Tetraploid induction and cytogenetic characterization for Clematis heracleifolia

Figures & data

Table 1. Inducing effect of colchicine on C. heracleifolia at different treatment times.

Treatment time (h)	No. of treated plants	No. of mutants	No. of deaths	Survival rate (%)	Mutation rate (%)
24 h	15	8	2	86.7	53.3
48 h	15	12	3	80.0	80.0
72 h	15	6	5	66.7	40.0

Figure 1 Metaphase chromosomes of mitosis in root tips of C. heracleifolia. (A) Diploid control; (B) induced tetraploid (10 × 40).

Figure 2 Comparisons for stoma measurement of C. heracleifolia. (A) Diploid control; (B) induced tetraploid (10 × 40).

Table 2. Comparison of stoma size and frequency between mutants and controls.

Material	Stoma width (μm)	Stoma length (μm)	Stoma frequency
Controls	23.46^A	38.78^Ab	36.88^B
Mutants	32.76^B	46.56^aB	28.86^A

Note: Capital letters stand for significance at the 0.05 level and lower case letters stand for significance at the 0.01 level.

Figure 3 Abnormal meiosis behavior of PMCs in induced tetraploid of C. heracleifolia. (A) Diplotene (showing bivalent);(B) diakinesis (showing quadrivalent); (C, D) telophase I (showing laggard chromosomes); (E, F) telophase I and II (showing chromosome bridge); (G, H) asynchronous chromosome segregation at telophase I; (I) triad; (J) heptad.