Suggested doses of proton ions and gamma-rays for mutation induction in 20 plant species

References

• Abu-Reidah IM, Arráez-Román D, Segura-Carretero A, Fernández-Gutiérrez A. 2013. Profiling of phenolic and other polar constituents from hydro-methanolic extract of watermelon (Citrullus lanatus) by means of accurate-mass spectrometry (HPLC-ESI-QTOF-MS). Food Res Int. 51(1):354–362.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baetcke KP, Sparrow AH, Nauman CH, Schwemmer SS. 1967. The relationship of DNA content to nuclear and chromosome volumes and to radiosensitivity (LD50). Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 58(2):533–540.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brunner H, Murata K, Ohmiya H. 2012. Appendix 1–3. In: Shu QY, Forster BP, Nakagawa H, editors. Plant mutation breeding and biotechnology. Wallingford (UK): CAB International; p. 561–589.
   Google Scholar
• Cui T, Luo S, Du Y, Yu L, Yang J, Li W, Chen X, Li X, Wang J, Zhou L. 2019. Research of photosynthesis and genomewide resequencing on a yellow-leaf Lotus japonicus mutant induced by carbon ion beam irradiation. Grassl Sci. 65(1):41–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Einset J, Collins AR. 2018. Genome size and sensitivity to DNA damage by X-rays-plant comets tell the story. Mutagenesis. 33(1):49–51.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerelchuluun A, Manabe E, Ishikawa T, Sun L, Itoh K, Sakae T, Suzuki K, Hirayama R, Asaithamby A, Chen DJ, et al. 2015. The major DNA repair pathway after both proton and carbon-ion radiation is NHEJ, but the HR pathway is more relevant in carbon ions. Radiat Res. 183(3):345–356.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hase Y, Satoh K, Kitamura S, Oono Y. 2018. Physiological status of plant tissue affects the frequency and types of mutations induced by carbon-ion irradiation in Arabidopsis. Sci Rep. 8(1):1394.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• He XQ, Hao XL. 2019. Evaluation of karyotype, genome size and GC content in dianthus chinensis L. Pak J Bot. 52(6):2017–2020.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Im J, Kim WJ, Kim SH, Ha BK. 2017. Effects of proton beam irradiation on seed germination and growth of soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.). J Korean Phys Soc. 71(11):752–757.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• International Atomic Energy Agency. 2021. Joint FAO/IAEA Mutant Variety Database. Vienna, Austria International Atomic Energy Agency; [accessed 2021 Feb 26]. https://mvd.iaea.org/#!Home
   Google Scholar
• Kang R, Seo E, Park A, Kim WJ, Kang BH, Lee JH, Kim SH, Kang SY, Ha BK. 2021. A comparison of the transcriptomes of cowpeas in response to two different ionizing radiations. Plants. 10:567.
   Google Scholar
• Kim SH, Kim SW, Ahn JW, Ryu J, Kwon SJ, Kang BC, Kim JB. 2020. Frequency, spectrum, and stability of leaf mutants induced by diverse γ-ray treatments in two Cymbidium hybrids. Plants. 9(4):546.
   Google Scholar
• Kim SH, Kim YS, Lee HJ, Jo YD, Kim JB, Kang SY. 2019. Biological effects of three types of ionizing radiation on creeping bentgrass. Int J Radiat Biol. 95(9):1295–1300.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kodym A, Afza R, Forster BP, Ukai Y, Nakagawa H, Mba C. 2012. Methodology for physical and chemical mutagenic treatments. In: Shu QY, Forster BP, Nakagawa H, editors. Plant mutation breeding and biotechnology. Wallingford (UK): CAB International; p. 169–180.
   Google Scholar
• Kwon SH, Won JL. 1978. Recommendable dose of X- and gamma-ray for mutation breeding. Korean J Breed Sci. 10:127–132.
   Google Scholar
• Lee YM, Jo YD, Lee HJ, Kim YS, Kim DS, Kim JB, Kang SY, Kim SH. 2015. DNA damage and oxidative stress induced by proton beam in Cymbidium hybrid. Hortic Environ Biotechnol. 56(2):240–246.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee YM, Lee HJ, Kim YS, Kang SY, Kim DS, Kim JB, Ahn JW, Ha BK, Kim SH. 2016. Evaluation of the sensitivity to ionising γ-radiation of a Cymbidium hybrid. J Hortic Sci Biotechnol. 91(2):109–116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li X, Han L, Li Y, Zhang J, Chen J, Lu W, Zhao X, Lai Y, Chen D, Wei G. 2016. Protective effect of sinapine against hydroxyl radical-induced damage to mesenchymal stem cells and possible mechanisms. Chem Pharm Bull (Tokyo). 64(4):319–325.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mao R, Li W, He Z, Bai Z, Xia P, Liang Z, Liu Y. 2019. Physiological, transcriptional, and metabolic alterations in spaceflight-subjected Senna obtusifolia. Plant Physiol Biochem. 139:33–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodríguez-Pérez C, Quirantes-Piné R, Fernández-Gutiérrez A, Segura-Carretero A. 2013. Comparative characterization of phenolic and other polar compounds in Spanish melon cultivars by using high-performance liquid chromatography coupled to electrospray ionization quadrupole-time of flight mass spectrometry. Food Res Int. 54(2):1519–1527.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruiqi G. 1986. The radiation protective effect of sinapine distributed in cruciferous plants on germinating seeds of barley and wheat. Sci China, Ser B-Chem Biol Agric Med Earth Sci. 29(7):723–732.
   Google Scholar
• Sparrow AH, Miksche JP. 1961. Correlation of nuclear volume and DNA content with higher plant tolerance to chronic radiation. Science. 134(3474):282–283.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Teixeira ES, Uppulury K, Privett AJ, Stopera C, McLaurin PM, Morales JA. 2018. Electron nuclear dynamics simulations of proton cancer therapy reactions: water radiolysis and proton- and electron-induced DNA damage in computational prototypes. Cancers. 10(5):136.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yamaguchi H, Hase Y, Tanaka A, Shikazono N, Degi K, Shimizu A, Morishita T. 2009. Mutagenic effects of ion beam irradiation on rice. Breed Sci. 59(2):169–177.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar