corredoira, E.; Vieitez, A.M. Limitations of somatic embryogenesis in hardwood trees. In Vegetative Propagation of Forest Trees; Park, Y.S., Bonga, J.M., Moon, H.-K., Eds.; National Institute of Forest Science (Nifos): Seoul, Republic of Korea, 2016; pp. 56–74. [Google Scholar]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Martínez, M.; Corredoira, E. Recent Advances in Plant Somatic Embryogenesis: Where We Stand and Where to Go? Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 8912. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25168912

AMA Style

Martínez M, Corredoira E. Recent Advances in Plant Somatic Embryogenesis: Where We Stand and Where to Go? International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2024; 25(16):8912. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25168912

Chicago/Turabian Style

Martínez, MªTeresa, and Elena Corredoira. 2024. "Recent Advances in Plant Somatic Embryogenesis: Where We Stand and Where to Go?" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 25, no. 16: 8912. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25168912

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