Next Article in Journal
Integrative Transcriptomics and Proteomics Elucidate the Regulatory Mechanism of Hydrangea macrophylla Flower-Color Changes Induced by Exogenous Aluminum
Previous Article in Journal
Mobile Computing for Pest and Disease Management Using Spectral Signature Analysis: A Review
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agronomy
Volume 12
Issue 4
10.3390/agronomy12040968
agronomy-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

An Optimized Protocol for Micropropagation and Acclimatization of Strawberry (Fragaria × ananassa Duch.) Variety ‘Aroma’

by
Juan C. Neri
,
Jegnes Benjamín Meléndez-Mori
*,
José Jesús Tejada-Alvarado
,
Nuri Carito Vilca-Valqui
,
Eyner Huaman-Huaman
,
Manuel Oliva
and
Malluri Goñas
Instituto de Investigación para el Desarrollo Sustentable de Ceja de Selva (INDES-CES), Universidad Nacional Toribio Rodríguez de Mendoza (UNTRM), Chachapoyas 01001, Peru
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2022, 12(4), 968; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12040968
Submission received: 30 March 2022 / Revised: 14 April 2022 / Accepted: 14 April 2022 / Published: 17 April 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Horticultural and Floricultural Crops)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
In strawberry micropropagation, several challenges must be overcome to obtain quality plants and achieve high survival rate to ex vitro acclimatization. In this study, therefore, a set of protocols were evaluated to optimize explant (meristem) disinfection, in vitro growth (multiplication and rooting), and ex vitro acclimatization of strawberry. The results showed that explants treated with 1.0% NaClO for 5 min had a lower percentage of contamination, and achieved a higher percentage of viability, height, and number of leaves. In vitro growth was favored by the use of 1 mg L−1 zeatin, since it allowed greater seedling growth (number of shoots, seedling height, number of leaves, number of roots and root length), and a higher pre-acclimation rate (100%). In the acclimatization phase, plants grown in a substrate composed of compost + peat combined with 4 g of humic acid achieved better response in morphological and physiological variables. In fact, the results of this study could be used to cultivate strawberry plants of the ‘Aroma’ variety with high commercial quality.

1. Introduction

Strawberry is a fruit that has high nutritional value and is a substantial source of folate, vitamin C, fiber, potassium, flavonoids, anthocyanin, phytochemicals, antioxidants [1,2], and bioactive compounds that reduce the risk of cardiovascular incidents and thrombosis [3,4]. In addition, it provides anti-cancer benefits and helps prevent age-related memory loss [5,6].
However, despite its multiple benefits and high agricultural potential, there are limitations for its cultivation due to the presence of diseases caused by viruses such as strawberry mottle virus (SMoV), Fragaria chiloensis cryptic virus (FClCV), strawberry necrotic shock virus (SNSV), and strawberry mild yellow edge virus (SMYEV) [7], and those caused by fungi such as Botrytis cinerea, Phytophthora, Pythium, Rhizoctonia, Colletotrichum spp., Verticillium dahliae, Mycosphaerella fragariae, Ramularia tulasnei, Phomopis obscurans or by the bacterium Xanthomomas fragariae [8]. Many of these diseases can be transmitted in the propagation process, which is traditionally done through stolons [9]. An interesting alternative to overcome this problem is the use of biotechnological tools that allow mass production of plants with excellent phytosanitary and genetic quality [10]. Meristematic tissue culture is a technique widely used to obtain pathogen-free and homogeneous plants over a short period of time (fungi, bacteria, and viruses) [11].
For successful micropropagation, it is essential to regulate and manage contamination during meristem establishment [12]. Likewise, it is equally important to identify the growth regulator and concentration that allow for successful establishment, multiplication, and rooting in vitro. Finally, one of the critical points in the tissue culture process is to achieve ex vitro acclimatization of micropropagated plants; therefore, it is crucial to evaluate various substrates and/or their combinations to achieve high survival rates and adequate plant growth and development [13,14,15].
Plants from in vitro culture have been reported to show high rooting and shoot generation rates [16] but, most importantly, they are free from diseases [17]. Furthermore, Nehra et al. [18] reported that in vitro propagated plants of ‘Redcoat’ produced significantly more inflorescences and flowers per crown compared to stolon-propagated plants, and consequently derive a higher number of fruits. However, tissue culture-propagated plants exhibit genotype-dependent behavior, suggesting the need for detailed evaluation of each strawberry cultivar [18].
In this context, the present study aimed to optimize the factors that influence the micropropagation of strawberry variety ‘Aroma’, and to evaluate the development of the plants during the ex vitro acclimatization process.

2. Materials and Methods

The research was carried out at the Laboratory of Plant Physiology and Biotechnology of the Universidad Nacional Toribio Rodríguez de Mendoza. As a source of explant, strawberry plants of the ‘Aroma’ variety grown at the experimental station located on the university campus were selected. The plants were propagated in 1.0 L containers with a sterile substrate composed of agricultural soil, peat, and river sand (ratio 2:1:1; pH 6.38). These received a preventive phytosanitary treatment with a solution of Phyton (2.5 mL L−1) and Chlorpyrifos (1.5 mL L−1), in addition to biostimulation and nutritional balance with Enziprom (5 mL L−1) and Basacote® Plus 6M (4 g plant−1), respectively. The phytosanitary treatment was carried out at 5-day intervals for 8 weeks.

2.1. Culture Medium and Growth Condition

In this study, Murashige and Skoog (MS) base medium [19], supplemented with 22.5 g L−1 sucrose, 0.15 g L−1 ascorbic acid, 0.10 g L−1 myo-inositol, 1.0 mL L−1 Plant Preservation Mixture, and 6 g L−1 Agar was used. The pH was adjusted to 5.8 and then autoclaved at 121 °C and 1.5 bar for 20 min. Explants were grown at 25 ± 1 °C and a photoperiod of 16 h light provided by white fluorescent tubes (3000 lux).

2.2. Disinfecting Plant Material

Stolons free of disease symptoms and nutritional deficiencies were harvested. Leaves and roots were removed, gently rinsed under running water, and placed in ascorbic acid solution (150 mg L−1) for 20 min. The crowns were then immersed in a soapy solution for 15 min and then placed in fungal solution (Carbonyl 1 g L−1) for 15 min. At the end of each disinfection process, three rinses with sterile distilled water were performed.

2.3. Experiment 1: In Vitro Establishment

Under aseptic conditions in a laminar flow chamber, explants were sterilized by immersion through independent treatments with sodium hypochlorite (0.5 and 1% NaOCl, for 3 or 5 min), hydrogen peroxide (0.5 and 1% H2O2, for 3 or 5 min), or mercuric chloride (0.1% HgCl, for 1.5 or 3 min). At the end of each treatment, three rinses with sterile distilled water were performed. The experiment consisted of 10 treatments and 10 replicates. Each repetition corresponded to one experimental unit (explant).
Sterile meristems (0.3 mm) were extracted and seeded in test tubes with 15 mL of base culture medium (Figure 1a). After 6 weeks, the percentage of phenolization, contamination, viability, seedling height, and number of leaves were recorded.

2.4. Experiment 2: In Vitro Growth (Multiplication and Rooting) and Pre-Acclimatization

Explants were grown on base medium supplemented with 6-Benzylaminopurine (0.5 mg L−1 BAP), coconut water (100 and 200 mL L−1), Thidiazuron (1 and 1.5 mg L−1), Zeatin (1 and 2 mg L−1) or gibberellic acid (0.5 mg L−1 AG3), and a phytohormone-free control. Three explants were placed in PTL-100-1PZ magenta flasks (PhytoTechnology Laboratories, Lenexa, KS, USA) (Figure 1b). The experiment consisted of nine treatments and five replicates. Each replicate corresponded to three experimental units (explants). After 5 weeks, the number of shoots, seedling height, number of leaves, number of roots, and root length were recorded.
Then, following the experimental design and treatments of the multiplication-rooting stage, the seedlings were separated and sown in polyethylene trays with a substrate composed of a mixture of sphagnum peat + perlite in a 1:2 ratio (special mixture, Klasmann Substrates Select, Geeste, Germany) with pH 6.0 (Figure 1c). The trays were placed in transparent containers with a thin film of water, then covered with parafilm (gradually removed) and maintained at a temperature of 25 °C, 80% relative humidity, and light intensity of 3000 lux. After 16 days, the percentage of pre-acclimation (survival) was recorded.

2.5. Experiment 3: Acclimatization

The most vigorous and uniform hardened seedlings (Figure 1d) were transferred to a shaded nursery (70% shade) and transplanted into 5” × 8” nursery bags containing four types of substrates (Table 1): compost (coffee pulp), burned rice husk, coconut fiber, and perlite, which were mixed with peat in a 2:1 ratio. After 7 days of acclimatization, humic acid was added (0 or 4 g EKOTRON® 70 GR), depending on treatment. The average temperature and relative humidity during the acclimatization period were 16.4 °C and 77.9%, respectively. The experiment was conducted under a 4 × 2 factorial design (substrate types × humic acid dose), with six replicates. Each replicate corresponded to one experimental unit (plant). After 35 days post-transplanting, the following parameters were evaluated.

2.5.1. Determination of Plant Growth Parameters

Plant height (longest shoot), number of leaves, number of shoots or crowns, root length, number of roots, aerial biomass (fresh and dry matter), root biomass (fresh and dry matter), leaf area, and root volume were recorded. To record dry matter, plants were dried in an oven at 60 °C until a constant weight was achieved. Leaf area of all leaves/plant was determined using a regression equation:
y = 0.286141 x − 8.5624061.10−5 x2 − 1.06547953.10−8 x3,
where y = leaf area cm2, x = length per leaf width, and coefficient of determination R2 = 0.99 [20].

2.5.2. Determination of Physiological Parameters

Chlorophyll content (SPAD index), water potential ψ (bar), and stomatal conductance (mmol/m2/s) were measured using a SPAD 502 chlorophyll meter (Konica Minolta, Tokyo, Japan), a Scholander-type pressure chamber (PMS Instruments, Corvallis, OR, USA) and an SC-1 leaf porometer (Decagon Devices, Pullman, WA, USA), respectively. Measurements were taken between 9:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m., on the three most light-exposed leaves.

2.6. Experimental Design and Data Analysis

All experiments were conducted under a complete randomized design (CRD). Data were subjected to analysis of variance and significant means were tested by Tukey’s test (p ≤ 0.05) using InfoStat statistical software version 2018.

3. Results

3.1. Experiment 1: In Vitro Establishment

Table 2 shows that the lowest percentage of contamination (10%) was obtained when the explants were treated with 1.0% NaClO for 5 min. In addition, it was also the treatment that allowed the highest percentage of viability (60%), height (5.7 cm), and number of leaves (3.7) per established seedling to be recorded. On the other hand, the highest percentages of contamination (80%) were recorded in the treatments with H2O2 1.0% for 3 and 5 min, NaClO 0.5% for 5 min and H2O2 0.5% for 3 min, the latter being also the treatment with no viability rate (Table 2).

3.2. Experiment 2: In Vitro Growth (Multiplication and Rooting) and Pre-Acclimatization

Explants grown with 1.0 mg L−1 zeatin produced significantly more shoots (4.20 ± 0.86) and leaves (17.13 ± 2.80). Regarding seedling height, the best results (>5 cm) were obtained in explants from the 1.0 mg L−1 zeatin, 100 mL L−1 coconut water, and control treatments (Table 3).
After 42 days, all installed explants developed roots. Effectively, the highest number (11.40 ± 2.38) and length of roots (13.41 ± 1.31 cm) were recorded at 1.0 mg L−1 zeatin. In general, seedlings grown on medium with 1.0 mg L−1 zeatin showed greater vigor and better morphological conformation, favorable for pre-acclimation (100%) success of the seedlings (Table 3).

3.3. Experiment 3: Acclimatization

The morphological performance of the seedlings during the acclimatization process is shown in Table 4. The greatest plant height (15.45 ± 0.91 cm), number of crowns (7.33 ± 0.82), number of roots (26.25 ± 0.76), and leaf area (516.17 ± 145.42 cm2) were recorded in plants grown on substrate 1 + 4 g humic acid. In substrates 1 and 3 (both with 4 g humic acid), the highest number of leaves was recorded, with values of 15.17 ± 2.14 and 15.17 ± 1.33, respectively. Regarding root length, substrate 3 + 4 g of humic acid yielded better root growth, achieving roots up to 32.21 ± 2.43 cm in length (Table 4).
Table 5 shows that the highest biomass, in terms of fresh weight (foliar: 29.46 ± 10.40 g; root: 12.94 ± 1.84 g) and dry weight (foliar: 5.40 ± 1.67 g; root: 1.31 ± 0.17 g) was achieved in plants grown on substrate 1 + 4 g of humic acid. Regarding root volume, it was observed that the highest value of this variable was recorded in substrate 3 (14.04 ± 4.08 mL) and substrate 1 (13.45 ± 2.19 mL), both with 4 g of humic acid, followed by substrate 3 (13.03 ± 1.69 mL) with no humic acid.
The physiological characteristics of the plants during the acclimatization process are shown in Table 6. Plants grown on substrate 1 + 4 g humic acid presented higher chlorophyll index and stomatal conductance, reaching values of 40.69 ± 2.57 SPAD and 434.47 ± 14.20 mmol/m2/s, respectively. By comparison, plants grown on substrate 4 without humic acid presented lower water potential (−16.74 ± 1.71 Bar).

4. Discussion

4.1. Micropropagation Stage

Although strawberries are generally propagated by stolons, this method does not necessarily guarantee high-quality plants due to the risk of spreading diseases [9]. Therefore, in vitro meristem culture is an ideal technique to obtain healthy and homogeneous plants [11,21,22]. However, to achieve a high rate of success, it is absolutely necessary to optimize protocols, thus minimizing material losses from tissue oxidation and contamination, or low response to in vitro growth conditions [23].
In the present study, meristems treated with 1% NaClO for 5 min achieved higher viability (60%) and lower contamination (10%). Similar results were reported by Munir et al. [24], where disinfection of strawberry meristems (‘Oso Grande’ and ‘Toro’ varieties) with 0.5% NaOCl for 10 to 15 min allowed recording a survival rate of 75% and contamination lower than 15%. It is worth mentioning that the addition of antioxidants plays an important role in improving the response during in vitro establishment as it reduces phenolization of explants [11,25].
During multiplication, it was observed that the use of zeatin (1 mg L−1) largely benefited the development of shoots, leaves, and roots. Similar effects have been described in the micropropagation of crops such as blueberry, where the addition of zeatin (1 mg L−1) favored the development of vigorous plants with an increased number of shoots and leaves [26]. In contrast, the results of this study show that the addition of AG3 (0.5 mg/L) or thiadizuron (1 and 1.5 mg L−1) clearly resulted in lower shoot induction. The low efficiency shown by these growth regulators (AG3 and thiadizuron) may be related to the fact that they need to act synergistically with other phytohormones to enhance their effects [15,27]. However, Zakaria et al. [28], during multiplication of three strawberry cultivars (Festival, Sweet Charly, and Florida) with 2 mg L−1 thiadizuron, achieved a shoot regeneration percentage above 70%, suggesting that the response is also related to the regeneration potential of each variety and to the concentration of phytohormones.
Even though all explants installed during the multiplication stage formed roots, the use of zeatin (1 mg L−1) clearly promoted better root system development. In this regard, Domínguez and Donayre [29] state that in the pre-acclimation stage, it is essential that seedlings should exhibit high vigor and a good root system, so as to ensure their survival. This, in fact, was confirmed in this study, since the seedlings that showed the best morphological behavior were highly adaptable during the transition to ex vitro conditions, with 100% survival (pre-acclimation). Similar results were described by Valencia- Juárez et al. [30], achieving 100% survival of strawberry seedlings of ‘Nikté’ variety. Jofre-Garfias et al. [31] also recorded up to 90% survival in strawberry of ‘Buenavista’ variety.
Although the best results were obtained with the use of zeatin, its high cost can be a limiting factor for implementing commercial micropropagation protocols in companies and nurseries. That is why, in recent years, coconut water has been used in micropropagation protocols for crops such as olive [32], hazelnut [33], and Raja Bulu banana [34], in certain cases as a substitute element for zeatin [32]. In this study, the use of coconut water produced encouraging results for plant height (5.41 ± 1.00 cm), number of leaves (13.00 ± 3.38), and survival (between 84.45 to 88.89%), but had no significant effects on shoot formation or root development. In plant tissue culture, coconut water is a source of beneficial nutritional and hormonal substances, but it is not always sufficient to promote successful micropropagation, so combining it with cytokinins can improve results [33]. In any case, considering the high prices of zeatin, the use of coconut water is justified from an economic point of view.

4.2. Acclimatization Stage

During acclimatization, plants must have a well-developed root system [35], enabling the plant to have properly assimilated water and nutrients, in addition to being well fixed to the substrate [36]. Accordingly, findings of this study indicate that plants grown in the 1 + 4 g humic acid substrate exhibited, in general, better morphological development. This result, together with the characteristics of the substrate, may be related to the application of humic acid, which in turn promotes root and vegetative growth by improving cation exchange capacity and increasing the number of favorable microorganisms in the soil, thereby improving the adaptive ability of plants [37,38,39]. Importantly, the substrate needs to exhibit good porosity and filtration [40].
Regarding the chlorophyll index, plants grown on substrate 1 + 4 g humic acid had favorable values (40.69 SPAD) for their growth and development, as reported, for example, in peach cultivation, where normal values vary in the range of 39–56 SPAD [41]. Similar values have also been recorded in hydroponic strawberry cultivation with 38.5 to 49.5 SPAD for young and old leaves, in different substrate (50% coco peat + 50% perlite) [42]. Nitrogen is a required element during the growth stage to ensure structural and osmotic functions [43]; therefore, the measurement of the chlorophyll index is useful as an indicator of nitrogen content. Conversely, unsuitable substrate can lead to water stress, resulting in changes in the photosynthetic system and lower chlorophyll levels [44]. Hence, suitable mixtures are vital to ensure good plant development, using easily accessible and low-cost materials [45].
Stomatic conductance is related to gas exchange in leaves, where high readings denote good water supply [46]. Substrate 1 + 4 g humic acid enables a better physiological response of strawberry plants, whereas plants grown on substrate 4 with or without humic acid recorded low levels of stomatal conductance, which may lead to reduced transpiration rate and photosynthetic carbon assimilation [47,48]. This demonstrates, together with water potential, a negative metabolic regulation of developmental processes in plants linked to water stress [49], which was more favored in substrate 4. In this way, changes in stomatal conductance are useful to determine and regulate water loss in plants, which are crucial to establish adequate irrigations [50].
By comparison, the highest level of water potential was recorded in substrate 1 + 4 g of humic acid, which was beneficial for the plants; on the contrary, the plants growing in substrate 4 without humic acid exhibited low values, which affected the growth and development processes [51], which may be due to the delay in cell divisions that occurs at the foliar and root level [52]. Moreover, water potential is a useful indicator to check the water status and its measurement indicates water demand of strawberry plants [53,54].
Accumulated biomass levels were even lower in plants grown on substrate 4. It has been reported that variations in water potential and stomatal conductance led to reductions in plant biomass, because water deficit seriously affects photosynthetic activity [55]. This is demonstrated by Cordoba-Novoa et al. [56], where low water potential (−22.10 Bar) together with low conductance led to a reduction in water in leaves and low biomass accumulation. Furthermore, substrate 4, being more porous (72.73%) than the others, retained less water and generated a greater water deficit, leading to less leaf development in the plants [57], making it unsuitable for acclimatizing strawberry plants of ‘Aroma’ variety.

5. Conclusions

The results achieved in this study describe an efficient protocol for in vitro propagation and ex vitro acclimatization of strawberry variety ‘Aroma’. Indeed, treatment with NaClO (1%) for 5 min showed high efficiency in reducing contamination and increasing meristem viability. Favorably, zeatin at a concentration of 1 mg L−1 was shown to promote growth, sprouting, rooting, and survival of new seedlings. During ex vitro acclimatization, the use of compost + peat-based substrate (substrate 1) plus humic acid yielded more vigorous plants with better morphological and physiological characteristics.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.C.N. and J.J.T.-A.; methodology, J.C.N., J.J.T.-A. and J.B.M.-M.; investigation, J.C.N., N.C.V.-V. and E.H.-H.; formal analysis, N.C.V.-V.; writing—original draft preparation, J.C.N. and J.B.M.-M.; writing—review and editing, J.B.M.-M. and M.G.; supervision, M.O.; project administration, E.H.-H.; funding acquisition, M.O. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The research was funded by SNIP project (312252)/CUI (2252878) “Creación del Servicio de un Laboratorio de Fisiología y Biotecnología Vegetal de la Universidad Nacional Toribio Rodríguez de Mendoza de Amazonas” (Creation of a Plant Physiology and Biotechnology Laboratory Service of the National University Toribio Rodríguez de Mendoza de Amazonas), executed by the Research Institute for the Sustainable Development of Ceja de Selva.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Giampieri, F.; Alvarez-Suarez, J.M.; Mazzoni, L.; Forbes-Hernandez, T.Y.; Gasparrini, M.; Gonzàlez-Paramàs, A.M.; Santos-Buelga, C.; Quiles, J.L.; Bompadre, S.; Mezzetti, B.; et al. Polyphenol-rich strawberry extract protects human dermal fibroblasts against hydrogen peroxide oxidative damage and improves mitochondrial functionality. Molecules 2014, 19, 7798–7816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  2. Etienne, H.; Berthouly, M. Temporary immersion systems in plant micropropagation. PCTOC 2002, 69, 215–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Ariza, M.T.; Martínez-Ferri, E.; Domínguez, P.; Medina, J.J.; Miranda, L.; Soria, C. Effects of harvest time on functional compounds and fruit antioxidant capacity in ten strawberry cultivars. J. Berry Res. 2015, 5, 71–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Beattie, J.; Crozier, A.; Duthie, G.G. Potential Health Benefits of Berries. Curr. Nutr. Food Sci. 2005, 1, 71–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Meyers, K.J.; Watkins, C.B.; Pritts, M.P.; Liu, R.H. Antioxidant and antiproliferative activities of strawberries. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 6887–6892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Hannum, S.M. Potential impact of strawberries on human health: A review of the science. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2004, 44, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Contreras-Paredes, C.A.; Silva-Rosales, L.; Gallegos, V.; Ortiz-Castellanos, M.L.; Jofre-Garfias, A.E.; Dávalos-González, P.A. Incidencia de Infecciones Virales Mezcladas en un Área de Producción de Fresa en Guanajuato, México. Rev. Mex. Fitopatol. 2014, 32, 12–25. [Google Scholar]
  8. Clavijo, R.; Beltrán, A.; Llauger, R.; Rodríguez, A.; Farrés, E.; García, M.E.; Placeres, J.; Betancourt, M.; Avalos, Y.; Rodríguez, M. Apuntes sobre el cultivo de la fresa (Fragaria × ananassa Duch.). Rev. CitriFrut. 2010, 27, 67–71. [Google Scholar]
  9. Rojas, P.; Almada, R.D.; Sandoval, C.; Keller, K.E.; Martin, R.R.; Caligari, P.D.S. Occurrence of aphidborne viruses in southernmost South American populations of Fragaria chiloensis ssp. chiloensis. Plant Pathol. 2013, 62, 428–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Da Fonseca, A.P.; da Silva, E.C.; Pereira, M.B.; de Oliveira, R.P.; Dornelles, A.L.C. Phenotypic stability of strawberry genotypes subjected to variable number of in vitro subcultures. Ciencia Rural 2013, 43, 1345–1350. [Google Scholar]
  11. Quiroz, K.A.; Berríos, M.; Carrasco, B.; Retamales, J.B.; Caligari, P.D.S.; García-Gonzáles, R. Meristem culture and subsequent micropropagation of Chilean strawberry (Fragaria chiloensis (L.) Duch.). Biol. Res. 2017, 50, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Niedz, R.P.; Bausher, M.G. Control of In vitro contamination of explants from greenhouse- and field-grown trees. Vitr. Cell. Dev. Biol. Plant 2002, 38, 468–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Sirijan, M.; Pipattanawong, N.; Chaiprasart, P. Effect of 1-naphthalene acetic acid and 6-benzyladenine on micropropagation of strawberry cultivar ‘Praratchatan No. 80′. Agr. Nat. Resour. 2019, 53, 355–363. [Google Scholar]
  14. Diengngan, S.; Murthy, B.N.S.; Mahadevamma, M. Effective Decontamination and Regeneration Protocol for In Vitro Culture of Strawberry Cv. Chandler. J. Hortic. Sci. 2014, 9, 126–130. [Google Scholar]
  15. Haddadi, F.; Aziz, M.A.; Saleh, G.; Rashid, A.A.; Kamaladini, H. Micropropagation of Strawberry cv. Camarosa: Prolific Shoot Regeneration from In Vitro Shoot Tips Using Thidiazuron with N6-benzylamino-purine. HortScience 2010, 45, 453–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Rahman, W.; Zohora, S.; Talukder, A.I.; Kayess, O. Effect of different hormone combinations on callus induction and plant regeneration of strawberry. Int. J. Adv. Res. 2015, 3, 1244–1250. [Google Scholar]
  17. Dutta, C.; Sen, D. In Vitro Propagation in Strawberry (Fragaria × ananassa Duch.). Indian J. Hill Farming 2019, 2019, 77–81. [Google Scholar]
  18. Nehra, N.S.; Kartha, K.K.; Stushnoff, C.; Giles, K.L. Effect of in vitro propagation methods on field performance of two strawberry cultivars. Euphytica 1994, 76, 107–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. 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]
  20. Casierra-Posada, F.; Peña, G.R.; Peña-Olmos, J.E. Estimación indirecta del área foliar en Fragaria vesca L., Physalis peruviana L., Acca sellowiana (Berg.) Burret, Rubus glaucus L., Passiflora mollissima (Kunth) L. H. Bailey Y. Ficus Carica L. Rev. UDCA Act. Div. Cient. 2008, 11, 95–102. [Google Scholar]
  21. Moradi, K.; Otroshy, M.; Azimi, M.R. Micropropagation of strawberry by multiple shoots regeneration tissue cultures. Int. J. Agric. Technol. 2011, 7, 1755–1763. [Google Scholar]
  22. García-Gonzáles, R.; Quiroz, K.; Carrasco, B.; Caligari, P. Plant tissue culture: Current status, opportunities and challenges. Cienc. Inv. Agr. 2010, 37, 5–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Ko, C.; Al-Abdulkarim, A.M.; Al-Jowid, S.M.; Al-Baiz., A. An effective disinfection protocol for plant regeneration from shoot tip cultures of strawberry. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 2009, 8, 2611–2615. [Google Scholar]
  24. Munir, M.; Iqbal, S.; Baloch, J.U.D.; Khakwani, A.A. In vitro explant sterilization and bud initiation studies of four strawberry cultivars. J. Appl. Hortic. 2015, 17, 192–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Bhatia., P.; Ashwath, N. Improving the Quality of in vitro Cultured Shoots of Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. cv. Red Coat). Biotechnology 2008, 7, 188–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Cüce, M.; Bektaş, E.; Sökmen, A. Micropropagation of Vaccinium arctostaphylos L. via lateral-bud culture. Turk. J. Agric. For. 2013, 37, 40–44. [Google Scholar]
  27. Debnath, A.J.; Gangopadhyay, G.; Basu, D.; Sikdar, S.R. An efficient protocol for in vitro direct shoot organogenesis of Sesamum indicum L. using cotyledon as explant. 3Biotech 2018, 8, 146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Zakaria, H.; Hussein, G.M.; Abdel-Hadi, A.-H.A.; Abdallah, N.A. Improved regeneration and transformation protocols for three strawberry cultivars. GM Crops Food 2013, 5, 27–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Domínguez, G.; Donayre, M.L. Aclimatación de Uncaria tormentosa (Willd.) DC. producida in vitro. Ecología Aplicada 2006, 5, 67–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Valencia-Juárez, M.C.; Escobedo-López, D.; Díaz-Espino, L.F.; González-Pérez, E. Aclimatación ex vitro de plántulas de Fragaria × ananassa Duch. Rev. Mex. Cienc. Agrícolas 2019, 10, 91–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Jofre-Garfias, A.E.; Vazquez-Sanchez, M.N.; Hernandez-Razo, A.R.; Davalos-Gonzalez, P.A. Production and Acclimatization of In Vitro Produced Strawberry Plants. Acta Hortic. 2006, 727, 67–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Peixe, A.; Raposo, A.; Lourenço, R.; Cardoso, H.; Macedo, E. Coconut water and BAP successfully replaced zeatin in olive (Olea europaea L.) micropropagation. Sci. Hortic. 2007, 113, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Prando, M.A.; Chiavazza, P.; Faggio, A.; Contessa, C. Effect of coconut water and growth regulator supplements on in vitro propagation of Corylus avellana L. Sci. Hortic. 2014, 171, 91–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Ajie, W.K.B.; Malinda, R.; Yuniastuti, E.; Yunus, A. In vitro micropropagation of Raja Bulu banana in medium supplemented with coconut water and NAA. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2019, 250, 012014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Dewir, Y.H.; El-Mahrouk, M.E.; Murthy, H.N.; Paek, K.Y. Micropropagation of Cattleya: Improved in vitro rooting and acclimatization. Hortic. Environ. Biotechnol. 2015, 56, 89–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Díaz, L.P.; Namur, J.J.; Bollati, S.A.; Arce, O.E.A. Acclimatization of Phalaenopsis and Cattleya obtained by micropropagation. Rev. Colomb. Biotecnol. 2010, 12, 27–40. [Google Scholar]
  37. Eissa, F.M.; Fathi, M.A.; El-Shall, S.A. The role of humic acid and rootstock in enhancing salt tolerance of “Le-Conte” pear seedlings. J. Agric. Sci. Mansoura Univ. 2007, 32, 3651–3666. [Google Scholar]
  38. Ismail, A.F.; Hussien, S.M.; El-Shall, S.A.; Fathi, M.A. Effect of irrigation and humic acid on Le-Conte pear. J. Agric. Sci. Mansoura Univ. 2007, 32, 7589–7603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Haggag, F.; Shahin, M.F.M.; Mustafa, N.S.; Mahdy, H.A.; Hassan, H.S.A. Studies on the Effect of Vinasse, Amino acids and Humic Acid Substances as Soil Applications on Fruit Quality and Quantity of Manzanillo Olive Trees. Middle East J. Appl. Sci. 2015, 5, 984–991. [Google Scholar]
  40. Lo, S.-F.; Nalawade, S.M.; Kuo, C.-L.; Chen, C.-L.; Tsay, H.-S. Asymbiotic germination of immature seeds, plantlet development and ex vitro establishment of plants of Dendrobium tosaense makino—A medicinally improrant orchid. Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. Plant 2004, 40, 528–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Benati, J.A.; Nava, G.; Mayer, N.A. Spad index for diagnosis of nitrogen status in ‘Esmeralda’ peach. Rev. Bras. Frutic. 2021, 43, e093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Ebrahimi, R.; Ebrahimi, F.; Ahmadizadeh, M. Effect of Different Substrates on Herbaceous Pigments and Chlorophyll Amount of Strawberry in Hydroponic Cultivation System. Am. Eurasian J. Agric. Environ. Sci. 2012, 12, 154–158. [Google Scholar]
  43. Mixquititla-Casbis, G.; Villegas-Torres, O.G.; Andrade-Rodríguez, M.; Sotelo-Nava, H.; Cardoso-Taketa, A.T. Crecimiento, rendimiento y calidad de fresa por efecto del régimen nutrimental. Rev. Mex.Cienc. Agrícolas 2020, 11, 1337–1348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Tembe, K.O.; Chemining’wa, G.N.; Ambuko, J.; Owino, W. Effect of water stress on yield and physiological traits among selected African tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) land races. Int. J. Agron. Agric. Res. 2017, 10, 78–85. [Google Scholar]
  45. Grigatti, M.; Giorgioni, M.E.; Ciavatta, C. Compost-based growing media: Influence on growth and nutrient use of bedding plants. Bioresour. Technol. 2007, 98, 3526–3534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Borowski, E.; Nurzyński, J. Effect of different growing substrates on the plant water relations and marketable fruit yield greenhouse-grown tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.). Acta Agrobot. 2012, 65, 49–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Chaves, M.M.; Oliveira, M.M. Mechanisms underlying plant resilience to water deficits: Prospects for water-saving agriculture. J. Exp. Bot. 2004, 55, 2365–2384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Lawlor, D.W.; Tezara, W. Causes of decreased photosynthetic rate and metabolic capacity in water-deficient leaf cells: A critical evaluation of mechanisms and integration of processes. Ann. Bot. 2009, 103, 561–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Degu, A.; Hochberg, U.; Wong, D.C.J.; Alberti, G.; Lazarovitch, N.; Peterlunger, E.; Castellarin, S.D.; Herrera, J.C.; Fait, A. Swift metabolite changes and leaf shedding are milestones in the acclimation process of grapevine under prolonged water stress. BMC Plant Biol. 2019, 19, 69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Jones, H.G. Stomatal control of photosynthesis and transpiration. J. Exp. Bot. 1998, 49, 387–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Donnelly, D.J.; Skelton, F.E. Comparison of hydathode structure in micropropagated plantlets and greenhouse-grown Q ` ueen Elizabeth’ rose plants. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 1989, 114, 841–846. [Google Scholar]
  52. Zhu, L.-H.; van de Peppel, A.; Li, X.-Y.; Welander, M. Changes of leaf water potential and endogenous cytokinins in young apple trees treated with or without paclobutrazol under drought conditions. Sci. Hortic. 2004, 99, 133–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Jensen, N.L.; Jensen, C.R.; Liu, F.; Petersen, K.K. Water Relations and Abscisic Acid in Pot-grown Strawberry Plants under Limited Irrigation. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 2009, 134, 574–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Ferreyra, R.; Selles, G.; Silva, H.; Ahumada, R.; Muñoz, I.; Muñoz, V. Efecto del agua aplicada en las relaciones hídricas y productividad de la vid «Crimson Seedless». Pesqui. Agropecu. Bras. 2006, 41, 1109–1118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Arbex de Castro Vilas Boas, A.; Page, D.; Giovinazzo, R.; Bertin, N.; Fanciullino, A.-L. Combined Effects of Irrigation Regime, Genotype, and Harvest Stage Determine Tomato Fruit Quality and Aptitude for Processing into Puree. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 1725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Cordoba-Novoa, H.A.; Pérez, M.M.; Cruz, B.E.; Flórez, N.; Magnitskiy, S.; Moreno, L.P. Shading Reduces Water Deficit in Strawberry (Fragaria × ananassa Duch.) Plants during Vegetative Growth. bioRxiv 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Tardieu, F. Plant response to environmental conditions: Assessing potential production, water demand, and negative effects of water deficit. Front. Physiol. 2013, 4, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Agronomy 12 00968 g001 550
Figure 1. Micropropagation of strawberry variety ‘Aroma’: (a) meristems sprouted after 30 days in establishment medium; (b) explants developed after 45 days in multiplication medium, ready to be transferred to pre-acclimation; (c) seedlings in pre-acclimation; (d) plant after 50 days of acclimatization.
Figure 1. Micropropagation of strawberry variety ‘Aroma’: (a) meristems sprouted after 30 days in establishment medium; (b) explants developed after 45 days in multiplication medium, ready to be transferred to pre-acclimation; (c) seedlings in pre-acclimation; (d) plant after 50 days of acclimatization.
Agronomy 12 00968 g001
Table
Table 1. Physical and chemical characteristics of the substrates used for acclimatization of strawberry variety ‘Aroma’.
Table 1. Physical and chemical characteristics of the substrates used for acclimatization of strawberry variety ‘Aroma’.
CharacteristicsValues
Substrate 1Substrate 2Substrate 3Substrate 4
PhysicalApparent Density (g/cm3)0.270.230.150.12
True Density (g/cm3)0.630.690.400.44
Porosity (%)57.0067.0062.5072.73
ChemicalpH5.515.805.044.50
EC (dS/m)1.180.490.910.40
CEC (meq/100g)30.0021.2028.0026.40
Organic matter (%)12.2010.4810.809.84
Available P (ppm)91.3057.7427.9723.06
Exchangeable K+ (meq/100 g)5.603.153.181.11
Exchangeable Ca2+ (meq/100 g)28.1918.109.837.29
Exchangeable Mg2+ (meq/100 g)2.201.111.301.08
Exchangeable Na+ (meq/100 g)0.820.601.120.13
EC: electrical conductivity, CEC: cation exchange capacity. Substrate 1: compost + peat; Substrate 2: carbonized rice straw + peat; Substrate 3: coconut fiber + peat; Substrate 4: perlite + peat; Substrate 4: perlite + peat.
Table
Table 2. Effect of different sterilization treatments on ‘Aroma’ strawberry meristems during in vitro establishment.
Table 2. Effect of different sterilization treatments on ‘Aroma’ strawberry meristems during in vitro establishment.
TreatmentPhenolization (%)Contamination (%)Viability (%)Seedling Height (cm)Number of Leaves
NaClO 0.5%, 3 min30 a60 bc10 cd1.1 ab1 ab
NaClO 0.5%, 5 min10 b80 a10 cd0.7 b0.2 b
NaClO 1.0%, 3 min20 a50 cd30 ab3.1 ab0.9 ab
NaClO 1.0%, 5 min10 b10 d60 a5.7 a3.7 a
H2O2 0.5%, 3 min20 a80 a0 d0 b0 b
H2O2 0.5%, 5 min0 c70 b30 ab2 ab2.4 ab
H2O2.1.0%, 3 min10 b80 a10 cd0.6 b0.3 b
H2O2 1.0%, 5 min0 c80 a20 bc0.9 b0.5 b
HgCl 0.1%, 1.5 min10 b70 b20 bc2 ab0.4 b
HgCl 0.1%, 3 min10 b50 cd40 a2 ab1.7 ab
Means with the same letter in the column do not differ significantly from each other (Tukey, p ≤ 0.05).
Table
Table 3. Effect of growth regulators on multiplication and pre-acclimation of strawberry seedlings ‘Aroma’ variety.
Table 3. Effect of growth regulators on multiplication and pre-acclimation of strawberry seedlings ‘Aroma’ variety.
TreatmentNumber of ShootsSeedling Height (cm)Number of LeavesNumber of RootsRoot Length (cm)Pre-Acclimatization (%)
Control1.63 ± 0.83 cd5.29 ± 1.65 a8.67 ± 0.90 d9.07 ± 2.91 abc5.24 ± 1.25 cd82.22 abcd
0.5 mg L−1 BAP2.69 ± 1.30 b2.85 ± 0.52 b10.09 ± 1.44 d9.93 ± 2.38 ab10.64 ± 4.18 b77.78 bcd
100 mL L−1 coconut water2.27 ± 1.49 bc5.41 ± 1.00 a8.60 ± 0.74 d8.73 ± 1.62 bcd5.95 ± 1.31 cd88.89 ab
200 mL L−1 coconut water2.13 ± 1.06 bc3.07 ± 1.32 b13.00 ± 3.38 bc8.80 ± 3.10 bcd7.61 ± 2.23 c84.45 abc
1.0 mg L−1 Thidiazuron1.33 ± 0.62 cd2.68 ± 0.64 b10.60 ± 1.80 cd7.47 ± 2.03 cd10.83 ± 2.74 b66.67 cd
1.5 mg L−1 Thidiazuron1.40 ± 0.63 cd3.08 ± 0.25 b10.20 ± 1.61d7.73 ± 1.03 bcd10.61 ± 1.08 b62.23 d
1.0 mg L−1 Zeatin4.20 ± 0.86 a5.63 ± 1.99 a17.13 ± 2.80 a11.40 ± 2.38 a13.41 ± 1.31 a100.00 a
2.0 mg L−1 Zeatin2.67 ± 0.98 b2.25 ± 0.35 b14.00 ± 3.80 b4.93 ± 1.83 e4.81 ± 2.00 d82.22 abcd
0.5 mg L−1 AG31.00 ± 0.00 d2.68 ± 0.43 b10.13 ± 1.46 d6.40 ± 0.99 de4.61 ± 1.67 d77.78 bcd
Means with the same letter in the column do not differ significantly from each other (Tukey, p ≤ 0.05).
Table
Table 4. Effect of substrate and humic acid on the morphological performance of ‘Aroma’ strawberry plants during acclimatization.
Table 4. Effect of substrate and humic acid on the morphological performance of ‘Aroma’ strawberry plants during acclimatization.
TreatmentPlant Height (cm)Number of LeavesNumber of CrownsNumber of RootsRoot Length (cm)Leaf Area (cm2)
S1 × 0 g HA11.50 ± 1.10 bc10.67 ± 2.50 bc4.00 ± 0.89 d17.96 ± 0.68 c26.38 ± 1.18 bcd323.55 ± 178.04 abc
S2 × 0 g HA9.77 ± 1.12 c11.17 ± 2.56 bc4.33 ± 0.82 cd17.79 ± 2.17 c27.46 ± 4.48 abcd328.27 ± 93.47 ab
S3 × 0 g HA10.25 ± 1.33 c10.50 ± 1.52 bc5.50 ± 0.55 bc21.67 ± 1.03 b28.96 ± 2.09 abc265.75 ± 92.91 bcd
S4 × 0 g HA6.22 ± 0.67 d9.33 ± 2.66 bc3.33 ± 0.82 d16.13 ± 1.66 c23.58 ± 2.42 de119.00 ± 22.89 d
S1 × 4 g HA15.45 ± 0.91 a15.17 ± 2.14 a7.33 ± 0.82 a26.25 ± 0.76 a31.29 ± 1.75 ab516.17 ± 145.42 a
S2 × 4 g HA12.32 ± 0.90 b12.50 ± 1.76 ab5.83 ± 0.75 b17.58 ± 3.38 c25.67 ± 3.27 cd216.20 ± 45.22 cd
S3 × 4 g HA11.53 ± 0.97 bc15.17 ± 1.33 a5.83 ± 0.75 b22.75 ± 0.76 b32.21 ± 2.43 a302.64 ± 125.13 bcd
S4 × 4 g HA7.42 ± 0.79 d8.00 ± 1.67 c8.00 ± 1.67 c16.38 ± 1.90 c19.00 ± 3.27 e132 ± 26.35 cd
Means with the same letter in the column do not differ significantly from each other (Tukey, p ≤ 0.05). S: substrate; HA: humic acid. Substrate 1: compost + peat; Substrate 2: carbonized rice straw + peat, Substrate 3: coconut fiber + peat and Substrate 4: perlite + peat.
Table
Table 5. Effect of substrate and humic acid on the biomass of strawberry ‘Aroma’ variety plants, during acclimatization.
Table 5. Effect of substrate and humic acid on the biomass of strawberry ‘Aroma’ variety plants, during acclimatization.
TreatmentFoliar Fresh Weight (g)Foliar Dry Weight (g)Root Fresh Weight (g)Root Dry Weight (g)Root Volume (mL)
S1 × 0 g HA17.73 ± 4.08 b3.34 ± 0.64 b8.48 ± 1.14 bcd0.89 ± 0.10 cd8.24 ± 1.05 b
S2 × 0 g HA11.77 ± 3.38 bc2.43 ± 0.85 bcd8.35 ± 2.08 bcd0.91 ± 0.23 cd8.40 ± 2.16 b
S3 × 0 g HA19.25 ± 3.98 b2.97 ± 0.53 bc12.00 ± 1.92 ab0.99 ± 0.17 bc13.03 ± 1.69 a
S4 × 0 g HA8.00 ± 0.32 c1.75 ± 0.14 cd6.88 ± 1.39 cd0.68 ± 3.78 d6.33 ± 1.21 b
S1 × 4 g HA29.46 ± 10.40 a5.40 ± 1.67 a12.94 ± 1.84 a1.31 ± 0.17 a13.45 ± 2.19 a
S2 × 4 g HA12.17 ± 1.21 bc2.44 ± 0.09 bcd9.40 ± 0.53 abc0.94 ± 0.05 cd9.04 ± 0.68 b
S3 × 4 g HA19.35 ± 3.46 b3.44 ± 0.57 b12.75 ± 4.16 a1.22 ± 0.22 ab14.04 ± 4.08 a
S4 × 4 g HA6.21 ± 1.01 c1.49 ± 0.11 d5.44 ± 1.98 d0.67 ± 0.11 d7.65 ± 1.35 b
Means with the same letter in the column do not differ significantly from each other (Tukey, p ≤ 0.05). S: substrate; HA: humic acid. Substrate 1: compost + peat; Substrate 2: carbonized rice straw + peat, Substrate 3: coconut fiber + peat and Substrate 4: perlite + peat.
Table
Table 6. Effect of substrate and humic acid on physiological variables of strawberry plants variety ‘Aroma’ during acclimatization.
Table 6. Effect of substrate and humic acid on physiological variables of strawberry plants variety ‘Aroma’ during acclimatization.
TreatmentChlorophyll Index (SPAD)Stomatal Conductance (mmol/m2/s)Water Potential ψ (Bar)
S1 × 0 g HA38.08 ± 3.52 abc410.73 ± 12.04 b−15.83 ± 2.06 ab
S2 × 0 g HA37.80 ± 3.33 bc394.88 ± 18.93 bc−14.11 ± 1.55 bc
S3 × 0 g HA35.39 ± 2.43 cd409.33 ± 28.08 b−12.92 ± 2.70 c
S4 × 0 g HA32.22 ± 2.53 e370.63 ± 8.09 d−16.74 ± 1.71 a
S1 × 4 g HA40.69 ± 2.57 a434.47 ± 14.20 a−9.69 ± 1.11 e
S2 × 4 g HA37.76 ± 2.40 bc410.28 ± 8.06 b−10.97 ± 1.45 de
S3 × 4 g HA39.27 ± 2.08ab409.42 ± 23.89 b−12.50 ± 1.74 cd
S4 × 4 g HA34.80 ± 3.18 de380.85 ± 24.63 cd−13.37 ± 1.89 c
Means with the same letter in the column do not differ significantly from each other (Tukey, p ≤ 0.05). S: substrate; HA: humic acid. Substrate 1: compost + peat; Substrate 2: carbonized rice straw + peat, Substrate 3: coconut fiber + peat and Substrate 4: perlite + peat.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Neri, J.C.; Meléndez-Mori, J.B.; Tejada-Alvarado, J.J.; Vilca-Valqui, N.C.; Huaman-Huaman, E.; Oliva, M.; Goñas, M. An Optimized Protocol for Micropropagation and Acclimatization of Strawberry (Fragaria × ananassa Duch.) Variety ‘Aroma’. Agronomy 2022, 12, 968. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12040968

AMA Style

Neri JC, Meléndez-Mori JB, Tejada-Alvarado JJ, Vilca-Valqui NC, Huaman-Huaman E, Oliva M, Goñas M. An Optimized Protocol for Micropropagation and Acclimatization of Strawberry (Fragaria × ananassa Duch.) Variety ‘Aroma’. Agronomy. 2022; 12(4):968. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12040968

Chicago/Turabian Style

Neri, Juan C., Jegnes Benjamín Meléndez-Mori, José Jesús Tejada-Alvarado, Nuri Carito Vilca-Valqui, Eyner Huaman-Huaman, Manuel Oliva, and Malluri Goñas. 2022. "An Optimized Protocol for Micropropagation and Acclimatization of Strawberry (Fragaria × ananassa Duch.) Variety ‘Aroma’" Agronomy 12, no. 4: 968. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12040968

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