請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/51874
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 葉德銘(Der-Ming Yeh) | |
dc.contributor.author | Ya-Ting Shiu | en |
dc.contributor.author | 許雅婷 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-15T13:54:40Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2015-08-31 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2015-08-31 | |
dc.date.issued | 2015 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2015-08-31 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 李哖. 1984. 彩葉草播種技術及栽培管理. 豐年34:28-32.
林立. 1998. 無機養分、溫度與光度對白鶴芋生長之影響. 國立臺灣大學園藝學系碩士論文. 臺北. 洪嘉樺. 2014. 花壇植物水分逆境耐受性之研究. 國立臺灣大學園藝學系碩士論文. 臺北. 夏文茹. 2010. 彩葉草之葉片性狀遺傳及遮光對商業品種及雜交後代生長之影響. 國立臺灣大學園藝學系碩士論文. 臺北. 張芳綺. 2005. 粗肋草之開花授粉、斑葉遺傳及親緣分析. 國立臺灣大學園藝學系碩士論文. 臺北. 陳珊妮. 2005. 遮光、溫度與巴克素對彩葉草生長之影響. 國立嘉義大學園藝學系碩士論文. 嘉義. 黃柄龍. 2011. 觀賞鳳梨微體繁殖與體細胞變異誘導之研究. 國立中山大學生物科學系博士論文. 高雄. 傅仰人. 2005. 聖誕紅之γ射線誘變育種. 國立中興大學園藝學系博士論文. 臺中. 魏芳明. 2001. 菊花珈瑪射線誘變育種之研究. 國立中興大學園藝學系碩士論文. 臺中. 西沢敦司、本多義昭、田端守. 1991. ЁЛズれんペХэф⑦葉発現ソ遺伝子支配. 生薬学雑誌 45:227-231. Ahloowalia B.S., M. Maluszynski and K. Nichterlein. 2004. Global impact of mutation-derived varieties. Euphytica 135:187-204. Arnold, N.P., N.N. Barthakur, and M. Tanguay. 1998. Mutagenic effects of acute gamma irradiation on miniature roses: Target theory approach. HortScience 33:127-129. Bala, M., and Singh, K.P. 2013. In vitro mutagenesis of rose (Rosa hybrida L.) explants using gamma-radiation to induce novel flower colour mutations. J. Hortic. Sci. Biotechnol. 88:462-468. Ball, V. 1985. Coleus. p. 438-439. In: V. Ball (ed.). The Ball redbook: Greenhouse growing, 14th ed. Ball Publishing, West Chicago, U.S.A Bhandal, I. and C.P. Malik. 1988. Potassium estimation, uptake and its roleinthe physiology and metabolism of flowering plants. Int. Rev. Cytol. 110:205-254. Bowen, H.J.M., P.A. Cawse, and M.J. Dick. 1962. The induction of sports in chrysanthemums by gamma radiation. Radiat. Bot.1: 297-303. Boye, C.L. and D.C. Rife. 1938. Genetic studies of Coleus I: Leaf color. J. Hered. 29:55-60. Boye, C.L. 1941. An allelic series in Coleus. J. Genet. 42:191-196. Broertjes, C. 1966. Mutation breeding of chrysanthemums. Euphytica 15:156-162. Burger, J. and G.E. Edward. 1996. Photosynthetic efficiency and photodamage by UV and visible radiation in red versus green leaf Coleus varieties. Plant Cell Physiol. 37:395-399. Codd., L.E. 1975. Plectranthus (Labiatae) and allied genera in Southern Africa. Bothalia 11:371-442. Deng, Z. and B.K. Harbough. 2006. Independent inheritance of leaf shape and main vein color in Caladium. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 131:53-58. Deng, Z., F. Goktepe, and B.K. Harbaugh. 2008, Inheritance of leaf spots and their genetic relationships with leaf shape and vein color in Caladium. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 133:78-83. Deng, Z. and B.K. Harbough. 2009. Leaf blotching in Caladium (Araceae) is under simple genetic control and tightly linked to vein color. HortScience 44:40-43. Di Benedetto, A.H. and Cogliatti, D.H. 1990. Effects of light intensity and quality on the obligate shade plant Aglaonema commutatum. I. Leaf size and leaf shape. J. Hort. Sci. 65:689-698. Doodeman, M., E.A. Boersma, W. Koomen, and F. Bianchi. 1984. Genetic analysis of instability in Petunia hybrid. 1. A highly unstable mutation induced by a transposable element insertion at the An1 locus for flower colour. Theor. Appl. Genet. 67:345-355. Failis, B.S., Lewis, A.J., and Barden, J.A. 1982. Net photosynthesis and transpiration of sun- and shade-grown Ficus benjamina leaves. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 107: 758-61. Fang, J.Y. and S. Traore. 2011. In vitro mutation induction of Saintpaulia using ethyl methanesulfonate. HortScience 46:981-984. Fedoroff, N., S. Wessler, and M. Shure. 1983. Isolation of the transposable maize controlling elements Ac and Ds. Cell 35:235 -242. Finnegan, D.J. 1989. Eukaryotic transposable elements and genome evolution. Trends Genet. 5:103-107. Gardener, A. 1855. Coleus blumei. The Florist 8:285-286. Garland, K.F., S.E. Burnett, L.B. Stack, and D. Zhang. 2010. Minimum daily light integral for growing high-quality coleus. HortTechnology 20:929-933. Gould, K.S., K.R. Markham, R.H. Smith, and J.J. Goris. 2000. Functional role of anthocyanins in the leaves of Quitinia serrata A. Cunn. J. Expt. Bot. 51: 1107-1115. Gould, K.S. and B.D. Quinn. 1999. Do anthocyanins protect leaves of New Zealand native species from UV-B?. New Zeal. J. Bot. 37:1:175-178. Graham, T.L. 1998. Flavonoid and flavonol glycoside metabolism in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 36:135-144. Hakeem H. and Rife D.C. 1966. Cytogenetic studies on Coleus. J. Bot. United Arab Republic 9:35-44. Hall H.K., M.H. Quazi, and R.M. Skirvin. 1986. Isolation of a pure thornless loganberry by meristem tip culture. Euphytica 35:1039-1044. Holton, T.A. and E.C. Cornish. 1995. Genetics and biochemistry of anthocyanin biosynthesis. Plant Cell 7:1071-1083. Hamrick, D. 2003. Coleus, p. 313-315. In D. Hamrick (ed.). Ball RedBook, 17th ed., Vol. II. Ball Publishing, Batavia, III., U.S.A. Henny, R.J. 1983a. Inheritance of variegation in three Aglaonema species. J. Hered. 74:475-476. Henny, R.J. 1983b. Inheritance of the midrib in Dieffenbachia and its linkage with the gene for foliar variegation. J. Hered. 74:483-483. Henny, R.J. 1986a. Stimulation of flowering in Aglaonema with GA3. Aroideana 6:71-72. Henny, R.J. 1986b. Inheritance of the foliar variegation in Dieffenbachia maculate ‘Camille’. J. Hered. 77:285-286. Henny, R.J. 1992. Inheritance of the foliar variegation pattern from Aglaonema nitidum (Jack) Kunth ‘Ermesto’s Favorite’. HortScience 27:274. Henny, R.J. and E.M. Rasmussan. 1982. Aglaonema hybridization guide. Foliage Digest 6 (2):12-13. Howard, H.W. 1959. Experiments with a potato periclinal chimera. Genetica 30:278-291. Huala, E., and I.M. Sussex. 1993. Determination and cell interactions in reproductive meristems. Plant Cell 5:1157-1165. Kaliamoorthy, S. and A.S. Rao. 1994. Effect of salinity on anthocyanin in the root of maize. Indian J. Plant Physiol. 37:169. Kasumi, M., Y. Takatsu, T. Manabe, and M. Hayashi. 2001. The effects of irradiating gladiolus cormels with gamma rays on callus formation, somatic embryogenesis and flower color variations in the regenerated plants. J. Jpn. Soc. Hort. Sci. 70:126-128. Langton, F.A. 1980. Chimerical structure and carotenoid inheritance in Chrysanthemum morifolium (Ramat.). Euphytica 29:807-812. Lawanson, A.O., B.B. Akindele, P.B. Fasalojo, and B.I. Akpe. 1972. Time course of anthocyanin formation during deficiencies of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium in seedlins of Zea mays Linn. var. E. S. 1. Z. Pflanzenphysio. 66:251-253. Lawanson, A.O., A. Ojeniyi, C.E. Ndudka, and S.O. Osueke. 1975. Distribution of cyanidin-3-galactoside and pelargonidi-3-gluctoside in mineral-deficient maize seedlings. Phyton 33:187-191. Lebowitz, R.J. 1985. The genetics and breeding of Coleus. Plant Breed. Rev. 3:343-360. Lebowitz, R.J. and R.H. Kloth. 1986. Genetics of foliar variegation in Coleus. J. Hered. 77:125-126. Lee, D.W. and J.B. Lowry. 1980. Young-leaf anthocyanin and solar ultraviolet. Biotrop.12:75-76. Love, J.E. and M.J. Constantin. 1966. The induction of bud sports in Coleus blumei by fast neutrons. Proc. Amer. Hort. Sci. 88:627-630. Maluszynski, M., K. Nichterlein, L. van Zanten and B.S. Ahloowalia. 2000. Officially released mutant varieties - the FAO/IAEA Database. Mut. Breed. Rev. 12:1-84. Mandal, A.K., D.C. Chakraberty, and S.K. Datta. 2000. In vitro isolation of solid novel flower color mutants from induced chimeric ray florets of chrysanthemum. Euphytica 114:9-12. Marcotrigiano, M. 1997. Chimeras and variegation: Patterns of deceit. HortScience 32:773-784. McClintock, B. 1950. The origin and behavior of mutable loci in maize. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 36:344-355. McClintock, B. 1951. Chromosome organization and genic expression. Cold Spring Habor Symp. Quant. Biol. 16:13-47. Moore, T. 1868. New hybrids of Coleus. Flor. Pomol. 21:100-101. Mortensen, L.M., and S.O. Grimstad. 1990. The effect of lighting period and photon flux density on growth of six foliage plants. Scientia Horticulturae 41:337-342. Nakatsuka, A., D. Mizuta, Y. Kii, I. Miyajima, and N. Kobayashi. 2008. Isolation and expression analysis of flavonoid biosynthesis genes in evergreen azalea. Sci. Hortic. 118:314-320. Nell, T.A., R.T. Leonard, and J.E. Barrrett. 1995. Production factors affect the postproduction performance of poinsettia. Acta Hortic. 405:132-135. Nguyen, P., and V. Dal Cin. 2009. The role of light on foliage colour development in coleus (Solenostemon scutellarioides (L.) Codd). Plant Physiol. Biochem. 47:934-945. Nguyen, P., K. Quesenberry, and D. Clark 2008. Genetics of growth habit and development of new coleus (Solenostemon scutellarioides (L.) Codd) varieties with trailing habit and bright color. J. Hered. 99:573-580. Oren-Shamir, M. and A. Levi-Nissim. 1997. Temperature effect on the leaf pigmentation of Cotinus coggygria ‘Royal Purple’ J. Hort. Sci. 72:425-432. Pedley, R., and K. Pedley. 1974. Coleus: A guide to their cultivation and identification. John Bartholomew, Edinburgh. U.K. Pohlman, R.F., N.V. Fedoroff, and J. Messing. 1984. The nucleotide sequence of the maize controlling element activator. Cell 37:635-643. Poole, R.T., and C.A. Conover. 1989. Production of ornamental foliage plants. Acta Hortic. 246:145-153. Repp, R.J. 2005. Coleus plant named ‘Sundancer6’. United States Plant Patent. United States of America. Rife, D.C. 1940. Genetic studies of Coleus II: Leaf form and a bud mutation. J. Hered. 31:293-295. Rife, D.C. 1944. The genetics of certain common variations in Coleus. Ohio. J. Sci. 44:18-24. Rife, D.C. 1948. Simply inherited variations in Coleus. J. Hered. 39:85-91. Rife, D.C. 1972. Leaf shape inheritance in Coleus. Quart. J. Flor. Acad. Sci. 34:187-190. Rife, D.C. and H.C. Duber. 1946. Genes and species differences in Colues. J. Hered. 37:327-330. Roger, R. 2008. Coleus: Rainbow foliage for container and gardens. Timber Press, Portland, OR. U.S.A. Saint-Come, M.R. 1974. Signification de l’inflorescence du Coleus blumei Benth. C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris 279:1661-1664. Satina S., A.F. Blakeslee, and A.G. Avery. 1940. Determination of the three germ layers in the shoot apex of Datura by means of induced polyploidy in periclinal chimeras. Amer. J. Bot. 27:895-905. Sheehan, T.J. and Y. Sagawa. 1955. The effects of gamma radiation on chrysanthemum and gladiolus. Proc. Florida State Hort. Soc. 72:388-391. Simard, M.H., N. Michaux-Ferriere, and A. Silvy. 1992. Variants of carnation (Dianthus caryophyllus L.) obtained by organogenesis from irradiated petals. Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 29:37-42. Spitters, C.J.T., L. Vosselman, J.M.M. Engels, W.N.M. van Kester, and A.C. Zeven. 1975. Investigations of the inheritance of flower variegation in Mirabilis jalapa L. 6. Genetics system of flower variegation. Euphytica 24:323-332. Stamps, R.H. 1995. Effects of shade level and fertilizer rate on yield and vase life of Aspidistra elatior ‘Variegata’ leaves. J. Environ. Hort. 13:137-137. Stewart, R.N. and H. Derman. 1970. Somatic genetic analysis of the apical layers of chimera sports in chrysanthemum by experimental production of adventitious shoots. Amer. J . Bot. 57:1061-1071. Stout, A.B. 1976. The development of horticultural varieties of coleus. J. New York Bot. Gard. 17:209-218. Sussex, I.M. 1989. Developmental programming of the shoot meristem. Cell 56:225-229. USDA. 2009. Census of horticultural specialties. United States Department of Agriculture, Washigton, D.C. 19 Aug. 2015. <Http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Online_Highlight/Census_of_Horticulture_Specialties/>. van Harten, A.M. 1998. Mutation breeding theory and practical applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Vaughn, K.C. and K.G. Wilson. 1980. Genetics and ultrastucture of a dotted leaf pattern in Hosta. J. Hered. 71:121-123. Vladimirova, S.V., D.B. McConnell, M.E. Kane, and R.W. Henley. 1997. Morphological plasticity of Dracaena sanderana ‘Ribbon’ in response to four light intensities. HortScience 32:1049-1052. Wang, Y.T. 1990. Growth substance, light, fertilizer, and misting regulate propagation and growth of golden pothos. HortScience 25:1602-1604. Wicker, T., F. Sabot, A. Hua-Van, J.L. Bennetzen, P. Capy, B. Chalhoub, A. Flavell, P. Leroy, M. Morgante, O. Panaud, E. Paux, P. SanMiguel, and A.H. Schulman. 2007. A unified classification system for eukaryotic transposable elements. Nat. Rev. Genet. 8:973-982. Woodall, G.S., I.C. Dodd, and G.R. Stewart. 1998. Contrasting leaf development within the genus Syzygium. J. Expt. Bot. 49:79-87. Yeh, D.M., and P.Y. Hsu. 2004. Differential growth and photosynthetic response of selected cultivars of English ivy to irradiance. J. Hortic. Sci. Biotechnol. 79:633–637. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/51874 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 彩葉草 [Solenostemon scutellariodes (L.) Codd.] 葉形、葉色多變,廣泛應用於綠美化,本研究探討彩葉草葉片性狀遺傳模式及誘變育種方法,以利選育新品種。
本研究參試之商業品種親本皆為正常葉寬,在 19 雜交組合中,17 組正常葉寬品種之自交、雜交後代全數皆為正常葉寬個體,‘Cardinal’ 及 ‘Defiance’ 此二組自交之後代中分離出葉寬狹窄個體,因此正常葉寬 (W) 相對於狹窄葉寬 (w) 應為顯性性狀,‘Cardinal’ 與 ‘Defiance’ 基因型為異質結合 Ww。葉緣深缺刻且雄不稔之品種與深缺刻且雄可稔之品種雜交,子代深缺刻與淺缺刻表現型之比例為 3:1 或 1:0;以葉緣深缺刻且雄不稔之品種與葉緣淺缺刻的品種雜交,後代深缺刻與淺缺刻葉緣之植株數趨近於 1:1,而深缺刻之子代全數為雄不稔;深缺刻且雄可稔之品種自交,子代深缺刻與淺缺刻表現型之分離比為 3:1,深缺刻且雄可稔之品種與淺缺刻品種雜交,子代分離比為1:1;淺缺刻之品種自交或雜交,後代性狀皆為淺缺刻。可知葉緣深缺刻且雄不稔 (L) 性狀相對於深缺刻且雄可稔性狀 (lF) 為顯性,深缺刻且雄不稔性狀相對於葉緣淺缺刻 (l) 為顯性性狀。皺褶葉面之品種雜交,後代皺褶葉面與平滑葉面植株之分離比趨近於 3:1,皺褶葉面之品種與平滑葉面之品種雜交,後代皺褶葉面與平滑葉面植株之分離比趨近於 1:1 或 1:0,而葉面平滑之品種相互自交或雜交,所得子代皆為葉面平滑,顯示皺褶葉面 (C) 相對於平滑葉面 (c) 應為顯性性狀,且由一對等位基因控制。葉脈不規則之品種雜交,後代不規則脈形與規則脈形之植株數比趨近於 3:1;不規則脈形與規則脈形之品種雜交,不規則脈形與規則脈形之植株數比趨近於 1:1 或 1:0;規則脈形之品種相互雜交,所得子代皆為規則脈形之植株,顯示脈形不規則 (G) 相對於脈形規則 (g) 為顯性性狀,由一對等位基因控制。扇形葉形品種 ‘Tilt a Whirl’ 之自交子代,中肋明顯短縮、中肋中等短縮與中肋無短縮 3 性狀之植株數比趨近於 1:2:1;‘Tilt a Whirl’ 與非扇形葉形之 ‘Wizard Jade’ 雜交,子代族群中無扇形葉個體,推測扇形葉個體中有 R 基因調控中肋短縮基因 F,R 基因對 F 基因具上位性,當 R 基因為隱性同質結合之 rr 時,才能表現中肋短縮之扇形葉性狀;中肋短縮程度明顯之雙扇葉形為同質顯性性狀,以 FF 表示其基因型;中肋短縮程度中等之扇形葉為異質結合之中間形性狀,以 Ff 表示其基因型;中肋無短縮之卵形葉為同質結合之隱性性狀,以 ff 表示其基因型。正常葉形之調控基因型則為 RR。 葉面具紫紅色斑塊之品種或品系自交,子代中具斑塊與不具斑塊之個體數比為 3:1 或 1:0;具斑塊與無斑塊之品種雜交,子代中具斑塊與無斑塊之族群比為 1:0 與 1:1;以不具斑塊之品種或品系進行自交,產生之子代皆不具斑塊。結果顯示紫紅色斑塊性狀由一對等位基因 B 及 b 控制,具斑塊 (B) 相對於不具斑塊 (b) 為顯性。以葉面撒佈小點之品種自交,子代具斑點與不具斑點之植株比例約為3:1;具白色斑點與不具白色斑點之品種雜交,子代具白色小斑點與不具白色小斑點之植株數比趨近於 1:1;不具白色斑點之品種雜交,子代全數不具白色斑點。由此可得知葉面小斑點性狀為一對等位基因控制,葉片具白色小斑點 (S) 為顯性性狀,葉片無白色小斑點 (s) 為隱性性狀。具中肋白色條帶之品種與不具中肋白色條帶之品種雜交,後代具中肋白色條帶與不具中肋白色條帶之植株數比趨近於 1:0;具條帶之品種相互雜交,子代中具條帶與無條帶之植株比趨近於 1:0 或 3:1;不具中肋白色條帶之品種相自交或雜交,所得子代皆不具中肋白色條帶。因此中肋條帶為顯性性狀由一對等位基因控制,具條帶性狀 (M) 相對於不具條帶性狀 (m) 為顯性。 測量四雜交後代選系 ‘Norris’ × ‘Defiance’ - Progeny 08、‘Fiesta’ × ‘Wizard Jade’ - Progeny 11-11、‘Norris’ × ‘Defiance’ - Progeny 10 與 ‘New Hurricane’ × ‘Wizard Jade’ - Progeny 07 不同光度下之淨光合作用速率,‘Fiesta’ × ‘Wizard Jade’ - Progeny 11-11 有最高之光補償點與光飽和點測值,顯示該品系較適合於光線充足之環境下生長;‘New Hurricane’ × ‘Wizard Jade’ - Progeny 07 之光補償點與 ‘Fiesta’ × ‘Wizard Jade’ 11-11 相近,但光飽和點較低,推測其光度適應範圍較窄,但兩者皆較適合生長於明亮環境下。‘Norris’ × ‘Defiance’ 08 與 ‘Norris’ × ‘Defiance’ - Progeny 10 之光補償點較低,顯示兩者能在較為低光的環境下生長。‘Norris’ × ‘Defiance’ - Progeny 10 之光補償點與光飽和點皆為四品系中最低,可能為適合於低光度下生長之品系。 以 0、20、25、30、35、40 及 50 Gy 之 ray 處理 ‘Defiance’ 及 ‘Cardinal’ 插穗後 6 個月,‘Defiance’ 之存活率以 25 Gy 劑量處理之 23% 最低,‘Cardinal’ 之存活率以 50 Gy 劑量處理之 66.7% 為最低;突變率於處理後 6 個月進行調查,‘Defiance’ 之突變率以處理 25 Gy 之組別最高,突變率為 7.1%;‘Cardinal’ 之突變率以處理 50 Gy 之組別最高,突變率為 7.5%。‘Defiance’ 在處理 20 Gy、25 Gy及 35 Gy 之處理劑量中,誘變當代 (M0) 出現葉片黃紅色交雜的嵌合斑紋,處理 35 Gy、40 Gy 及 50 Gy 之組別中,則出現花青素消失,全葉呈現黃綠色的性狀;‘Cardinal’ 在處理 25 Gy 組別中,誘變當代出現帶有大理石斑紋的嵌合突變枝,在處理 30 Gy 之組別中出現銅紅色葉色,40 Gy 及 50 Gy 之組別中有全葉呈現黃綠色的性狀,50 Gy 之組別中出現黃紅色交雜的嵌合斑紋。誘變當代扦插繁殖後部分枝條嵌合變異性狀消失,顯示嵌合斑紋可能為輻射傷害之表現,銅紅色及全黃綠葉變異枝之植株,性狀可藉由扦插繁殖固定。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Coleus [Solenostemon scutellariodes (L.) Codd.], with various leaf forms and shapes, are used extensively for landscaping and decoration all year round. Crosses between commercial cultivars and ray treatments were conducted to have a better understand of leaf characteristics inheritance and induced-breeding in Coleus.
Progenies obtained from selfing or crossing cultivars with normal leaf width were all with normal width, except that progeny from selfing ‘Defiance’ resulted in a 3:1 ratio (normal: narrow). These results indicated that characteristic of leaf width was controlled by a single locus, while normal width (W) is dominant to narrow width (w). Progenies obtained from crossing between male-sterile deep lobed and male-fertile deep lobed cultivars resulted in a 3:1 or 1:0 ratio (deep-lobe: shallow-lobe). Progeny from crossing between male-sterile deep lobed and shallow lobed resulted in a 1:1 ratio (deep-lobe: shallow-lobe). Selfing male-fertile deep lobed resulted in a 3:1 ratio, while crossing between male-fertile deep lobed segregated in a 1:1 ratio (deep-lobe: shallow-lobe). These suggested that leaf margin was controlled by a single locus. Deep-lobed and male sterile (L) is dominant to deep-lobed and male-fertile (lF), while the latter is dominant to shallow-lobed and male-sterile (l) .Cultivars with crinkled surface were crossed, and the progeny fit a 3:1 ratio (crinkled: smooth). Crossing between smooth-leaved cultivars produced all smooth-leaved seedlings. Progeny from crossing between crinkled and smooth cultivars fit a 1:0 or 1:1 ratio (crinkled: smooth). These suggested that leaf surface trait was governed by a single locus. Crinkled surface (C) is dominant to smooth surface (c). Crossing between irregular-vein cultivars, between anastomosis and regular-vein cultivars, and between anastomosis cultivars fit a 3:1, 1:1 or 1:0 and 0:1 ratio (anastomosis: regular-vein), respectively in progeny. This indicated that leaf vein trait was governed by a single locus, and anastomosis vein (G) is dominant to regular vein (g). Crossing between purple blotched cultivars and strains resulted in a 3:1 or 1:0 ratio (blotched: non-blotched). Crossing between non-blotched cultivars and strains all had non-blotched progenies. These indicated that purple blotch (B) is dominant to non-blotched leaf (b). Selfing white spotted leaf cultivars resulted in a 3:1 ratio, while crossing white spotted leaf cultivars with non-spotted cultivars resulted in a 1:1 ratio (spotted: non-spotted). These indicated that white spotted trait might be controlled by a single allele, and white spotted leaf (S) is dominant to non- spotted leaf (s). Progenies of crossing between white midrib striped cultivars and midrib non-striped cultivars resulted in a 1:0 ratio. Progenies of crossing between white midrib striped cultivars resulted in a 1:0 or 3:1 ratio. These indicated that white midrib striped trait is controlled by a single allele, and white midrib striped leaf (M) is dominant to midrib non-striped leaf (m). Mesurements were conducted to test net photosynthesis rate under different photosynthetic photon flux in four progenies: ‘Norris’ × ‘Defiance’ - Progeny 08, Fiesta × Wizard Jade 12-11, ‘Norris’ × ‘Defiance’ - Progeny 10 and New Hurricane × Wizard 07. ‘Fiesta’ × ‘Wizard Jade’ - Progeny 11-11 had a highest light saturation and a compansetion point, indicating this strain grew better under sufficient light condition. ‘New Hurricane’ × ‘Wizard Jade’ - Progeny 07 had a similar light compansetion point to ‘Fiesta’ × ‘Wizard Jade’ - Progeny 11-11, but with a lower light saturation point, suggesting it might have a narrow light acclimation range. ‘Norris’ × ‘Defiance’ - Progeny 08 and ‘Norris’ × ‘Defiance’ - Progeny 10 had lower light compansetion points and thus could adapt to lower light condition. ‘Norris’ × ‘Defiance’ - Progeny 10 had the lowest light saturation and compansetion point among the four strain, which means it could grow under low light intensity. The cuttings of ‘Defiance’ and ‘Cardinal’ were treated with ray. After 6 months, ‘Defiance’ exhibited the lowest survival rate (23%) and highest mutation rate (7.1%) at 25 Gy treatment, while ‘Cardinal’ had the lowest survival rate (66.7%) and highest mutation rate (7.5%) at 50 Gy. Mutation shoots (M0) from ‘Defiance’ were chimeric or yellowish, and ‘Cardinal’ became copper-colored, yellowish, or chimeric. Some of chimeric sports disappeared after propagation with cuttings, indicating that the chimeric phenotype resulted from irradiation damage. Plants with copper-red and yellowish sports remain unchanged after cutting-propagation, and thus had potential to a new germplasm for landscape and commercial uses. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-15T13:54:40Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-104-R02628110-1.pdf: 4082248 bytes, checksum: 05ea3459f2fcdbc500c46309e3b68e59 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 摘要 i
Abstract iv 目錄 vii 表目錄 ix 圖目錄 x 前言 (Introduction) 1 前人研究 (Literature Review) 3 一、彩葉草 3 (一) 植物學分類及特徵 3 (二) 栽培歷史、維護管理與利用 3 二、彩葉草及觀葉植物之葉形遺傳 4 三、彩葉草及觀葉植物之葉斑與葉色遺傳 5 四、跳躍因子 8 五、葉片花青素與環境因子 9 (一) 花青素生合成路徑 9 (二) 調節花青素表現之因子 10 六、景觀植物之耐陰性及光度適應性 11 七、誘變育種 12 (一) 誘變方法 12 (二) 誘變與嵌合體 13 材料與方法(Materials and Methods) 15 一、彩葉草品種間自交與雜交後代葉片性狀表現 15 二、彩葉草雜交後代之光反應曲線 16 三、彩葉草之 射線誘變 17 結果 (Results) 19 一、彩葉草品種間自交、雜交之後代葉形性狀分離表現 19 (一) 葉片寬度性狀 19 (二) 葉緣缺刻性狀 19 (三) 葉面皺褶性狀 21 (四) 脈形不規則形性狀 23 (五) 扇形葉形性狀 24 二、彩葉草品種間自交、雜交之後代葉斑性狀分離表現 25 (一) 葉面斑塊性狀 25 (二) 葉面白色斑點性狀 26 (三) 中肋白色條帶性狀 27 三、彩葉草雜交後代之光反應曲線 29 四、彩葉草之 射線誘變育種 30 討論 (Discussion) 68 參考文獻 (References) 80 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 彩葉草之葉片性狀遺傳與誘變育種 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Leaf Trait Inheritance and Induced-mutation in Coleus | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 103-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 楊雯如(Wen-Ju Yang),沈榮壽(Rong-Show Shen),陳彥銘(Yen-Ming Chen) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 葉形,葉斑,分離比, 射線,突變, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | leaf shape,leaf variegation,segregation ratio, ray,mutation, | en |
dc.relation.page | 88 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2015-08-31 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 生物資源暨農學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 園藝暨景觀學系 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 園藝暨景觀學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-104-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 3.99 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。