SpringerLink
Log in

Culture medium pH is influenced by basal medium, carbohydrate source, gelling agent, activated charcoal, and medium storage method

  • Published:
Plant Cell Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

When four carbohydrates were tested against six commonly cited inorganic basal media, post-autoclave pH was highest for carbohydrate-free and sucrose containing media, and progressively lower for maltoseglucose and fructose-containing media, respectively. Post-autoclave pH for these media without carbohydrates was related to medium buffering capacity. Addition of gelling agents (10 of 11 tested) increased the postautoclave pH of MS medium containing sucrose. Neutralized and acid-washed activated charcoal also increased the post-autoclave pH of liquid and agarsolidified MS medium, and the pH changed further during 8 weeks of storage. Changes in medium pH caused by gelling agents, but not charcoal, could be alleviated by adjusting the pH after their addition but prior to autoclaving.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barrow JR (1986) Plant Cell Reports 5:405–408

    Google Scholar 

  • Basu A, Sethi U, Guha-Mukherjee S (1988) J. Exper. Bot. 39:1735–1742

    Google Scholar 

  • Batty N, Dunwell J (1989) Plant Cell Tiss. Organ Cult. 18:221–226

    Google Scholar 

  • Behagel HA (1971) In: Van Bragt J, Mossel DAA, Pierik RLM, Veldstra H (eds) Effects of sterilization on components in nutrient media. Miscellaneous papers 9 Landbouwhogeschool Wageningen The Netherlands, p. 117–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Bornman CH, Vogelmann TC (1984) Physiol. Plant. 61:505–512

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchheim JA, Colburn SM, Ranch JP (1989) Plant Physiol. 89:768–775

    Google Scholar 

  • Cousson A, Toubart P, Tran Thanh Van K (1989) Can. J. Bot. 67:650–654

    Google Scholar 

  • Debergh PC (1983) Physiol. Plant. 59:270–276

    Google Scholar 

  • Fridborg G, Pedersen M, Landstrom L-E, Eriksson T (1978) Physiol. Plant. 43:104–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamborg OL, Miller RA, Ojima K (1968) Experimental Cell Research 50:151–158

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamborg OL, Murashige T, Thorpe TA, Vasil IK (1976) In Vitro 12:473–478

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagimori M, Matsumoto T, Obi Y (1983) Agric. Biol. Chem. 47:565–571

    Google Scholar 

  • Hildebrandt AC, Riker AJ (1949) Amer. J. Bot. 36:74–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsiao K-C, Bornman CH (1991) Physiol. Plant. 82:261–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ichi T, Koda T, Asai I, Hatanaka A, Sekiya J (1986) Agric. Biol. Chem. 50:2397–2399

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaramillo J, Summers WL (1990) J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 115:1047–1050

    Google Scholar 

  • Johansson L (1986) Potato Research 29:179–190

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser WM, Hartung W (1981) Plant Physiol. 68:202–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan A, Chauhan YS, Roberts LW (1986) Plant Sci. 46:213–216

    Google Scholar 

  • de Lange JH (1989) S. Afr. J. Bot. 55:1–5

    Google Scholar 

  • Langowska I (1980) Pol. Arch. Hydrobiol. 27:125–136

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd G, McCown B (1980) Intern. Plant Prop. Soc. Proc. 30:421–427 (Publ. 1981)

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin SM (1980) In: Staba EJ (ed) Plant tissue culture as a source of biochemicals. CRC Press, Boca Raton. p.143–148

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathes MC, Morselli M, Marvin JW (1973) Plant and Cell Physiol. 14:797–801

    Google Scholar 

  • Minocha SC (1987) In: Bonga JM, Durzan DJ (eds) Cell and tissue culture in forestry, v. 1, Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht, p.125–141

    Google Scholar 

  • Misson JP, Boxus Ph, Coumans M, Giot-Wirgot P, Gaspar Th (1983) Med. Fac. Landbouww. Rijksuniv. Gent 48:1151–1157

    Google Scholar 

  • Morimoto H, Murai F (1989) Plant Cell Reports 8:210–213

    Google Scholar 

  • Murashige T, Skoog F (1962) Physiol. Plant. 15:473–497

    Google Scholar 

  • Nesius KK, Fletcher JS (1973) Physiol. Plant. 28:259–263

    Google Scholar 

  • Nitsch C (1977) In: Reinert J and Bajaj YPS (eds) Applied and fundamental aspects of plant cell, tissue, and organ culture. Springer-Verlag, New York. p.268–278

    Google Scholar 

  • Nitsch JP, Nitsch C (1969) Science 163:85–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Orshinsky BR, McGregor LJ, Johnson GIE, Hucl P, Kartha KK (1990) Plant Cell Reports 9:365–369

    Google Scholar 

  • Pasqualetto P-L, Zimmerman RH, Fordham I (1986) J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 111:976–980

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahbar K, Chopra RN (1982) Z. Pflanzenphysiol. 106:185–189

    Google Scholar 

  • Redei GP (1974) Ann. Bot. 38:287–297

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeves DW, Horton BD, Couvillon GA (1983) Scientia Hort. 21:353–357

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarma KS, Maesato K, Hara T, Sonoda Y (1990) Ann. Bot. 65:37–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Schenk N, Hsiao K-C, Bornman CH (1991) Plant Cell Reports 10:115–119

    Google Scholar 

  • Schenk RU, Hildebrandt AC (1972) Can. J. Bot. 50:199–204

    Google Scholar 

  • Selby C, Lee R, Harvey BMR (1989) New Phytol. 113:203–210

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw PE, Tatum JH, Berry RE (1967) Carbohydrate Res. 5:266–273

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh M, Krikorian AD (1980) Ann. Bot. 46:807–809

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh M, Krikorian AD (1981) Ann. Bot. 47:133–139

    Google Scholar 

  • Singha S (1982) J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 107:657–660

    Google Scholar 

  • Skirvin RM, Chu MC, Mann ML, Young H, Sullivan J, Fermanian T (1986) Plant Cell Reports 5:292–294

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith DL, Krikorian AD (1990a) Physiol. Plant. 80:329–336

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith DL, Krikorian AD (1990b) Plant Cell Reports 9:34–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith MAL, McCown BH (1982/83) Plant Sci. Letters 28:149–156

    Google Scholar 

  • Stasinopoulos TC, Hangarter RP (1990) Plant Physiol. 93:1365–1369

    Google Scholar 

  • White PR (1963) The cultivation of animal and plant cells. Ronald Press Co., New York. p.59

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams RR, Taji AM, Bolton JA (1985) HortScience 20:1052–1053

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaghmout OMF, Torello WA (1988) HortScience 23:615–616

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang B, Stoltz LP (1989) HortScience 24:503–504

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Horticulture, The Ohio State University, Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, 1680 Madison Ave., 44691-4096, Wooster, Ohio, USA

    Henry R. Owen, Donna Wengerd & A. Raymond Miller

Authors
  1. Henry R. Owen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Donna Wengerd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. Raymond Miller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Communicated by J. J. Finer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Owen, H.R., Wengerd, D. & Miller, A.R. Culture medium pH is influenced by basal medium, carbohydrate source, gelling agent, activated charcoal, and medium storage method. Plant Cell Reports 10, 583–586 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00232516

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00232516

Key Words

Search

Navigation