
Effect of pH medium on the growth of bryophytes cultivated In vitro
Abstract:
Anthropogenic disturbance has affected greatly the diversity and richness of bryophytes. In situ and ex situ studies have helped in the restoration and conservation of species that have been in danger of extinction. It is unknown how the ex situ technique may contribute to propagation of neotropical species. One of the abiotic factor is pH. This can influence the germination of spores or asexual propagules and the dedifferentiation of gametophytic modules. For this reason, we study the effect of pH medium (4, 5, 6) on spores of two mosses (Octoblepharum albidum and Vesicularia vesicularis var. rutilans), moss gametophytes fragments (Neckeropsis disticha, Pilotrichidium antillarum, and Pottiaceae sp.), and also of moss asexual propagule (Calymperes afzelii) for optimal growth according to species requirements.
Later we studied if these species had a more specific pH requirements (5.0, 5.2, 5.4, 5.6, 5.8, 6.0). According to pH treatment, samples were inoculated in pietri dishes in sterile medium (1/2MS), solidified with 1% phytagel and seal with parafilm. At 5-6 weeks, variation in modules (protonema and gametophyte ramets) were measured and compared for each. Species showed different patterns of growth. Among treatments, low survival limited the production of modules on the gametophyte of the Pottiaceae sp. But N. disticha and P. antillarum grew, although did not vary among the different pH treatments. O. albidum & C. afzelii preferred a pH of 6, while growth in V. vesicularis var. rutilans augmented when they were cultivated in pH of 4. On specific requirements, we observed that O. albidum grew best when pH was 5.0, and N. disticha and P. antillarum when pH was of 6.0. C. afzelii had no preference on pH 5-6, obtaining more adaptability for their substrate.
Experience:
ABRCMS is an opportunity that enables us to share with other member of the scientific community. I participated from other symposium and had a view that his one was no different from the others. I knew this was another opportunity that would enable my personal growth as well scientific, but due to my ignorance I didn’t consider how it would do so. I did not challenge my mind for other purpose than presenting my poster and meeting the personal from the different graduate programs. Therefore I had no expectation on how interesting and fulfilling this would be. I arrived at the airport and saw many of my colleagues; they were taking the same flight for this convention. This spark a little of emotion and started to talk to them about their projects and how they were feeling. They were anxious and very interested to meet new people as well their possible mentor for graduate work. I then considered seeking more information about the activities being held and noted which ones I wanted to participate. In overall I got to understand the process for graduate school application, personal statement. Inasmuch, I observed on how to give effective oral presentation by comparing between the plenary scientific session and the concurrent scientific sessions.Poster sessions were very interesting. From: symbiotic relationship between cnidarians and also what molecular mechanism aided in their relationship; to the formation of anti-tumor product for cancer treatments. I also participated in the “interrogation” of the different booth to gather information about what programs and knowledge would be provided depending if it was a graduate program or an association. I was interested mainly on plant biology and therefore got information about the American Society of Plant Biologist, but I also found that there was society of developmental biology (SDB). This was very important for me, mainly because my future graduate work will involve aspect of this area of expertise. My expectations were met far beyond my initial response for this convention and I enjoy very much the social events that were held there.