'INTKRNATfONAL SOCIETY OF SUGARCANE TECHNOLOGISTS
Fourth Congress,
San Juan, Puerto Rico
,iJY.[aroh 1st to 16th, 1932.
Bulletin No. 20.
Conrtesy of the Department of Agriculture and Commerce of Puerto Rico.
ON THE SOMATIC CHROMOSOME NUMBERS OF SUGAR-CANE FORMS AND THE
CHROMOSOME NUMBERS OF INDIGENOUS INDIAN CANES
By DR. G. BREMER
In 1930 I succeeded in obtaining exact eountings
the somatic chromosome numbers of sugar cane
The somatic chromosomes were only counin cells of roottips, which were cultivated under
favourable conditions. For that purpose sugar'
cane had to be planted in quartz sand to which a
nutrient solution was added daily.
The possibility to fix the chromosome numbers in
" somatic cells is of much importance since. many' cane
. , forms flower rarely or never.
.'
...... In the first place I wished to know whether exact
,>, 1chromoeome countings could be obtained from a large
number of cane varieties belonging to different Saccharum species' and species hybrids. The results of
this' research have been published in the "MededeelIngen van het Proefstation vvoor de Java-Suikerin'austrie," jaargang 1931 p.583: A short summary of \
this investigation may followhere,
The haploid chromosome nlu:i:iberof noble sugar
cane, Saceharun'b O'f!icinaru'YI'IA, is. 40. The somatic.
chromosome number 80 could be counted' exactly in
the roottips of E. K.28.
Some sugar canes deviate slightly in outer char.ucteristics from the noble sugar cane, S. of!icinarwJn.
. Probably these canes are species hybrids between officinar1~m and an unknown species. To these canes
belong the Loethers cane and Kara Kara Wa, a cane
variety from British Guiana. Loethers showed 99
chromosomes in the anaphase of reduction division
and about the same number ill the somatic cells. In
Kara Kara Wa the somatic number appeared to be
127 or 128. Therefore also in the chromosome numbers these canes deviate from noble sug-ar cane.
Already at the third congress I laid stress. on the
fact that S. spon.ta;n,eum ought to be divided into different groups or types. The "glagah "-clones, or
Java have 56 chromosomes in the haploid phase and
112 in the somatic. Glagah Tabongo from Celebes
showed 80 chromosomes in the somatic cells and a
clone of Krakatoa 126. S. biflorum (S. aegyptia-
.j
Ci~m.), which HAq'KEL classifies under S. sponiomeusn,
differs much from the Java glagah's in external characteristics, but it'showed exactly the same number 56
in the metaphase of reduction division. The somatic
number 112 could be counted only approximately;
The Kavangire-cane from Porto Rico, belonging to'
S. sinenee, has 118 somatic chromosomes.
In Chunnee, which according to JESUIET should belong to S. barberi, I found 91 chromosomes in the
anaphase of reduction division and about the same
number in the somatic cells.
Jnrn.y )pcture at the third Concrees I mentioned
that the 'I'anangge cane of Celebes and Borneo has
30,chromosomes in the haploid phase, the smallest
number found is Saccharum; Already in 1924 I supposed that this cane should belong to an unknown
Saccharuan. species. In roottips of tl;J.is cane I could
count exactly 60 chromosomes.
The hybrids between S. of!icinaltf'um, and S. sponta:
neum: of Java. show exactly 136 chromosomes in the
anaphase of reduction division. Since the sum of
the haploid numbers of the parents is 96, it appears
therefore that there is an increase of 40 chromosomes,
the haploid number of sugar cane. Now this increase of 40 chromosomes could also be stated in the
somatic cells of Kassoer and G. 107, a hybrid from
the crossing Striped Preanger X Glagah alas Troeno.
Furthermore I counted the somatic numbers of
some of our POJ-canes. POJ 2364 showed exactly 148
chromosomes, the number which I formerly counted
in the anaphase of reduction division. In eells.tof
roottips of POJ 2878 I counted 119'--121 chromosomes, in the anaphase Of reduction division, 119-120
ehromosomes were found. POJ 2940 has 97 ehromosomes in the somatic cells and POJ 2961, a hybrid.,
between POJ 2878 and. 2940, 109, that means exactly
the sum of the haploid numbers 60 and 49 of the
parents.
~.". This investigation demonstrated that the's6.~atic
~hromosome.;numbers could be counted in carle .va-
INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF SUGAR CANE TECHNOLOGISTS
2
rieties which belong to widely different species or
groups. So it would probably be possible to fix the
somatic chromosome numbers of a large number of
forms in each of those groups.
One of the cane groups, an investigation of which
had to be taken into consideration, was that of the
indigenous Indian Cane Varieties, since we have still
very little information about their place in taxonomy.
Many of these cane varieties did not flower at all.
Others are sterile to such a degree that they don't
form normal anthers. Therefore only of a small
number of them it was possible to count the chromosome numbers in the generative cells.
Dr. BARBER divides the Indian canes into 5 groups;
the Sunnabile group, MUngo group, Saretha group,
Pansahi group and Nargori group. To each of these
groups belong a large" number of varieties. Prof.
JES'WIET identified the Pansahi group with BoxBURGH'S Sacc~ar1t1n smense. The four other groups
he considered to belong to one Saccharum specie'S,
which he named Sacchar1,~1n b,wrberi.
To Saccharum: sinwnse Roxs. belong a large number of Chinese and Indian canes, including Uba,
Kavangire, Zwinga and Cayana. I mentioned above
that I found 118 chromosomes in the somatic cells
of Kavangire and formerly I found about the same
number in Uba.
The present investigation includes only those varieties, which according tOJ:mSWIET, should belong
S. barberi,
The following numbers were found:
to
I Somatic
Simnabile group
Haploid 1
Naanal Oolrnbatore 1921. . , .' , ' , , , . , , , ',,'' , , , , . , , , . , ...
Khadya Coirnbatore 1921. ' .. , . , , , . , . , , , .. , , , . , , , , . , "
Bansa Ooimbatore 1921. , , , , . , . ' , , , , ' , , , , , . , , , . , ' , . , ,
Bunuabile Ooimbatore 1921, . , ' , , , . , , , , , , . ' , ' .. , . , . , "
Rakhra Ooimbatore 1921..", '" , " " " , ""
..
Rakrl Shahjahanpur A. 42 1920.. ,
Dhaulu Ooimbatore 1921.. ...... ,
,."",.,.,.,."
""." .... ,
", .. ""."
, . , . , , , , .. , ,
""""""
82/2
,...........
,." .. ,.,.',
116
116
116
116
Mungo Coimbatore 1921. "
',
" "I"'" ""',"
Hemja Ooimbatore 1921.; , , , . , , , , , . , . " . .
,.,,',
,
Burll Ooimbatore 1921.
, .. " .. " ' .. .. .. ..
82/2
Katara Ooimbatere 1921. . , .. , , , . , , , , , , , , ," . , . , ., , . , " """"""
Sarauti Ooimbatore 1921..."" ... """",.,.", .. ", " .. ,.,.".,
BuxariaOoim
Coimbatore
1921.
"":.,.",.,,.
',,,
Matna
batore 1921.,
"
, .. ,, , .. , .. ,
.
Rheora Ooimbatore 1921. , ' . ' , , . , , , , , , , , , , , , . , , , , , , , " .. ",.".",
Reora Shahlahanpur A 18 1920,." , .. , " , " " " ,."", """"""
(deviating from Rheora Ooimbatore)
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
Mungo Group
I''''''''''''
The haploid numbers of Rakhra and Burli could
be counted with great exactness: the somatic number, however, only in favourable conditions. The
most distinct somatic divisions always showed exactly
82 chromosomes.
From the Nargori group very good nucleardivisions could be obtained. The number found were:
Nargori Group
Haploid I Somatic
Katai Ooim batore 1921." , .... , " .. " " .. , .. , .. , .. ".. ,,, .. ,,,,,,,
Sararo Ooim batore 1921" , ' .. " ' " , , " .. ' .. " " .. " , " ,,,,, .... ,,,
Hathooni Behar 1925, ' , , , , , ' , , , , , ' , ' , , , , , , , ' , , , , , , , ., ",,',"""
Baruk Behar 1925".,." ,., " """'" , ".,., ' .. '.' " ,
, " ,.' " ,
Manga Ooim batore 1921. , " , , " " .... , .. " " , .. ' " "
, .. ,
Kewali Ooimbatore 1921. " , , . , , ' , , , , , . , , , , , ' , . , , , , , ' .
.,,.,,,,
124
124
124
124
107
107
Saretha Group
Ohunnee 1895, , . , , ' , ' , , . , . , , . , , , , , , . , . , , ' , , , , , , , , , . , , ,
91/2
Katha Ooimbatore 1920".".""., ... ,."""",,,,., About 90/2
Kansar Colmhatore 1920",.,.,.".".,.""",."".,
Saretha Ooimbatore 1920.", ,.,." " " " ,.,., " " ,., " ,
Bnrra Ohunnee Bhahjahanpur 1920" . ' . ' . , . , , , . , . , , . ,
N agf~'ifa~~t~~I~;gJ~) ~,~:~1: ~~.~l:a~t.~l:i~t~c~ b.el~~gi.~~ ., .,., ..
Maneria Oonnbatore (also Saretha group) , , ., . ' .. , .. ,
92/2
92/2
91/21
' .. ",
91/2
A bout 91
90 or 91
89-91
91
1 Since the reduction division is mostly somewhat irregular, I mention
here the total number Of chromosomes, found in .the anaphase of this division,
divided by two,
'
Besides the above mentioned canes we have in the
collection of our Experiment Station atPasoeroean
three Indian varieties, which were imported by BOBUS
in 1895 and formerly were planted in a mixture
under the name Ruokree. In 1917 JESWIET separated this mixture into three clones Ruckree I, II
and III.
Ruokreo II shows much resemblance to the Saretha
group and has about 90/2 chromosomes haploid.
Ruckree III, very similar to Rakhra and, Dhaulu,
has 82 somatic chromosomes.
Ruckree I, probably more intermediate between
Saretha and Dhaulu, has exactly 90 chromosomes in
the somatic phase.
From' this investigation some important conclusions may be drawn.
In the first place it appears that all the groups of
BARBER have their own typical chromosome number:
82 in the Mungo group, 116 in the Sunnabile group,
90~92 in the Saretha group and 124 in the Nargori
group. Since these groups have not only their special
morphological characters but also their specific chromosome number, it seems to me that it will be rather
difficult to classify all varieties in one species, S.
borberi.
In the second place it is striking that-within the
Sunnabile and the Nargori group there are numbers
deviating from the typical ones.
Sunnabile and the canes closely related, to it have
116 chromosomes, but Dhaulu and the closely related
Rakhra and Rakri 82.
Our Dhaulu shows an almost complete resemblance
to the picture of Dhaulu of Gurdaspuf/at' plate XIV
of BARBER'S publication. About Dhaulu of Phillanr
BARBER writes at p.7 of his "Studies in Indian
Sugar canes No.1":
('This cane shows sufficient resemblance to Dhaulu
of Gurdaspur to warrant the suggestion that it has
INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF SUGAR CANE TECHNOLOGISTS
arisen from. it" and further at p.8 "This cane appears to be almost identical With Bodi and 'Dhaur of
the Meerut division and is an elongated, primitive
form of the great Mango group of Rheora,' Hemja,
Burli, Kuswar, etc., of the United Provinces and
Bihar. "
So it is evident that. BAR.BER supposes a relation
between the Dhaulucanes .and the Mungo group.
'Since Dhaulu also shows the same chromosome number as the Mungo ioanes-i-the very particular number 82-, which differs from that of Sunnabile. T
. should think that, as far I can judge this question,
it would be preferable to separate the Dhaulu-canes
'. from the Sunnabile group and to create a separate
Dhaulu group, which shows a close relation to the
'Mungo group.
It is very surprising that there are two different
'chromosome numbers in the Nargori group. The
canes Manga and Kewali with 107 chromosomes show
very great resemblance in morphological characters
'to Sararo, Katai, Hathooni and Baruk with 124 chro, ,osomes. One might suppose that Mlanga anld Keali should be hybrids between a cane of the Nargori
oup and one of the Saretha group, since the sum
. the haploid numbers 6.2, and 45 (or 46) is exactly
7. In that case it also should be. necessary to
ppose that the morphological characteristics of the
, rgori group in the hybrid should dominate over
.OSe of the Saretha group. Of course, other posbilities may not be excluded, but it i~ very suggesYe, while moreover the odd somatic number 107 of
's~ canes is an indication for a pronounced hybrid
ure.
n the Saretha group the canes Kansar and Saretha
e 92 chromosomes; Chunnee, Burra Chunnee
Maneria 91. The cane Ruckree I has 90 chroossibly the canes with 91 chromosomes are hys between a cane with 9.2 chromosomes and one
BO chromosomes.
h relation to the chromosome numbers of these
,ian canes the chromosome number of one other
., has still been fixed.
.t year it struck Dr. Posrmrarrs that there. exists
eat resemblance between" Geel Egyptisch riet.'
low Egyptian Cane), which must be identical to
'.'Creole Cane,'" and the canes of the Mungo '
Probably the Creole Cane has been brought
3
by Arabians from India to North A;frica and Spain.
In NOEL DEERR'S book "Cane Sugar" o~e may read
about it at p.47: "It is perhaps to be associated
with the Booree cane of India since in a. report to
the East India Company of date 1792 there is found
the remark: "West Indian planters say the same
sort 'which grows in the West .Indian Islands". Also
in their paper" Cane Cultivation in Northern India"
at the third congress 1 NOEL DEERR and C. G. ATKINS
write: "Puri which definitely is West Indian Creole
cane-" so it seems very probable indeed that Creole
Cane occurs in India.
'
Past year in the field of the' Experiment Station
at Pasoeroean Creole Cane was planted next to the
Mungo Cane and it appeared that there was a striking resemblance in many characters, but the stems
of the Creole Cane were thicker and it looked much
more like a noble cane; Creole is also a much
weaker cane; in June of this year it was already
almost dead, when Mungo still had green leaves.
I supposed, therefore, that Creole Cane possibly
would be a hybrid between a cane of the Mungo
group and a weak noble variety, belonging to S. officinan~1n.
I found in the anaphase of reduction division 81
chromosomes and also in the somatic cells of Creole
Cane the number 81 could be counted with great aecuracy since the somatic cells gave very distinct rlivisions. ,The number 81 is exactly the sum ,of the
haploid number 41 of the Mungo group and 40 of
S. officinarum.
.
There is still another cytological characteristic indicating a close relation between Creole Cane and
the Indian Cane varieties.
The latter varieties-including those of the Saretha
group, Burli, Rakhra,Kewali and varieties of S. sinensi>--show during the metaphase and telophase of
the reduction division in the pollen mother cells 'in
the cytoplasma, usually near one of the poles, a long
membranaceous body, which must be a rest of the nucleolus. I never found this body in varieties of S.
officinarum, and S. eponiameum; It appears to be a
special character of the Indian canes. This membranaceous body is also present in "GeelEgyptisch
riet ' '. This too is a strong indication for a close relation between the Creole Cane and the Indian Cane
varieties.
1
India.
Noel Doerr and O. G. Atkins. Oane Oultivation in Northern
Proceedings 'I'hird congress Int. Sugar Oane Techn. p. 239. '
© Copyright 2024 ExpyDoc
