Establishment of Mass Propagation System of Virus-Free Sweetpotato Plants and Conservation

  • Lee, Joon-Seol (Mokpo Experiment Station, National Institute of Crop Science, RDA) ;
  • Chung, Mi-Nam (Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Jeong, Byeong-Choon (Mokpo Experiment Station, National Institute of Crop Science, RDA) ;
  • Ahn, Young-Sup (National Institute of Crop Science, RDA) ;
  • Kim, Hag-Sin (Honam Agricultural Research Institute, NICS) ;
  • Park, Jong-Suk (Jinan Medicinal Herbs Experiment Station Jeollabukdo ARES) ;
  • Bang, Jin-Ki (Mokpo Experiment Station, National Institute of Crop Science, RDA)
  • Published : 2007.06.30

Abstract

Sweetpotato fields in Korea are highly infected with virus and virus like diseases that greatly diminish both yield and quality as indicated by field observations and laboratory tests. In order to solve this problem, there is an urgent need to produce and mass propagate virus-free planting materials for distribution to the farmers. These experiments were conducted, firstly, to determine the most appropriate culture media, nutrient solution, and cutting intervals to maintain growth and vigor of tissue cultured plantleta as mother plants for propagation in insect-proof greenhouse. And as a labor saving method, the production efficiency of plug trays for rapid propagation of stem cuttings as a source of planting materials was likewise evaluated. Results showed that plants grown in medium B supplied with 0.5 and 1.0 strength of MS nutrients had high growth rate, and 20-day cutting interval was the best. 72-plug tray was better than 128-plug. Secondly, it was to develop a technique for the production of first-generation seed roots using hydroponics cultivation system. The yield of virus-free plants propagated in the non-insect proof and open-field cultivation was 2,402 kg/10a, 6% higher than those in the insect-proof cultivation, and the rate of virus re-infection was 18% higher compared to 3.3% with insect-proof cultivation. Lastly, it was to investigate the growth performance of virus free plants in farmers' field. Differences were existed in the yield depending on the variety used, but virus free plants showed an increase of $6{\sim}24%$ over virus infected plants.

Keywords

References

  1. Abad, J. A., M. A. Conkling, and J. W. Moyer. 1992. Comparison the capsid protein cistron from serologically distinct strains of sweetpotato feathery mottle virus. Arch. Virol. 226 : 147-157
  2. Bryan, A. D. and J. R. Schultheis. 2003. Cultivar decline in sweetpotato: II. Impact of virus infection on yield storage root quality in 'Beauregard' and 'Hernandez'. Hor. Sci. 128(6) : 856-863
  3. Chun, C. H. and K. Toyoki. 2001. Mass propagation of virus-free transplants of sweetpotato in ciosed-type systems. proceedings of the International semina. Sweetpotato Breeding and Biotechnological Application. pp. 24-36
  4. CIP. 1990. Annual report. Intl. Potato Center. Lima. Peru. pp. 70-75
  5. Hahn, S. K., E. R. Terry, and K. Leuschner., 1981. Resistance of sweepotato to virus complex. Hor. Sci. 16 : 535-537
  6. McCreight, J. D. 2000. Inheritance of resistance to lettuce infectious yollows virus in melon. Hor. Sci. 35(6) : 1118
  7. Jeong, B. C., Y. S. Ahn, J. S. Lee, M. N. Chung, and H. S. Kim. 2002. Product and utilization of sweetpotato. RDA. pp. 18
  8. Karyeija, R. F., J. F. Kreuze, R. W. Gibson, and J. P .T. Valkonen. 2000. Two serotypes of sweetpotato feathery mottle virus in uganda and their interaction with resistant sweetpotato cultivars. Phytopathology. 90 : 1250-1255 https://doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO.2000.90.11.1250
  9. Mihovilovich, E., H. A. Mendoza, and L. F. Salazar. 2000. Combining ability fo resistanceto sweetpotato feathery mottle virus. Hor. Sci. 35(7) : 1319-1320
  10. Moyer, J. W. and L. F. Salazar. 1990. Viruse and virus-like disease of sweetpotato. In: CIP. Control of virus and virus-like disease of potato and sweetpotato. Report of 3th Planning Conference. Lima. pp. 13-19
  11. Villordon, A. Q., J. M. Cannon, H. L. Carroll, and J. W. Franklin. 2003. Sweetpotato 'Beauregard' mericlones vary in yield, vine charact and storage root size and shape attributes. Hor. Sci. 23(4) : 67-69