<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v2.3 20070202//EN" "journalpublishing.dtd">
<article article-type="review-article" dtd-version="2.3" xml:lang="EN" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Front.Genome Ed.</journal-id>
<journal-title>Frontiers in Genome Editing</journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="pubmed">Front.Genome Ed.</abbrev-journal-title>
<issn pub-type="epub">2673-3439</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name>Frontiers Media S.A.</publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">734951</article-id>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fgeed.2021.734951</article-id>
<article-categories>
<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
<subject>Genome Editing</subject>
<subj-group>
<subject>Review</subject>
</subj-group>
</subj-group>
</article-categories>
<title-group>
<article-title>Protoplast Regeneration and Its Use in New Plant Breeding Technologies</article-title>
<alt-title alt-title-type="left-running-head">Reed and Bargmann</alt-title>
<alt-title alt-title-type="right-running-head">Protoplast Regeneration in NPBT</alt-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Reed</surname>
<given-names>Kelsey M.</given-names>
</name>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes">
<name>
<surname>Bargmann</surname>
<given-names>Bastiaan O. R.</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="corresp" rid="c001">&#x2a;</xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1197180/overview"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff>School of Plant and Environmental Sciences, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Virginia Tech, <addr-line>Blacksburg</addr-line>, <addr-line>VA</addr-line>, <country>United&#x20;States</country>
</aff>
<author-notes>
<fn fn-type="edited-by">
<p>
<bold>Edited by:</bold> <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/67113/overview">Matthew R. Willmann</ext-link>, Pairwise, United&#x20;States</p>
</fn>
<fn fn-type="edited-by">
<p>
<bold>Reviewed by:</bold> <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/800591/overview">Yanpeng Wang</ext-link>, Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology (CAS), China</p>
<p>
<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/367872/overview">Bastian Minkenberg</ext-link>, Inari Agriculture, Inc., United&#x20;States</p>
</fn>
<corresp id="c001">&#x2a;Correspondence: Bastiaan O. R. Bargmann, <email>bastiaan@vt.edu</email>
</corresp>
<fn fn-type="other">
<p>This article was submitted to Genome Editing in Plants, a section of the journal Frontiers in Genome Editing</p>
</fn>
</author-notes>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>03</day>
<month>09</month>
<year>2021</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="collection">
<year>2021</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>3</volume>
<elocation-id>734951</elocation-id>
<history>
<date date-type="received">
<day>01</day>
<month>07</month>
<year>2021</year>
</date>
<date date-type="accepted">
<day>11</day>
<month>08</month>
<year>2021</year>
</date>
</history>
<permissions>
<copyright-statement>Copyright &#xa9; 2021 Reed and Bargmann.</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>2021</copyright-year>
<copyright-holder>Reed and Bargmann</copyright-holder>
<license xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">
<p>This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these&#x20;terms.</p>
</license>
</permissions>
<abstract>
<p>The development of gene-editing technology holds tremendous potential for accelerating crop trait improvement to help us address the need to feed a growing global population. However, the delivery and access of gene-editing tools to the host genome and subsequent recovery of successfully edited plants form significant bottlenecks in the application of new plant breeding technologies. Moreover, the methods most suited to achieve a desired outcome vary substantially, depending on species&#x27; genotype and the targeted genetic changes. Hence, it is of importance to develop and improve multiple strategies for delivery and regeneration in order to be able to approach each application from various angles. The use of transient transformation and regeneration of plant protoplasts is one such strategy that carries unique advantages and challenges. Here, we will discuss the use of protoplast regeneration in the application of new plant breeding technologies and review pertinent literature on successful protoplast regeneration.</p>
</abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd>protoplast</kwd>
<kwd>regeneration</kwd>
<kwd>gene editing</kwd>
<kwd>crop improvement</kwd>
<kwd>tissue culture</kwd>
</kwd-group>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body>
<sec id="s1">
<title>Introduction</title>
<p>Since the advent of CRISPR/Cas9 and related gene-editing technology, direct modification of crop genomes has become the way of the future for advanced breeding techniques in agriculture (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B109">Zhang et&#x20;al., 2019</xref>). These new plant breeding technologies (NPBT) have opened avenues of fundamental and translational research that were previously inaccessible. In contrast to transgenic approaches, NPBT can avoid costly and time-consuming regulatory hurdles and accelerate the introduction of new crop lines to the ag market (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B58">Lassoued et&#x20;al., 2021</xref>).</p>
<p>Breeding for the introgression of new traits from a wild relative or mutagenized population into an elite crop cultivar is a lengthy procedure, requiring numerous rounds of selection to regain the characteristics of the parental strain (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">Figure&#x20;1A</xref>). The ability to efficiently modify crop genes can save several years over conventional breeding approaches and phenotypic recurrent selection (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Bull et&#x20;al., 2017</xref>). However, the current most commonly used NPBT method of inserting a transgenic CRISPR/Cas9 construct into the host genome and then crossing it out again to obtain transgene-free progeny still requires multiple rounds of selection (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">Figure&#x20;1B</xref>). This is especially true for highly heterozygous and/or outcrossing&#x20;crops.</p>
<fig id="F1" position="float">
<label>FIGURE 1</label>
<caption>
<p>Schematic Representation of the Application of New Plant Breeding Technologies.</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fgeed-03-734951-g001.tif"/>
</fig>
<p>In contrast to conventional breeding or transgenic CRISPR/Cas9 approaches, gene editing through transient transformation and regeneration of protoplasts can achieve the desired genetic outcome within a single clonal generation by avoiding the integration of foreign DNA into the host genome (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">Figure&#x20;1C</xref>). Aside from the potential to speed up the application of NPBT, the use of protoplasts may have numerous other advantages.</p>
<sec id="s1-1">
<title>Advantages of Using Protoplasts in NPBT</title>
<p>As stated above, the use of transient transformation of protoplasts can circumvent transgenesis (the integration of genetic material from one organism into the genome of another organism). The enzymatic removal of the plant cell wall allows for the introduction of foreign DNA, RNA, or protein into protoplasts through either polyethylene glycol (PEG) treatment or electroporation. Although relatively infrequent, the use of DNA (often in the form of plasmids) does not fully preclude the random integration of transgenes (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Lin et&#x20;al., 2018</xref>). However, CRISPR/Cas9 can also be expressed through transformation with mRNA encoding the Cas9 enzyme along with the desired guide RNA (gRNA) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B108">Zhang et&#x20;al., 2016</xref>). Alternatively, protoplasts can be transformed with ribonucleoprotein complexes, consisting of Cas9 associated with the gRNA (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B97">Svitashev et&#x20;al., 2016</xref>). The latter two approaches more effectively preclude the integration of foreign DNA, although there have been cases where DNA-template contamination in the <italic>in&#x20;vitro</italic> transcribed mRNA or gRNA has led to insertions, e.g. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Andersson et&#x20;al., 2018</xref>). Particle bombardment is a potential alternative for transient delivery method for DNA-free gene-editing tools, e.g. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B60">Liang et&#x20;al., 2018</xref>). However, it may suffer from limitations in transformation efficiency and the regeneration of chimeric plants (as discussed below).</p>
<p>If the goal of the gene-editing approach goes beyond site-specific insertions and/or deletions for the knock-out of gene function but instead aims for specific nucleotide substitutions or insertion of a specific sequence through homologous recombination, there is a need for the co-introduction of a DNA-repair template (as in oligo directed mutagenesis) or a donor sequence, respectively. Prime editing and viral replicons are potential methods to deliver such templates and donors transgenically (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">&#x10c;erm&#xe1;k et&#x20;al., 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B62">Lin et&#x20;al., 2020</xref>). However, in addition to the potential for a non-transgenic outcome, the use of protoplasts allows for more control over the amount of template or donor delivered and effect higher precision and efficiency, e.g. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B90">Sauer et&#x20;al., 2016</xref>).</p>
<p>In many plant species, the lack of host susceptibility to <italic>Agrobacterium</italic> transformation limits the use of transgenic NPBT approaches. This is seen in particular in monocots (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">Hwang et&#x20;al., 2017</xref>). Host-pathogen incompatibility is also expected to be a limiting factor in the applicability of viruses for the delivery of gene-editing tools (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B65">Ma et&#x20;al., 2020</xref>). In such cases, the use of protoplasts (or particle bombardment) may be a feasible alternative delivery method.</p>
<p>Chimerism (where only parts of the regenerated plant are descended from an edited cell) can be an issue when using conventional, tissue-culture based approaches where a callus intermediate is used, e.g. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Charrier et&#x20;al., 2019</xref>). This phenomenon occurs because <italic>de novo</italic> shoots or embryos can be formed from a group of cells rather than a single antecedent. In the case of protoplasts, regenerated plants are (in most cases) derived from a single cell, thereby avoiding this potential problem. Chimerism can be a concern especially when non-selectable, non-transgenic approaches are used together with conventional tissue culture, e.g. transient transformation with <italic>Agrobacterium</italic> or particle bombardment. Additionally, such non-selectable strategies can suffer from low editing efficiency in the regenerated plants because only the cells on the surface of the tissue are potentially edited whereas regeneration can also occur from the numerous non-transformed cells. In comparison, protoplast transformation efficiencies are much higher and plants regenerated from protoplasts transiently transformed with editing tools will therefore have better chance of being successfully edited.</p>
<p>However, a glaring limitation in the use of protoplasts for NPBT is the challenges faced in the regeneration of plants from single cells and there appears to be no universal strategy that applies to diverse (sub)species. Plant tissue culture in general, and protoplast regeneration in particular, is often lightheartedly considered more of an artform than a science, requiring an experienced eye and instinctual decision making, as comprehensive systematic approaches are too vast in scope to be feasible. In this review, we will discuss a compilation of literature on plant regeneration from protoplasts. We will deliberate protoplast isolation, protoplast culture, and plant regeneration from protoplast culture, specifically in the light of the application of&#x20;NPBT.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="s2">
<title>Obtaining Protoplasts</title>
<sec id="s2-1">
<title>Source Tissue</title>
<p>The tissue from which protoplasts are derived is very important for obtaining regenerable starting material. The genotype, organ or tissue, and growth conditions of the plants used can be a significant determinant in regeneration success.</p>
<sec id="s2-1-1">
<title>Genotype</title>
<p>Different cultivars or ecotypes can have widely varying success rates in tissue culture and protoplast regenerative capacity. Depending on the species being worked with and the end goal of the application, it is recommended to assess the regenerative capacity of multiple genotypes and select the most suitable for further&#x20;use.</p>
<p>When comparing four different Arabidopsis (<italic>Arabidopsis thaliana</italic>) ecotypes (Col-0, Ws-2, No-0, and HR-10), all gave a similar number of protoplasts with an optimized digestion, but differed significantly when comparing optimal protoplast division media, callus induction media, and shoot induction media (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">Jeong et&#x20;al., 2021</xref>). Ws-2 showed the highest regeneration efficiency, whereas the Col-0, No-0, and HR-10 had relatively ineffective regeneration rates, regardless of efforts to vary the composition of media and tissue culture methods.</p>
<p>Comparison of three different <italic>Cyclamen</italic> species (<italic>C. graecum</italic>, <italic>C. mirabile</italic>, and <italic>C. alpinum</italic>) found significant differences in protoplast culture and regeneration, including division frequencies (often referred to as plating efficiency) and morphological appearance of regenerating embryos (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B83">Prange et&#x20;al., 2010a</xref>). Plants were regenerated from protoplasts derived from embryogenic callus in all three species, but had different efficiencies in microcallus formation and development of somatic embryos. Interestingly, there was no correlation between the regenerative capacity of the source embryogenic callus and the ability of the protoplasts to divide and regenerate, with <italic>C. graecum</italic> performing the worst in regeneration from callus but showing the highest protoplast division&#x20;rates.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2-1-2">
<title>Organ or Tissue</title>
<p>Different source materials for protoplast isolation can affect the number, size, viability, and regenerative capacity of protoplasts. There are examples of protoplast isolation and regeneration from numerous tissues, including leaves, cotyledons, roots, petioles, hypocotyls, petals, callus, and suspension cultures (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">Table&#x20;1</xref>).</p>
<table-wrap id="T1" position="float">
<label>TABLE 1</label>
<caption>
<p>Obtaining Protoplasts.</p>
</caption>
<table>
<thead valign="top">
<tr>
<th align="left">Species</th>
<th align="center">Tissue Source</th>
<th align="center">Pre-digestion</th>
<th align="center">Enzyme Composition</th>
<th align="center">Digestion Buffer</th>
<th align="center">Conditions</th>
<th align="center">Yield</th>
<th align="center">Reference</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody valign="top">
<tr>
<td align="left">American Elm <italic>(Ulmus americana)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Cell suspension</td>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">0.2% cellulase Onozuka RS, 0.1% Driselase, 0.03% pectolyase Y-23</td>
<td align="left">0.5&#xa0;M mannitol, 2.5&#xa0;mM MES, CPW salts</td>
<td align="left">2&#xa0;h, dark, 25&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">2 &#xd7; 10<sup>6</sup> per ml of packed cell volume</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">Jones et&#x20;al. (2015)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Amur cork tree <italic>(Phellodendron amurense)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Callus</td>
<td align="left">Sliced</td>
<td align="left">1% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 1% Driselase</td>
<td align="left">0.6&#xa0;M mannitol</td>
<td align="left">8&#xa0;h</td>
<td align="left">5.5 x 10<sup>5</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 90% viability</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Azad (2012)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Arabidopsis <italic>(Arabidopsis thaliana)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Seedlings</td>
<td align="left">Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">1% cellulase Celluclast 1.5&#xa0;L, 2% carbohydrase Viscozyme L, 1% pectinase Pectinex ultra SP-L</td>
<td align="left">0.47&#xa0;M mannitol, 10&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 10&#xa0;mM MES</td>
<td align="left">12&#xa0;h, dark, 50&#xa0;rpm, RT</td>
<td align="left">1 &#xd7; 10<sup>7</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>
</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">Jeong et&#x20;al. (2021)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Banana <italic>(Musa paradisiacal)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Embryogenic cell suspension</td>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">3.5% cellulase R-10, 1% macerozyme R-10, 0.15% pectolyase Y-23</td>
<td align="left">204&#xa0;mM KCl, 67&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>
</td>
<td align="left">10&#x2013;12&#xa0;h, dark, 50&#xa0;rpm, 27&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">6 &#xd7; 10<sup>6</sup> per ml of packed cell volume</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Dai et&#x20;al. (2010)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="4" align="left">Cabbage <italic>(Brassica oleracea var. capitata)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Cotelydons</td>
<td align="left">Sliced and Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">cellulase, pectinase (concentrations not disclosed)</td>
<td align="left">0.5&#xa0;M mannitol, 3&#xa0;mM MES, CPW salts</td>
<td align="left">Overnight, dark, 30&#xa0;rpm, 25&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B42">Jie et&#x20;al. (2011</xref>)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Leaves</td>
<td align="left">Sliced and Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">0.5% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 0.1% pectolyase Y-23</td>
<td align="left">0.4&#xa0;M mannitol, 3&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 2&#x20;mM MES</td>
<td align="left">18&#xa0;h, dark, 20&#xa0;rpm, 25&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">not disclosed, 88% viability</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B52">Kie&#x142;kowska and Adamus (2019)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Hypocotyls</td>
<td align="left">Sliced and Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">0.5% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 0.1% pectolyase Y-23</td>
<td align="left">0.4&#xa0;M mannitol, 3&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 2&#xa0;mM MES</td>
<td align="left">18&#xa0;h, dark, 20&#xa0;rpm, 25&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">not disclosed, 92% viability</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B51">Kie&#x142;kowska and Adamus (2021)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Leaves and hypocotyls</td>
<td align="left">Sliced and Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">1% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 0.1% macerozyme R-10</td>
<td align="left">0.8&#xa0;M sucrose, KM medium</td>
<td align="left">16&#x2013;18&#xa0;h, dark, 30&#xa0;rpm, 25&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">Leaves: 2 &#xd7; 10<sup>6</sup>&#x20;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>; Hypocotyls: 0.7 &#xd7; 10<sup>6</sup>&#xa0;fw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>; 60&#x2013;90% viability</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">Kie&#x142;kowska and Adamus (2012)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Canola (<italic>Brassica napus</italic>)</td>
<td align="left">Leaves</td>
<td align="left">Sliced</td>
<td align="left">1% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 0.1% macerozyme R-10</td>
<td align="left">0.4&#xa0;M sucrose, K3 medium</td>
<td align="left">14&#x2013;18&#xa0;h, dark, 24&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">1 x 10<sup>7</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>
</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B121">Sahab et&#x20;al. (2019)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" align="left">Carrot <italic>(Daucus spp.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Leaves</td>
<td align="left">Sliced and Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">1% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 0.1% pectolyase Y-23</td>
<td align="left">0.6&#xa0;M mannitol, 5&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 10&#xa0;mM MES</td>
<td align="left">14&#x2013;16&#xa0;h, dark, 30&#xa0;rpm, 26&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Grzebelus and Skop (2014)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Leaves and hypocotyls</td>
<td align="left">Sliced and Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">1% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 0.1% pectolyase Y-23</td>
<td align="left">0.6&#xa0;M mannitol, 5&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 20&#xa0;mM MES</td>
<td align="left">14&#x2013;18&#xa0;h, 30&#xa0;rpm, 26&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">Leaves: 3.21 x 10<sup>6</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 74% viability; Hypocotyls: 0.96 x 10<sup>6</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>
</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">Grzebelus et&#x20;al. (2012)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Leaves</td>
<td align="left">Sliced and Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">1% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 0.1% pectolyase Y-23</td>
<td align="left">0.6&#xa0;M mannitol, 5&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 20&#x20;mM MES</td>
<td align="left">12&#x2013;16&#xa0;h, dark, 30&#xa0;rpm, 26&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">2.8 x 10<sup>6</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 72&#x2013;93% viability</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B63">Ma&#x107;kowska et&#x20;al. (2014)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Cauliflower <italic>(Brassica oleracea var. botrytis)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Hypocotyls</td>
<td align="left">Sliced and Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">1% cellulase R-10, 0.1% macerozyme R-10</td>
<td align="left">0.4&#xa0;M sucrose, B5 salts and vitamins</td>
<td align="left">15&#xa0;h, dark, 24&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">5.2 x 10<sup>6</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>
</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B94">Sheng et&#x20;al. (2011)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Chicory and Endive <italic>(Cichorium intybus and endivia)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Leaves</td>
<td align="left">Sliced and Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">1% cellulase Caylase 345, 0.5% pectinase Caylase M2</td>
<td align="left">0.5&#x20;M mannitol, 30&#xa0;mM sucrose, 0.55&#xa0;mM inositol, 0.05&#xa0;mM FeNa-EDTA, 1/2 MS macro elements, Heller micro elements, Morel &#x26; Wetmore vitamins</td>
<td align="left">16&#xa0;h, dark, 25&#xa0;rpm, 23&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">1 x 10<sup>6</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 85&#x2013;95% viability</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Deryckere et&#x20;al. (2012)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" align="left">Chrysanthemum <italic>(Chrysanthemum&#xa0;morifolium)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Leaves</td>
<td align="left">Sliced and Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">1.5% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 0.3% macerozyme R-10, 0.1% Driselase</td>
<td align="left">0.4&#xa0;M mannitol, 5&#xa0;mM MES, CPW salts</td>
<td align="left">4&#xa0;h, dark, 40&#xa0;rpm, 25&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">6.32&#x2009;&#xd7;&#x2009;10<sup>5</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 91.7% viability</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Adedeji et&#x20;al. (2020)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Leaves and callus</td>
<td align="left">Sliced and Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">Leaves: 0.5% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 0.3% macerase R-10, 0.1% Driselase; Callus: 1.5% cellulase Onozuka R- 10, 0.5% macerase R-10, 0.1% Driselase</td>
<td align="left">0.4&#xa0;M mannitol</td>
<td align="left">16&#xa0;h, dark, 10&#xa0;rpm, 22&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">Eeckhaut et&#x20;al. (2020)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Coriander <italic>(Coriandrum sativum vars.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Embryogenic cell suspension</td>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">2% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 1% pectinase and 0.2% macerozyme R-10</td>
<td align="left">0.6&#xa0;M mannitol, 5&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>
</td>
<td align="left">14&#x2013;18&#xa0;h, dark, 50&#xa0;rpm</td>
<td align="left">4.81 &#xd7; 10<sup>6</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 90-93.8% viability</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B111">Ali et&#x20;al. (2018)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Cottonwood <italic>(Populus beijingensis)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Cell suspension</td>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">1% cellulase Onozaka RS, 1% macerozyme R-10</td>
<td align="left">0.6&#xa0;M mannitol, 5&#xa0;mM MES, CPW salts</td>
<td align="left">4&#x2013;6&#xa0;h, dark, 80&#xa0;rpm, 28&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">not disclosed, 90&#x2013;95% viability</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Cai and Kang (2014)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Crown imperial <italic>(Fritillaria imperialis L.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Callus</td>
<td align="left">Sliced</td>
<td align="left">2% cellulase, 0.1% pectinase</td>
<td align="left">0.5&#xa0;M mannitol, CPW salts</td>
<td align="left">8&#xa0;h, dark, 70&#xa0;rpm, 25&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">1.37&#xd7;10<sup>5</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>
</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">Chamani and Tahami (2016)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Florist Kalanchoe <italic>(Kalanchoe blossfeldiana)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Cultured leaf explants</td>
<td align="left">Sliced</td>
<td align="left">0.4% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 0.2% Driselase</td>
<td align="left">0.4&#xa0;M mannitol, 100&#xa0;mM glycine, 14&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 0.5&#xa0;mM MES, MS macro elements</td>
<td align="left">4&#xa0;h, dark, 40&#xa0;rpm, 25&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">6.0 x 10<sup>5</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>
</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Castelblanque et&#x20;al. (2010)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Gentian <italic>(Gentiana decumbens)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Leaves</td>
<td align="left">Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">1% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 0.5% macerozyme R-10</td>
<td align="left">0.5&#xa0;M mannitol, 5&#xa0;mM MES, CPW salts</td>
<td align="left">3&#x2013;4&#xa0;h, dark, 50&#xa0;rpm, 26&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">9.31 &#xd7; 10<sup>5</sup>&#x20;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 84.6% viability</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B99">Tomiczak et&#x20;al. (2015)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" align="left">Ginger <italic>(Zingiber officinale Roscoe.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Embryogenic cell suspension</td>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">4.0% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 1.0% macerozyme R-10, 0.1% pectolyase</td>
<td align="left">0.6&#xa0;M mannitol, 0.45&#xa0;M CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 5&#xa0;mM MES</td>
<td align="left">12&#x2013;14&#xa0;h, dark, 27&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">6.27 x 10<sup>6</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>
</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B115">Guan et&#x20;al. (2010)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Leaves and callus suspension</td>
<td align="left">Sliced and Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">1&#x2013;3% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 0.5-1% macerozyme, 0-0.5% hemicellulase</td>
<td align="left">0.5&#xa0;M mannitol, CPW salts</td>
<td align="left">10&#xa0;h at 15&#xb0;C followed by 6&#x2013;8&#xa0;h at 30&#xb0;C, dark, 53&#xa0;rpm</td>
<td align="left">not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B118">Nirmal Babu et&#x20;al. (2016)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Grape hyacinth <italic>(Muscari neglectum)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Embryogenic callus</td>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">1% cellulase R-10, 1% Driselase, 0.1% pectolyase Y-23</td>
<td align="left">0.5&#xa0;M mannitol, 5&#xa0;mM MES</td>
<td align="left">2&#xa0;h, dark, 90&#xa0;rpm, 25&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">7 &#xd7; 10<sup>5</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>
</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B117">Karamian and Ranjbar (2011)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Grapevine (<italic>Vitis vinifera</italic> L.)</td>
<td align="left">Embryogenic callus</td>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">2% cellulase Onozuka, 1% macerozyme R-10, 0.05% pectolyase Y-23</td>
<td align="left">0.5&#xa0;M mannitol, 10&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 5&#xa0;mM MES</td>
<td align="left">6&#xa0;h, shaking</td>
<td align="left">1 &#xd7; 10<sup>7</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, &#x3e;80% viability</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Bertini et&#x20;al. (2019)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Guava <italic>(Psidium guajava)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Leaves</td>
<td align="left">Sliced</td>
<td align="left">2.4% cellulase, 3% macerase, 0.6% hemicellulase</td>
<td align="left">0.75&#xa0;M mannitol, CPW salts</td>
<td align="left">10&#xa0;h, dark, 45&#xa0;rpm, 27&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">3.7 x 10<sup>6</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, &#x3e;90% viability</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B87">Rezazadeh and Niedz (2015)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Hydrangea <italic>(Hydrangea spp.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Leaves</td>
<td align="left">Sliced and Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">0.002% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 0.0005% Driselase, 0.0005% MKC- hemicellulase, and 0.001% pectinase<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="Tfn1">
<sup>a</sup>
</xref>
</td>
<td align="left">0.35&#xa0;M sorbitol, 0.35&#xa0;M mannitol, 9&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 0.83&#xa0;mM NaH<sub>2</sub>PO<sub>4</sub>, 3&#xa0;mM MES</td>
<td align="left">14&#x2013;18&#xa0;h, dark, 30&#xa0;rpm, 25&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">5.5 &#xd7; 10<sup>6</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 87% viability</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">K&#xe4;stner et&#x20;al. (2017)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" align="left">Lettuce (<italic>Lactuca sativa</italic>)</td>
<td align="left">Cotelydons</td>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">1% cellulase R-10, 0.5% macerozyme R-10</td>
<td align="left">0.45&#xa0;M mannitol, 20&#xa0;mM MES, CPW salts</td>
<td align="left">14&#xa0;h, dark, 40&#xa0;rpm, 25&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B102">Woo et&#x20;al. (2015)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Leaves</td>
<td align="left">Sliced</td>
<td align="left">1.5% cellulase R-10, 0.3% macerozyme R-10</td>
<td align="left">0.4&#xa0;M mannitol, 20&#xa0;mM KCl, 10&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 20&#xa0;mM MES, 0.1% BSA</td>
<td align="left">4,5&#xa0;h, dark, 50&#xa0;rpm</td>
<td align="left">not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B119">Park et&#x20;al. (2019)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Lily <italic>(Lilium ledebourii)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Leaves</td>
<td align="left">Sliced</td>
<td align="left">4% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 1% pectinase</td>
<td align="left">0.7&#xa0;M mannitol, CPW salts</td>
<td align="left">24&#xa0;h, dark, 70&#xa0;rpm, 25&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B123">Tahami et&#x20;al. (2014)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Love-in-a-Mist <italic>(Nigella damascena&#xa0;L.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Callus</td>
<td align="left">Sliced and Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">1% cellulase, 0.1% pectolyase</td>
<td align="left">0.6&#xa0;M mannitol, 5&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 10&#xa0;mM MES</td>
<td align="left">14&#x2013;16&#xa0;h, dark, 30 rpm, 26&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">3 &#xd7; 10<sup>5</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>
</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B55">Klimek-Chodacka et&#x20;al. (2020)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Oil palm <italic>(Elaeis guineensis)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Cell suspension</td>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">2% cellulase, 0.5% cellulase Onuzuka R10, 1% pectinase, 0.1% pectolyase Y23</td>
<td align="left">0.2&#xa0;M mannitol, 0.4&#xa0;M KCl, 45&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>
</td>
<td align="left">14&#xa0;h, dark, 26&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">1.14 &#xd7; 10<sup>6</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 82% viability</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69">Masani et&#x20;al. (2013)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" align="left">Petunia <italic>(Petunia&#xa0;hybrids)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Leaves</td>
<td align="left">Sliced and Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">2% cellulase Onozuka R-10 , 0.6% macerozyme R-10</td>
<td align="left">0.6&#xa0;M mannitol, 10&#x20;mM MES, 0.2% BSA</td>
<td align="left">6&#xa0;h, dark, 30&#xa0;rpm, 25 &#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">1.04 &#xd7; 10<sup>6</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 73.3% viability</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B45">Kang et&#x20;al. (2020)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Leaves</td>
<td align="left">Sliced and Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">1.2% carbohydrase Viscozyme, 0.6% cellulase Celluclast, 0.6% pectinase PectinEX</td>
<td align="left">1&#xa0;M Manitol, 8&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 0.1&#xa0;M MES, 0.1% BSA</td>
<td align="left">3&#xa0;h, 40&#xa0;rpm, 25&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">6.9 &#xd7; 106 per 12&#x2013;16 leaves, 94.3% viability</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B107">Yu et&#x20;al. (2020)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Qin-jiao <italic>(Gentiana macrophylla)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Embryogenic cell suspension</td>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">2% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 0.5&#x20;% macerozyme R-10, 0.5% hemicellulase</td>
<td align="left">0.4&#xa0;M sorbitol, 50&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 2.5&#xa0;mM MES</td>
<td align="left">14&#x2013;16&#xa0;h, dark, 30&#xa0;rpm, 25&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">6.2 x 10<sup>6</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, &#x3e;90% viability</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B116">Hu et&#x20;al. (2015)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Silk tree <italic>(Albizia julibrissin)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Leaves and callus</td>
<td align="left">Sliced and Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">Leaves: 1.5% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 1% pectolyase Y-23; Callus: 2% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 1% pectolyase Y-23</td>
<td align="left">0.7&#xa0;M mannitol, CPW salts</td>
<td align="left">6&#xa0;h (leaves) 16&#xa0;h (callus), dark, 40&#xa0;rpm, 25&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">Leaves: 6.31 x 10<sup>5</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 87% viability; Callus: 5.53 x 10<sup>5</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 85% viability</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B120">Rahmani et&#x20;al. (2016)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" align="left">Sowbread <italic>(Cyclamen spp.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Somatic embryos and embryogenic cell suspension</td>
<td align="left">Sliced and Plasmolysis for embryos only</td>
<td align="left">2% cellulase R-10, 0.5% macerozyme R-10</td>
<td align="left">0.35&#xa0;M sucrose, KM8p macro elements</td>
<td align="left">16&#x2013;18&#xa0;h, dark, 24&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">Suspension cultures: 4.24 x 10<sup>5</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>; Somatic embryos: 0.57 x 10<sup>5</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>; Dissected germinated embryos: 3.09 x 10<sup>5</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>
</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B84">Prange et&#x20;al. (2010b)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Embryogenic cell suspension</td>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">2% cellulase R-10, 0.5% macerozyme R-10</td>
<td align="left">0.35&#xa0;M sucrose, KM8p macro elements</td>
<td align="left">16&#x2013;18&#xa0;h, dark, 24&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">1.36 &#xd7; 10<sup>6</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>
</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B83">Prange et&#x20;al. (2010a)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Stevia <italic>(Stevia rebaudiana)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Leaves</td>
<td align="left">Sliced</td>
<td align="left">2% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 1.5% macerozyme Onozuka R-10, 0.2% Driselase, 0.1% pectolyase Y-23</td>
<td align="left">0.5&#xa0;M mannitol, 2.5&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 5&#xa0;mM MES</td>
<td align="left">4&#xa0;h, dark, 55&#xa0;rpm, 25&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">8.4 x 10<sup>6</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 98.8% viability</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B63">Lopez-Arellano et&#x20;al. (2014)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Strawberry <italic>(Fragaria ananassa)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Shoots</td>
<td align="left">Sliced and Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">1% cellulase Cellulysin, 0.1% pectinase Macerase</td>
<td align="left">0.4&#xa0;M sucrose, K3 medium</td>
<td align="left">18&#xa0;h, dark, 20&#xa0;rpm, 25&#xb0;C</td>
<td align="left">not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Barcel&#xf3; et&#x20;al. (2019)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Widow&#x27;s-thrill <italic>(Kalancho&#xeb; spp.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Leaves</td>
<td align="left">Sliced and Plasmolysis</td>
<td align="left">0.5% cellulase Onozuka R-10, 0.1% Driselase</td>
<td align="left">0.58&#xa0;M mannitol, 14&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 93&#xa0;mM glycine, 2.5&#xa0;mM MES, 1.65&#xa0;g/L MS macro elements</td>
<td align="left">16&#x2013;18&#xa0;h, dark, 40&#xa0;rpm, RT</td>
<td align="left">10.78 &#xd7; 10<sup>5</sup>&#xa0;gfw<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 60-90% viability</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B112">Cui et&#x20;al. (2019)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<fn id="Tfn1">
<label>a</label>
<p>&#x3d; suspicion of inaccurate magnitude reported.</p>
</fn>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
<p>In cabbage (<italic>Brassica oleracea</italic>), it was observed that hypocotyl-derived protoplasts yielded more regenerated shoots than leaf-derived protoplasts (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">Kie&#x142;kowska and Adamus, 2012</xref>). In a comparison on the regeneration capacity of protoplasts derived from leaves, cotyledons, and callus from coastal medick (<italic>Medicago littoralis</italic>), leaf protoplast-derived callus was found to have the highest regeneration capacity with a frequency of 20% and cotyledon protoplast-derived callus had a regeneration frequency of 15% (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B151">Zafar et&#x20;al., 1995</xref>). In this study, callus-derived protoplasts developed only a few microcolonies that were not tested for regeneration. Embryogenic callus can potentially provide improved regeneration success in cases where somatic tissues fail to produce regenerable protoplasts, e.g<italic>.</italic> in grapevine (<italic>Vitis vinifera</italic>) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Bertini et&#x20;al., 2019</xref>).</p>
<p>The age of the source tissue can also be of importance, both for protoplast yield and viability as well as regeneration success. Generally, protoplasts derived from younger tissues perform better in culture. This has been shown for hypocotyls and leaves in cabbage (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">Kie&#x142;kowska and Adamus, 2012</xref>) and cell suspension cultures in oil palm (<italic>Elaeis guineensis</italic>) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69">Masani et&#x20;al., 2013</xref>), for example.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2-1-3">
<title>Plant Growth Conditions</title>
<p>The growth conditions of the starting material, including growth media and light, can have a significant effect on the regenerative capacity of protoplasts. An important consideration is that the material needs to be sterile (either grown under aseptic conditions or sterilized upon harvest) in order to be used for further culture of the obtained protoplasts.</p>
<p>In Arabidopsis, plants grown on Gamborg B5 medium and harvested 3&#xa0;weeks after germination had a larger rosette with nearly twice as many leaves when compared to plant grown on Murashige and Skoog (MS) medium, resulting in twice as many protoplasts per harvested plant. However, during protoplast culture, the plants grown initially on MS media showed two to three times higher plating efficiency. And when comparing the photoperiod under which plants were grown, short day (10&#xa0;h) resulted in a fourfold higher plating efficiency than long day (16&#xa0;h) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B70">Masson and Paszkowski, 1992</xref>).</p>
<p>Examination of cauliflower (<italic>Brassica oleracea</italic>) leaf protoplast quality of shoots grown in various vessel types found that protoplast yield, viability, division, and shoot regeneration was higher from tissue of plants grown in containers with vented lids compared to containers with closed lids (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">Chikkala et&#x20;al., 2009</xref>).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="s2-2">
<title>Enzymolysis</title>
<p>When it comes to isolating protoplasts, it is not only about obtaining a high number of protoplasts, but also about optimizing their viability and regenerative capacity. Many factors in the enzymolysis procedure may be of influence, including the utilized pretreatment, buffer composition, cell-wall digestion enzymes, incubation conditions, and purification methods (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">Table&#x20;1</xref>). Although, to our knowledge, there are not studies on the effect on protoplast regeneration directly for all of the different factors described here, it seems reasonable to assume that effects on the quality (viability) of the isolated protoplasts will translate to an influence on regenerative capacity of the isolated protoplasts.</p>
<sec id="s2-2-1">
<title>Pretreatment</title>
<p>Pretreatment of tissue can be used to augment the number of viable protoplasts isolated by increasing the access of the used enzymes to the plant cell wall. This can be achieved through physical disruption of the tissue (e.g. slicing leaf tissue), vacuum infiltration of the enzyme solution, or a preplasmolysis treatment.</p>
<p>Slicing tissue into smaller sections or strips before moving to the enzyme solution allows for more surface area for the enzymes to work, leading to the release of more protoplasts. With rice (<italic>Oryza sativa</italic>), longitudinal cutting, parallel to the veins, before enzyme digestion resulted in over twice as many viable protoplast as leaves cut in cross section (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Lin et&#x20;al., 2018</xref>). Another example of physical disruption is the &#x201c;Tape-Arabidopsis Sandwich&#x201d; method (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B103">Wu et&#x20;al., 2009</xref>). This method uses tape on both sides of a leaf to add support and allow the removal of the bottom epidermal layer. This protocol has been successfully applied to other Brassicaceae species, including <italic>B. oleracea</italic>, <italic>B. napus</italic>, <italic>Cleome spinosa</italic>, <italic>C. monophilla</italic>, and <italic>C. gynadra</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Lin et&#x20;al., 2018</xref>).</p>
<p>In addition to physical disruption, vacuum infiltration of plant tissue with the enzyme solution can be used to ensure that the enzymes are able to reach more of the cells, which could increase protoplast yield. In both apple (<italic>Malus domestica</italic>) and grapevine, vacuum infiltration was a part of the optimization of the protoplast isolation procedure to obtain the highest number of viable protoplasts per gram of fresh weight (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B79">Osakabe et&#x20;al., 2018</xref>).</p>
<p>Preplasmolysis treatment is used to shrink the protoplasts away from the cell wall before introducing the enzyme solution. This is thought to avoid damage to the cell membrane. When comparing protoplasts isolated from birdsfoot trefoil (<italic>Lotus corniculatus</italic>) tissue with and without preplasmolysis, the pretreated protoplasts had roughly five times more cell wall formation than the nontreated after 3&#xa0;days of culture. After 1&#xa0;week, the viability of the nontreated protoplasts decreased significantly (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B100">Vessabutr and Grant, 1995</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2-2-2">
<title>Enzyme Solution Buffer</title>
<p>The buffer for the enzyme solution is critical for optimal enzyme activity and ensuring a high number of viable protoplasts. The buffer solution typically includes KCl; CaCl<sub>2</sub>; mannitol, sorbitol, or salts as osmolytes; MES (2-(N-morpholino)&#x200b;ethanesulfonic acid) as pH buffer; BSA (bovine serum albumin) as an alternate target for proteases that may degrade the enzymes; and &#x3b2;-mercaptoethanol as a reducing agent (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">Table&#x20;1</xref>). <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B114">Frearson et&#x20;al. (1973)</xref> first formulated a combination of salts that many still use, called the cell and protoplast washing (CPW) salts. This basal salt solution is often modified with the addition of mannitol or sorbitol for osmotic pressure and different enzymes for optimal protoplast isolation (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B42">Jie et&#x20;al., 2011</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">Jones et&#x20;al., 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B99">Tomiczak et&#x20;al., 2015</xref>).</p>
<p>Proper osmolality is crucial in order to ensure the survival of the cells and provide an environment for potential cell wall formation and division, leading to regeneration. Protoplast development has been shown to be inhibited by excess osmotic pressure during isolation and culture by impairing metabolism (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B88">Ruesink, 1978</xref>) as well as division and cell wall regeneration (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B81">Pearce and Cocking, 1973</xref>).</p>
<p>Enzyme solutions with the same (or similar) composition as the subsequent protoplast culture medium have also been used successfully in protoplast regeneration applications. For example sugar beet (<italic>Beta vulgaris</italic>) callus protoplasts were isolated using Kao and Michayluk salts in the enzyme solution (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">Dovzhenko and Koop, 2003</xref>); Mango (<italic>Mangifera indica</italic>) pro-embryogenic mass-derived protoplasts were isolated using an enzyme solution containing Gamborg B5 and Murashige and Skoog salts (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">Ara et&#x20;al., 2000</xref>); petunia (<italic>Petunia</italic> spp.) and calibrachoa (<italic>Calibrachoa</italic> spp.) leaf protoplasts were isolated with Kao and Michayluk and Gamborg B5 salts in the solution (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B71">Meyer et&#x20;al., 2009</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2-2-3">
<title>Enzymes</title>
<p>Many commercially available cell-wall degrading enzymes (or enzyme mixtures) are used for the isolation of protoplasts. They differ in their substrates as well as the purity or combination of the enzymes in the extract. Enzymolysis is generally achieved using both cellulases and hemicellulases (e.g. beta-glucanases, xylanases, protopectinases, polygalacturonases, pectin lyases, and pectinesterases). Some of the most commonly used enzymes or enzyme mixtures are Cellulase R-10, Macerozyme R-10, and Pectolyase Y-23 (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">Table&#x20;1</xref>). The manufacturer/supplier of the enzymes may be a factor in the success rates (personal experience and communication with others).</p>
<p>The effect of different enzyme combinations and concentrations were tested on the isolation of protoplasts from stevia (<italic>Stevia rebaudiana</italic>) leaves (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B63">Lopez-Arellano et&#x20;al., 2014</xref>). The optimized enzyme solution contained 2% Cellulase R-10, 1.5% Macerozyme Onozuka R-10, 0.2% Driselase, and 0.1% Pectolyase Y-23. When the Cellulase R-10 was decreased to 1% or increased to 3%, there was a significant drop in both the yield and viability of the protoplasts. There was also a lower viability when pectolyase Y-23 was not present. When isolating protoplasts from tobacco (<italic>Nicotiana tabacum</italic>) leaves, it was found that Pectolyase Y-23 was 20&#x20;times more effective than Macerozyme R-10 (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B74">Nagata and Ishii, 1979</xref>). This was determined to be due to the Pectolyase Y-23 having 50&#x20;times stronger endopolygalacturonase activity.</p>
<p>As the cost of lab-grade enzymes can be prohibitive, the use of food-grade cell wall degrading enzymes was investigated as a low-cost alternative for the isolation of switchgrass (<italic>Panicum virgatum</italic>) leaf protoplasts (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Burris et&#x20;al., 2016</xref>). It was determined that using a combination of Rohament CL with Rohapect 10&#xa0;L and Rohapect UF (cellulases and pectinases commonly used in brewing and juicing) yielded up to 8.4 &#xd7; 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts per gram of leaf tissue.</p>
<p>Although (to our knowledge) there have been no systematic analyses of whether the combination of enzymes used may influence the division rates and regenerative capacity of the produced protoplasts, one can imagine that there could well be an effect. The enzymes themselves, the crude extracts, as well as the cell-wall degradation products they produce can all be recognized by plant cells as pathogenic elicitors, to a greater or lesser extent, depending on the sensitivity of the genotype used to the different enzymes and extracts employed. Protoplast yield and viability may well be a good measure for protoplast isolation, but it could be the case that an enzyme combination that does not necessarily give the highest yield and viability could be more suitable for subsequent regeneration of the protoplasts.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2-2-4">
<title>Enzymolysis Conditions</title>
<p>Conditions during protoplast isolation (i.e. duration, temperature, light, and agitation) can play a significant role in the subsequent yield, viability and regenerative capacity of the protoplasts.</p>
<p>The length of a digestion period typically ranges from 2 to 18&#xa0;h (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">Table&#x20;1</xref>). The duration of digestion needs to be long enough to release sufficient numbers of protoplasts, but not too long as to decrease the viability due to cell damage or the lack of nutrients and growth regulators in the enzymolysis solution. For example, when comparing 4, 8, and 12&#xa0;h digestion duration of crown imperial (<italic>Fritillaria imperialis</italic>) callus, the yield and viability were highest at 8&#xa0;h (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">Chamani and Tahami, 2016</xref>).</p>
<p>Temperature also plays an important role in protoplast yield and viability. Room temperature is the most commonly used, although there are examples of higher temperatures being employed (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">Table&#x20;1</xref>). There could be effects on enzyme activity (and protoplast yield) as well as protoplast viability and regenerative capacity. Intuitively, it may be preferable to use a temperature that is close to that used for the growth of the source material and/or subsequent protoplast culture conditions, in order to minimize temperature fluctuations or shocks. Conversely, perhaps a particular temperature treatment may actually benefit regenerative capacity.</p>
<p>Digestion in a light or dark condition may additionally influence the protoplast isolation, with most choosing dark conditions (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">Table&#x20;1</xref>). This may avoid the production of free radicals and photoinhibition in cells containing chloroplasts. Although there are also examples where digestion under light performed better than in the dark. In geranium (<italic>Pelargonium</italic> x <italic>hortorum</italic>) leaf protoplast isolation, protoplast yield and viability were increased when the digestion occurred in light; in the dark, the enzymes were efficient but most of the released protoplasts had burst (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B75">Nassour and Dorion, 2002</xref>). The protoplasts isolated from the light condition were regenerated into plants, but the effect of light or dark condition during digestion on the regeneration capacity was not investigated.</p>
<p>Agitation of the enzymatic solution on a gyratory shaker during the protoplast digestion can increase the protoplast yields. Typically, speeds range from 0 to 90&#xa0;rpm, with the average being around 40&#xa0;rpm (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">Table&#x20;1</xref>). Alternatively, the agitation can be implemented only at the end of the digestion period to facilitate the release of protoplasts from the cell wall remnants.</p>
<p>Again, protoplast yield and viability may well be a good measure, but it could be the case that digestion conditions that do not necessarily give the highest yield and viability could be more suitable for subsequent regeneration of the protoplasts.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2-2-5">
<title>Purification</title>
<p>Following enzymolysis, separation of the protoplasts from undigested tissue, cell wall debris, and dead cells can be an important factor in the culture of the protoplasts. Debris and dead cells may elicit negative effects in the living protoplasts that will inhibit their division and development, e.g. in kalanchoe (<italic>Kalanchoe blossfeldiana</italic>) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Castelblanque et&#x20;al., 2010</xref>). Filtration and sucrose cushions, or floatation through a density gradient, are commonly used techniques.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="s3">
<title>Protoplast Culture</title>
<sec id="s3-1">
<title>Culture Media</title>
<p>Protoplast culture media are central to protoplast division and plant regeneration. The appropriate macro-, micro-nutrients, and additives, such as plant growth regulators, osmotic stabilizers, medium solidifiers, and supplements, are essential in protoplast culture.</p>
<sec id="s3-1-1">
<title>Nutrients</title>
<p>Optimal protoplast culture media vary widely, depending on the genotype and source tissue used (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">Table&#x20;2</xref>). Common medium formulations (such as MS (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B73">Murashige and Skoog, 1962</xref>), Gamborg (B5) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">Gamborg et&#x20;al., 1968</xref>), Kao and Michayluk (KM (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B46">Kao and Michayluk, 1975</xref>)), Y3 (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">Eeuwens, 1976</xref>), or Nitsch (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B76">Nitsch and Nitsch, 1969</xref>)), or slight modification thereof, are often used in protoplast culture. Although there are also examples of custom formulations, e.g. TM2G for tomato (<italic>Solanum lycopersicon</italic>) protoplast culture (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B92">Shahin, 1985</xref>). This is also a case where the manufacturer/supplier of the premixed media may be a factor in the success rates (personal experience and communication with others). When establishing and optimizing a protoplast culture procedure, it is prudent to assay an array of medium formulations for suitability.</p>
<table-wrap id="T2" position="float">
<label>TABLE 2</label>
<caption>
<p>Protoplast Culture.</p>
</caption>
<table>
<thead valign="top">
<tr>
<th align="left">Species</th>
<th align="center">Protoplast Density</th>
<th align="center">Protoplast Culture Medium</th>
<th align="center">Protoplast Culture PGRs</th>
<th align="center">Time to Division</th>
<th align="center">Time to Microcalli</th>
<th align="center">Reference</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody valign="top">
<tr>
<td align="left">American Elm <italic>(Ulmus americana)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">2 &#xd7; 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Agarose beads (1.6% SeaPlaque agarose); liquid KM5/5 medium (KM medium, 10% mannitol, 2.56&#xa0;mM MES)</td>
<td align="left">5.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 5&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">2-6&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">Jones et&#x20;al. (2015)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Amur cork tree <italic>(Phellodendron amurense)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">4-6 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Solid MS medium (3% sucrose, 0.2% Gellan gum)</td>
<td align="left">4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">2&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">2&#xa0;months</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Azad (2012)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Arabidopsis <italic>(Arabidopsis thaliana)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">1 x 10<sup>6</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Thin alginate layer (1.4% sodium alginate); liquid PIM medium (B5 medium, 2% sucrose, 6% myo&#x2010;inositol)</td>
<td align="left">2.3&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 8.9&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">7&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">28&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">Jeong et&#x20;al. (2021)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Banana <italic>(Musa paradisiacal)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">1 &#xd7; 10<sup>6</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Nurse culture: protoplasts in liquid M5 (MS medium, 4.5% sucrose, 4.1&#x20;&#x3bc;M biotin, 680&#x20;&#x3bc;M glutamine, 0.01% malt extraction) with a sterilized nitrocellulose filter seperating the feeder layer (MS medium, Morel vitamins, 4% sucrose, 0.25% myo-inositol, 9.05&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 2.8&#xa0;mM glucose, 278&#xa0;mM maltose, 1.2% agarose) containing the nurse cells (M. acuminate cv. Mas (AA))</td>
<td align="left">4.5&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D</td>
<td align="left">4-5&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">1&#xa0;month</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Dai et&#x20;al. (2010)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="4" align="left">Cabbage <italic>(Brassica oleracea var. capitata)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">1-2 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">agarose embedding culture (MS medium (without NH<sub>4</sub>NO<sub>3</sub>), 8% myo-inositol, 3% sucrose, 1.19&#x20;mM thiamine), media with (20.6&#xa0;mM ammonia (NH<sub>4&#x2b;</sub>), 39.4&#xa0;mM nitrate ions (NO<sub>3-</sub>)) added after 2&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">9.05&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">3-5&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">4&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B42">Jie et&#x20;al. (2011)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">4 &#xd7; 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Alginate layers (1.4% alginic acid sodium salt); liquid culture medium (B5 medium, KM vitamins, 7.4% glucose, 0.025% casein hydrolysate, 0.1&#xa0;&#x3bc;M PSK-&#x3b1;)</td>
<td align="left">0.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 0.91&#xa0;&#x3bc;M zeatin</td>
<td align="left">3,4&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">3&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B52">Kie&#x142;kowska and Adamus (2019)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">4 &#xd7; 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Alginate layers (1.4% alginic acid sodium salt); liquid culture medium (B5 medium, KM vitamins, 7.4% glucose, 0.025% casein hydrolysate, 10&#xa0;&#x3bc;M putrescine)</td>
<td align="left">0.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 1&#xa0;&#x3bc;M zeatin</td>
<td align="left">3-5&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">4&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B51">Kie&#x142;kowska and Adamus (2021)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">4 &#xd7; 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Alginate layers (1.4% sodium alginate); CPP liquid medium (KM medium, MS FeEDTA, B5 vitamins, 7.4% glucose, 0.025% casamino acids)</td>
<td align="left">0.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 0.91&#xa0;&#x3bc;M zeatin</td>
<td align="left">3,4&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">4&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">Kie&#x142;kowska and Adamus (2012)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Canola <italic>(Brassica napus)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">5 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Agarose (0.3% Sea-Plaque agarose) or Alginate (0.5% sodium alginate) Beads; liquid medium (combination of K3, H, and A mediums)</td>
<td align="left">5.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 0.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 0.89&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">6&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">3,4&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B121">Sahab et&#x20;al. (2019)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" align="left">Carrot <italic>(Daucus spp.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">4 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Thin alginate layer; liquid CPP (KM medium, B5 vitamins, 7.4% glucose, 0.025% casein enzymatic hydrolysate, 100&#xa0;nM PSK-&#x3b1;, 0.88&#xa0;mM cefotaxime, 0.01-0.05% antibiotic (cefotaxime or timentin))</td>
<td align="left">0.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 0.91&#xa0;&#x3bc;M zeatin</td>
<td align="left">5&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Grzebelus and Skop (2014)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">4 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Calcium alginate layers (1.4% alginic acid sodium salt); CPP liquid medium (KM medium, B5 vitamins, 7.4% glucose, 0.025% casein hydrolysate)</td>
<td align="left">0.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 0.91&#xa0;&#x3bc;M zeatin</td>
<td align="left">3&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">3-6&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">Grzebelus et&#x20;al. (2012)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">4 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Thin alginate layer; liquid CPP (KM medium, B5 vitamins, 7.4% glucose, 0.025% casein hydrolysate, 100&#xa0;nM PSK-&#x3b1;, 0.88&#xa0;mM cefotaxime, 0.3&#xa0;mM timentin)</td>
<td align="left">0.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 0.91&#xa0;&#x3bc;M zeatin</td>
<td align="left">4-8&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B66">Ma&#x107;kowska et&#x20;al. (2014)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Cauliflower <italic>(Brassica oleracea var. botrytis)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">2 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Nurse culture: protoplasts in solid 1/2 medium (B5 medium, 4.5% sorbitol, 4.5% mannitol, 0.2% glucose, 0.2% agarose), suspended in liquid MS medium (7.3% mannitol) containing nurse cells (tuber mustard)</td>
<td align="left">2.7&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 4.5&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">3,4&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">21&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B94">Sheng et&#x20;al. (2011)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Chicory and Endive <italic>(Cichorium intybus and endivia)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">5 x 10<sup>4</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Low melting point agarose (LMPA) beads (0.25% LMPA); MC1 liquid medium (1/2 MS macro elements, Heller micro elements, Morel &#x26; Wetmore vitamins, 9% mannitol, 1% sucrose, 1.39&#xa0;mM inositol, 2.55&#xa0;mM glutamine, 0.05&#xa0;mM FeNa-EDTA). After 5&#xa0;days, MC1 liquid medium replaced with MC2 liquid medium (1/2 MS macro elements, Heller micro elements, Heller KCl, Morel &#x26; Wetmore vitamins, 6% mannitol, 1% sucrose, .55&#xa0;mM inositol, 5.1&#xa0;mM glutamine, 0.05&#xa0;mM FeNa-EDTA)</td>
<td align="left">MC1: 10.75&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 4.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP; MC2: 2.7&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">14&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Deryckere et&#x20;al. (2012)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" align="left">Chrysanthemum <italic>(Chrysanthemum&#xa0;morifolium)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">1 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Liquid medium (1/2 MS medium (without NH<sub>4</sub>NO<sub>3</sub>), 7.2% mannitol, 1% sucrose, 5.13&#xa0;mM MES, 0.02% activated charcoal)</td>
<td align="left">10.75&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 4.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">4,5&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">5&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Adedeji et&#x20;al. (2020)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">1 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Liquid culture (1/2 MS salts (without NH<sub>4</sub>NO<sub>3</sub>), KM vitamins, 7.2% mannitol, 1% sucrose, 3.42&#xa0;mM glutamine, 0.83&#xa0;mM inositol, 5.13&#xa0;mM MES)</td>
<td align="left">10.75&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">&#x3c;1&#xa0;week</td>
<td align="left">5,6&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">Eeckhaut et&#x20;al. (2020)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Coriander <italic>(Coriandrum sativum vars.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">2 &#xd7; 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Liquid MS medium</td>
<td align="left">4.5&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B111">Ali et&#x20;al. (2018)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Cottonwood <italic>(Populus beijingensis)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">2 &#xd7; 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Thin liquid culture (MS medium (without NH<sub>4</sub>NO<sub>3</sub>), 10.8% glucose)</td>
<td align="left">9.05&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 0.89&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">4,5&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">5&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Cai and Kang (2014)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Crown imperial <italic>(Fritillaria imperialis L.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">1 &#xd7; 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Liquid MS medium (MS medium, 9% mannitol, 0.02% casein hydrolysate)</td>
<td align="left">2.3&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 4.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">48&#xa0;h</td>
<td align="left">3-4&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">Chamani and Tahami (2016)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Florist Kalanchoe <italic>(Kalanchoe blossfeldiana)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">1 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Liquid BMb medium (macronutrients (5&#xa0;mM NH<sub>4</sub>NO<sub>3</sub>, 15&#xa0;mM KNO<sub>3</sub>, 3&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 1.5&#xa0;mM MgSO<sub>4</sub>, 0.5&#xa0;mM KH<sub>2</sub>PO<sub>4</sub>), MS micronutrients, SH vitamins (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B92">Shahin, 1985</xref>), 5.8% mannitol, 4.45% sucrose, 28&#xa0;mM myo-inositol, 25&#xa0;mM xylitol, 0.3&#xa0;mM ascorbic acid, 0.05&#xa0;mM adenine hemisulfate, 0.5&#xa0;mM MES)</td>
<td align="left">5.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 2.3&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">5-7&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">30&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Castelblanque et&#x20;al. (2010)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Gentian <italic>(Gentiana decumbens)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">1 &#xd7; 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Agarose beads (0.8% Sea Plaque Agarose); PCM liquid medium (MS medium (without NH<sub>4</sub>NO<sub>3</sub>), 3% glucose, 9% mannitol, 20.53&#xa0;mM glutamine, 0.8% Sea Plaque Agarose)</td>
<td align="left">10.75&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 0.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M TDZ</td>
<td align="left">3-5&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">10-12&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B99">Tomiczak et&#x20;al. (2015)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" align="left">Ginger <italic>(Zingiber officinale Roscoe.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">1 x 10<sup>6</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Shallow liquid MS medium (MS medium, 9% mannitol, 0.05% casein hydrolysate)</td>
<td align="left">4.5&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 0.93&#xa0;&#x3bc;M kinetin</td>
<td align="left">2-4&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">10-12&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B115">Guan et&#x20;al. (2010)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Liquid medium (MS medium, 7% mannitol, 2% sucrose)</td>
<td align="left">2.7&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 2.3&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B118">Nirmal Babu et&#x20;al. (2016)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Grape hyacinth <italic>(Muscari neglectum)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">1 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Nurse culture: protoplasts were isolated in alginate beads (1% sodium alginate), suspended in liquid culture (MS medium, 9% mannitol, 0.57&#xa0;mM ascorbic acid) with nurse cells (same species, 1 &#xd7; 10&#x5e;<sup>6</sup> protoplasts/ml) also in alginate beads</td>
<td align="left">5.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 4.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">4-5&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">4-5&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B117">Karamian and Ranjbar (2011)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Grapevine <italic>(Vitis vinifera L.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">1 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Disc-cultures: protoplasts in solid Nitsch&#x2019;s medium (5.4% glucose, 3% sucrose, 0.2% gellan gum) suspended in liquid Nitsch&#x2019;s medium (5.4% glucose, 3% sucrose, 0.3% activated charcoal)</td>
<td align="left">10.75&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">10&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Bertini et&#x20;al. (2019)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Guava <italic>(Psidium guajava)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">1 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Alginate beads; liquid culture media (MS medium (without NH<sub>4</sub>NO<sub>3</sub>), 3% sucrose, 59.3&#xa0;&#x3bc;M thiamine, 48.6&#xa0;&#x3bc;M pyridoxine, 16.25&#xa0;&#x3bc;M nicotinic acid, 22.8&#xa0;&#x3bc;M pantothenic acid, 0.17&#xa0;mM ascorbic acid, 10.25&#xa0;&#x3bc;M glutamine, 0.56&#xa0;mM myo-inositol, 0.43&#xa0;mM proline)</td>
<td align="left">5.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">7&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B87">Rezazadeh and Niedz (2015)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Hydrangea <italic>(Hydrangea spp.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">1 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Liquid PPM1 media (MS medium, MW vitamins, 0.5% sucrose, 9.5% mannitol, 0.5% PVP 10, 3.48&#xa0;mM MES, 0.6&#xa0;mM Timentin, 1.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M ascorbic acid, 0.13&#xa0;mM citric acid, 67&#xa0;nM Karrikinolide)</td>
<td align="left">5.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">3-15&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">3&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">K&#xe4;stner et&#x20;al. (2017)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" align="left">Lettuce <italic>(Lactuca sativa)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">2.5 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Agarose layers (1.2% agarose); liquid medium (1/2 B5 medium, 10.3% sucrose, 3.38&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 50&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NaFe-EDTA, 1.67&#xa0;mM sodium succinate, 0.51&#xa0;mM MES)</td>
<td align="left">0.9&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 1.33&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">3&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B102">Woo et&#x20;al. (2015)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left"/>
<td align="left"/>
<td align="left"/>
<td align="left">5&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">4&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B119">Park et&#x20;al. (2019)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Lily <italic>(Lilium ledebourii)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">1 &#xd7; 10<sup>6</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Liquid medium (MS medium, 9% mannitol, 0.2% yeast extract)</td>
<td align="left">4.5&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 0.93&#xa0;&#x3bc;M kinetin</td>
<td align="left">48&#xa0;h</td>
<td align="left">20&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B123">Tahami et&#x20;al. (2014)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Love-in-a-Mist <italic>(Nigella damascena&#xa0;L.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">4 &#xd7; 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Alginate layers; CPP liquid medium (KM medium, B5 vitamins, 7.4% glucose, 0.025% casein hydrolysate)</td>
<td align="left">5.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 9.3&#xa0;&#x3bc;M kinetin</td>
<td align="left">10&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B55">Klimek-Chodacka et&#x20;al. (2020)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Oil palm <italic>(Elaeis guineensis)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">5.7 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Agarose bead culture (0.6% SeaPlaque agarose); Y3A liquid medium (2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M GA<sub>3</sub>)</td>
<td align="left">10&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 10&#xa0;&#x3bc;M IAA, 2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M IBA, 10&#xa0;&#x3bc;M Zea, 2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M GA<sub>3</sub> , 10&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BA and 2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2iP</td>
<td align="left">9&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69">Masani et&#x20;al. (2013)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" align="left">Petunia <italic>(Petunia&#xa0;hybrids)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">1 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Liquid medium (KM medium, B5 vitamins, 10.9% mannitol, 1.0% sucrose, 5.13&#xa0;mM MES)</td>
<td align="left">5.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 4.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">3&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">4&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B45">Kang et&#x20;al. (2020)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">2.5 &#xd7; 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Liquid medium (MS medium, 6% myo-inositol, 2% sucrose)</td>
<td align="left">9.05&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">1&#xa0;day</td>
<td align="left">3-4&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B107">Yu et&#x20;al. (2020)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Qin-jiao <italic>(Gentiana macrophylla)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">3&#x2013;5 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Agar-pool culture: protoplasts in liquid P1 (MS (without NH<sub>4</sub>NO<sub>3</sub>), 5.5% mannitol, 2% sucrose, 1% glucose, 20.53&#xa0;mM glutamine, 0.05% casein hydrolysate) surronded by agar-solidified P1 (0.85% agar)</td>
<td align="left">9.05&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">3-4&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">3-4&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B116">Hu et&#x20;al. (2015)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Silk tree <italic>(Albizia julibrissin)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">3-5 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Agarose layers (1.4% SeaPlaque agarose); liquid KM8p medium (KM medium, 8% sucrose, 10.25&#xa0;mM MES)</td>
<td align="left">2.7&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">30-48&#xa0;h</td>
<td align="left">4&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B120">Rahmani et&#x20;al. (2016)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" align="left">Sowbread <italic>(Cyclamen spp.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">1.5 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Alginate films (1.15% sodium alginate); modified liquid KM8p medium (3.75&#xa0;mM NH<sub>4</sub>NO<sub>3</sub>, 8.11&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>)</td>
<td align="left">2.3&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 1&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2iP</td>
<td align="left">24-48&#xa0;h</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B84">Prange et&#x20;al. (2010b)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">1.5 &#xd7; 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Species dependent: Agarose lense (1.5% LM agarose) or Alginate film (1.15% sodium alginate) in liquid medium, either 8&#xa0;pmC.1 or 8&#xa0;pmC.2 (modified KM8p, 3.75&#xa0;mM NH<sub>4</sub>NO<sub>3</sub>, 8.11&#xa0;mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>)</td>
<td align="left">8&#xa0;pmC.1: 4.5&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 0.4 2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2iP; 8&#xa0;pmC.2: 2.3&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 1&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2iP</td>
<td align="left">24-48&#xa0;h</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B83">Prange et&#x20;al. (2010a)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Stevia <italic>(Stevia rebaudiana)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">5 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Agarose bead culture (0.6% SeaPrep agarose); liquid modified KM8p medium (5.1% sucrose, 5.5% mannitol)</td>
<td align="left">5.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 0.9&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 2.28&#xa0;&#x3bc;M zeatin</td>
<td align="left">2,3&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">14&#xa0;days to microcolonies</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B63">Lopez-Arellano et&#x20;al. (2014)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Strawberry <italic>(Fragaria ananassa)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">2 &#xd7; 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Agarose beads (0.6% agarose); modified KM8p liquid medium (7.2% glucose)</td>
<td align="left">5.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 1.14&#xa0;&#x3bc;M TDZ</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">3&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Barcel&#xf3; et&#x20;al. (2019)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Widow&#x27;s-thrill <italic>(Kalancho&#xeb; spp.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">1 x 10<sup>5</sup> protoplasts/ml</td>
<td align="left">Liquid medium (KM medium, Schenk and Hildebrandt (1972) vitamins, 5% mannitol, 4% sucrose, 0.5% myo-inositol, 19.7&#xa0;mM xylitol, 2.56&#xa0;mM MES, 0.28&#xa0;mM ascorbic acid, 27.1&#xa0;&#x3bc;M adenine hemisulfate, 0.15&#xa0;mM timentin)</td>
<td align="left">5.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 2.3&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">3-7&#xa0;days</td>
<td align="left">8&#xa0;weeks</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B112">Cui et&#x20;al. (2019)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
<p>In a comparison of 14 formulations based on MS, KM, and Y3 media for oil palm cell suspension-derived protoplast division, Y3-based medium gave the fastest cell wall formation, quickest division, and highest division frequency (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69">Masani et&#x20;al., 2013</xref>). Amur cork tree (<italic>Phellodendron amurense</italic>) stem protoplasts were cultured in MS, half-strength MS, and Woody Plant Medium (WPM), and culture in full-strength MS medium resulted in the highest colony formation rate (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Azad, 2012</xref>).</p>
<p>Protoplast cultures also need a carbon source for energy metabolism, typically sucrose or glucose and to a lesser degree mannitol or sorbitol (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">Table&#x20;2</xref>). Comparing the effect of 1 and 2% of either glucose or sucrose as the carbon source for chrysanthemum (<italic>Chrysanthemum morifolium</italic>) leaf protoplast culture, 1% sucrose performed best (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Adedeji et&#x20;al., 2020</xref>). Although 2% sucrose resulted in the highest division rate, there was no subsequent colony formation. Only 1% sucrose and 2% glucose led to microcallus formation, with 1% sucrose more rapidly producing larger microcalli. For Arabidopsis seedling protoplast culture, three different variations of supplements with B5 medium and vitamins were tested for protoplast proliferation (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">Jeong et&#x20;al., 2021</xref>). Myo-inositol as the primary carbon source along with sucrose resulted in the highest proliferation rate across four the different Arabidopsis ecotypes. A simplification of KM8p medium with the removal of all of the sugars (fructose, ribose, xylose, mannose, rhamnose, cellobiose, sorbitol and mannitol) except glucose still resulted in protoplast division that led to callus and embryo formation from carrot (<italic>Daucus carota</italic>) leaf protoplasts (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">Grzebelus et&#x20;al., 2012</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s3-1-2">
<title>Osmotic Pressure</title>
<p>Osmotic pressure is an important aspect of protoplast culture media. Generally, mannitol, sorbitol, sucrose, glucose, myo-inositol or a combination of these components is used to ensure the proper osmolarity. Determining the proper solute concentration is critical for the protoplast survival and division rates. Generally, the concentration of the major osmoticum used in the initial protoplast culture medium varies from 0.1 to 0.8&#xa0;M (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">Table&#x20;2</xref>). Intuitively, it seems that having a comparable osmolarity between enzymolysis and initial culture conditions would expose the protoplasts to less osmotic shock upon transfer to culture medium and benefit their viability and&#x20;vigor.</p>
<p>For cabbage cotyledon protoplasts, myo-inositol was a better osmotic regulator than mannitol (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B42">Jie et&#x20;al., 2011</xref>). It is theorized that myo-inositol may be advantageous to both carbohydrate metabolism in cell walls and inositol metabolism in cell membranes in protoplast culture. However, whether these advantages are gained with a small addition of myo-inositol with a different primary osmoticum or if a large quantity of myo-inositol is needed has yet to be determined.</p>
<p>Osmolarity is commonly decreased gradually as the protoplast reform their cell walls and begin to divide. For example, gradually reducing the osmolarity for oil palm cell suspension protoplast cultures doubled the number of microcalli (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69">Masani et&#x20;al., 2013</xref>). In gentian (<italic>Gentiana decumbens</italic>) leaf protoplast culture, the osmolarity of the liquid medium around agarose beads was decreased by reducing the mannitol concentration from 0.5 to 0.33&#xa0;M during the fifth and sixth week of culture, followed by another decrease to 0.17&#xa0;M mannitol in the seventh and eighth week, and no mannitol for the subsequent weeks (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B99">Tomiczak et&#x20;al., 2015</xref>). In chrysanthemum protoplast culture, after the first week in liquid culture medium, myo-inositol was omitted from the refresh medium and mannitol concentrations were dropped from the initial 0.4&#xa0;M to 0.32, 0.21, and 0.11&#xa0;M for weeks 2, 3, and 4, respectively (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">Eeckhaut et&#x20;al., 2020</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s3-1-3">
<title>Plant Growth Regulators</title>
<p>Plant growth regulators, particularly cytokinins and auxins, are essential for the growth of microcalli from protoplasts. Additionally, gibberellic acid (GA<sub>3</sub>) has been shown to be beneficial in some cases. The most common cytokinins are 6-benzylaminopurine (BAP), zeatin, kinetin, isopentenyl adenine (2iP), and thidiazuron (TDZ). The most common auxins are indole-3-acetic acid (IAA), indole-3-butyric acid (IBA), 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D), and naphthalene acetic acid (NAA). Optimal concentrations, combinations, and ratios vary widely, depending on the genotype and source tissue of the protoplasts (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">Table&#x20;2</xref>).</p>
<p>A ratio of a relatively higher concentration of auxin with a lower concentration of cytokinins was effective for microcallus formation from populus (<italic>Populus beijingensis</italic>) cell suspension protoplasts (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Cai and Kang, 2014</xref>). Conversely, in kalanchoe leaf protoplast culture, a higher cytokinin to auxin ratio resulted in better proliferation and microcallus formation; having cytokinin exclusively resulted in slow growth and the microcalli eventually died (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Castelblanque et&#x20;al., 2010</xref>).</p>
<p>Coconut water is a natural source of plant growth regulators, both auxin (IAA) and cytokinins (various) as well as other phytohormones, such as gibberellins, and other supplements, such as vitamins and minerals, that have been found to be beneficial in plant tissue culture (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B106">Yong et&#x20;al., 2009</xref>). As a supplement in corn (<italic>Zea mays</italic>) embryogenic callus protoplast culture, coconut water led to a high efficiency of microcallus formation, with a 2% coconut water addition producing the most microcalli (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B39">Imbrie-Milligan et&#x20;al., 1987</xref>). Coconut water was also found to increase protoplast cell division in orchid (<italic>Phalaenopsis</italic> spp.) callus protoplasts (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B56">Kobayashi et&#x20;al., 1993</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s3-1-4">
<title>Additional Supplements</title>
<p>Additional supplements, such as polyvinylpyrrolidone, antioxidants, activated charcoal, silver nitrate, antibiotics, complex organics, amino acids, polyamines, conditioned medium, and peptide growth factors, can be added to the media to support protoplast division and microcallus formation (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">Table&#x20;2</xref>).</p>
<p>Antioxidants, such as ascorbic acid, citric acid, reduced glutathione, and L-cysteine, can be used to mitigate the inhibitory effects of reactive oxygen species. In oil palm protoplast regeneration, it was found that 200&#xa0;mg/L ascorbic acid gave the greatest indication of further cell growth and development with the microcalli turning yellow and developing into embryogenic calli (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69">Masani et&#x20;al., 2013</xref>). With this supplementation, two types of embryogenic callus were observed, compact and friable embryogenic callus, which were both able to further develop into somatic embryos and regenerate into plantlets.</p>
<p>Polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) is used to adsorb phenolics. While phenolics may be beneficial for plant defense (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Bhattacharya et&#x20;al., 2010</xref>), an accumulation during protoplast culture has been found to lead to oxidative browning of the culture medium, inhibiting protoplast growth and division (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B86">Reustle and Natter, 1994</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B82">Prakash et&#x20;al., 1997</xref>). There has also been reports of PVP suppressing tissue browning and improving callus formation in peony (<italic>Paeonia lactiflora</italic>) petal explant tissue culture (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">Cai et&#x20;al., 2020</xref>). Polyvinylpolypyrrolidone (PVPP), a highly cross-linked version of PVP, has also been found to inhibit tissue necrosis in Virginia pine (<italic>Pinus virginiana</italic>) callus culture (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B98">Tang et&#x20;al., 2004</xref>), as well as preventing browning better than PVP in guar (<italic>Cyamopsis tetragonoloba</italic>) cotyledon protoplast culture (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B91">Saxena and Gill, 1986</xref>). When PVP was added to the PVPP culture of guar cotyledon protoplasts, not only was it found to enhance the necrosis inhibition, but it also improved the protoplast division frequency. Another compound known to decrease tissue browning is 2-aminoindane-2-phosphonic acid (AIP), which is a reversible inhibitor of phenylalanine ammonia lyase (PAL), an enzyme necessary for polyphenol production (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">Appert et&#x20;al., 2003</xref>). While the inhibition of PAL was able to increase the cell wall digestibility and facilitate sustained cell division in American elm (<italic>Ulmus americana</italic>), extended inhibition results in decreased shoot growth in tissue culture (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Jones et&#x20;al., 2012</xref>). This decrease in plant growth due to PAL inhibition from AIP has also been seen in birch (<italic>Betula pubescens</italic>) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B77">Nybakken et&#x20;al., 2007</xref>) and St. John&#x2019;s wort (<italic>Hypericum</italic> spp.) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B54">Klejdus et&#x20;al., 2013</xref>). It could be hypothesized that an early addition of AIP will increase the likelihood of protoplast survival, but it should not be used for an extended period as to disrupt the callus and shoot growth, as described for American elm protoplast regeneration (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">Jones et&#x20;al., 2015</xref>).</p>
<p>Activated charcoal is a commonly used additive employed for its ability to adsorb inhibitory elements, such as phenolics and reactive oxygen species, that can impede protoplast division. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Adedeji et&#x20;al. (2020)</xref> found that the ideal concentration of activated charcoal for chrysanthemum leaf protoplast regeneration was 0.02% (w/v) and adding a higher concentration of 0.1% resulted in agglutination of the protoplasts, causing them to die before entering the microcolony stage. In primrose (<italic>Primula</italic> spp.) cell suspension-derived protoplast culture, the addition of 0.1% PVP did not induce callus formation; however, the addition of activated charcoal did (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B72">Mizuhiro et&#x20;al., 2001</xref>).</p>
<p>Silver nitrate (AgNO<sub>3</sub>), an inhibitor of ethylene action, has been shown in some cases to increase callus formation and regeneration efficiency as well as effect protoplast isolation efficiency. The culture of hypocotyl protoplasts from several <italic>Brassica</italic> species was markedly improved by the addition of silver nitrate in the culture medium (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B80">Pauk et&#x20;al., 1991</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">Hu et&#x20;al., 1999</xref>). With rice (<italic>Oryza sativa</italic>) suspension cultures, the addition of silver nitrate during protoplast isolation reduced protoplast yield but increased the frequency of colony formation (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">Ishii, 1988</xref>).</p>
<p>Antibiotics may be used to avoid endogenous or exogenous contamination, however they can either inhibit or stimulate explant growth and development with the direct causation not yet understood (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B85">Qin et&#x20;al., 2011</xref>). A study analyzing the effects of three &#x3b2;-lactam antibiotics (cefotaxime, carbenicillin, and timentin) at different concentrations on carrot seedling protoplasts found that, while plating efficiencies decreased in all antibiotic concentrations higher than 100&#xa0;mg/L, cefotaxime and timentin in the range of 100&#x2013;500&#xa0;mg/L increased regeneration efficiency (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Grzebelus and Skop, 2014</xref>). Timentin was used with <italic>Hydrangea</italic> leaf protoplasts to limit the endophytes and it was observed that in antibiotic-free medium, the protoplasts rebuilt the cell wall faster and divided earlier, but callus was only formed in medium with antibiotics (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">K&#xe4;stner et&#x20;al., 2017</xref>).</p>
<p>The exact composition of complex organics, such as casein hydrolysate, casamino acids, coconut water, and yeast extract, is typically undefined and varies depending on the manufacturer/supplier and potentially the batch. However, the amino acids, hormones, vitamins, fatty acids, carbohydrates, and other growth supplements they provide may enhance growth and regeneration of plants (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">Bhatia, 2015</xref>). The addition of casein hydrolysate was initially shown to give a more consistent high rate of microcallus formation from tobacco (<italic>Nicotiana tabacum</italic>) protoplasts (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Galun and Raveh, 1975</xref>), and is currently an addition to protoplast culture media regularly (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">Table&#x20;2</xref>).</p>
<p>Polyamines can regulate plant growth and stress responses through many means, including increasing antioxidant activity and regulating oxidative stresses (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Chen et&#x20;al., 2019</xref>). In a comparison of the exogenous addition of the polyamines putrescine, spermidine, and spermine on sugar beet (<italic>Beta vulgaris</italic>) cell suspension-derived protoplasts, spermine resulted in the highest plating efficiency, likely due to its stronger inhibitory effect on ethylene production (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B68">Majewska-Sawka et&#x20;al., 1997</xref>). Polyamines exogenously applied in different concentrations on cabbage hypocotyl protoplast culture obtained the highest frequency of shoot organogenesis from protoplasts treated with putrescine (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B51">Kie&#x142;kowska and Adamus, 2021</xref>). However, the addition of putrescine had no effect on the culture or regeneration of Love-in-a-Mist (<italic>Nigella damascena</italic>) callus protoplasts (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B55">Klimek-Chodacka et&#x20;al., 2020</xref>).</p>
<p>Conditioned medium (spent liquid medium used for cell-suspension cultures that is filtered and subsequently used as a supplement for protoplast culture) may contain compounds that encourage growth and mitotic activity. Fresh conditioned medium from cell-suspension cultures significantly increased the plating efficiency in chrysanthemum leaf protoplast culture (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B110">Zhou et&#x20;al., 2005</xref>).</p>
<p>Phytosulfokine (PSK), specifically PSK-&#x3b1;, is a peptide that was originally detected secreted in conditioned medium, but was later found in whole plants (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B105">Yang et&#x20;al., 1999</xref>). It was found to promote cell growth, enhance callus growth as well as adventitious root and bud formation, and improve somatic embryogenesis in multiple species, and has also been shown to enhance protoplast regeneration in carrot (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B66">Ma&#x107;kowska et&#x20;al., 2014</xref>) and cabbage (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B52">Kie&#x142;kowska and Adamus, 2019</xref>). With carrot leaf protoplasts, application of PSK-&#x3b1; during the initial culture resulted in a four-fold increase in regenerated plants (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B66">Ma&#x107;kowska et&#x20;al., 2014</xref>). PSK-&#x3b1; was shown to be both genotype- and dose-dependent and did not require a constant presence to maintain cell divisions in cabbage leaf protoplasts (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B52">Kie&#x142;kowska and Adamus, 2019</xref>). Not only was the PSK-&#x3b1; found to promote cell proliferation, but it also increased differentiation and organogenesis in five of the six cabbage accessions tested.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="s3-2">
<title>Protoplast Culture Conditions</title>
<p>Protoplast culture conditions, such as the use of liquid or semi-solid medium, temperature and light, cell density, or the presence of nurse cultures, can have a significant effect on the division and microcallus formation potential of protoplasts.</p>
<sec id="s3-2-1">
<title>Liquid Vs. Semi-solid Medium</title>
<p>When it comes to determining the solidity of the media to use with protoplast culturing, there are multiple factors to consider, including imaging potential, media refreshing, toxin accumulation, and cell aggregation.</p>
<p>Liquid medium is the most straightforward to make since it requires no agar manipulation. However, it faces a multitude of challenges. With imaging, unless each cell is in a separate space, it is impossible to track the growth of an individual cell. There is also the potential for aggregation of cells to form a non-homogeneous callus, possibly resulting in chimerism of the regenerated plants. Aggregation can also cause a local accumulation of toxic substances released from dying cells that may inhibit the growth of neighboring cells (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Deryckere et&#x20;al., 2012</xref>).</p>
<p>To avoid cell agglutination, embedding the protoplasts in semi-solid medium can ensure physical separation of cells. The embedding medium will typically contain agar, agarose, or alginate as a solidifier. Alginate is favorable for heat-sensitive protoplasts because the gelling is induced by exposure to calcium ions rather than the need to heat the agar or agarose solutions above the melting&#x20;point.</p>
<p>In a comparison between thin alginate layers and extra thin alginate films on carrot shoot protoplast culture, thin alginate layers resulted in nearly a 20% increase in plating efficiency in every accession tested (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B66">Ma&#x107;kowska et&#x20;al., 2014</xref>). Sterilizing the alginate solution through filter-sterilization was also found to give over a 10% increase in plating efficiency over autoclave-sterilization in several of the accessions&#x20;used.</p>
<p>The amount of liquid medium surrounding alginate beads can affect the protoplast proliferation capability. In American elm (<italic>Ulmus americana</italic>) cell suspension-derived protoplast alginate bead culture, cultures that contained less than 2&#xa0;ml or more than 3&#xa0;ml of liquid medium failed to develop beyond the first cell division; whereas cultures that contained 2 or 3&#xa0;ml of liquid medium continued to proliferate (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">Jones et&#x20;al., 2015</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s3-2-2">
<title>Temperature and Light</title>
<p>The temperature and light conditions used during protoplast culture vary widely (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">Table&#x20;2</xref>) and have both been shown to be of effect in regeneration success. Cabbage leaf protoplast cultures were greatly affected by light and temperature, with very few divisions occurring in cultures moved from dark at 25&#xb0;C to light at 23&#xb0;C after 7&#xa0;days of culture, compared to those kept in the dark conditions for all 15&#x20;days (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">Kaur et&#x20;al., 2006</xref>). Using lettuce (<italic>Lactuca saligna</italic>) leaf protoplasts, dark culture led&#x20;to sustained division while light bleached and killed the&#x20;protoplasts in 3&#xa0;days (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Brown et&#x20;al., 1987</xref>). However, Arabidopsis cotyledon protoplasts did not show a significant&#x20;variation in either the plating density or growth rates whether cultured in the light or dark (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">Dovzhenko et&#x20;al., 2003</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s3-2-3">
<title>Cell Density</title>
<p>The protoplast plating density can range from single cells up to a few million protoplasts per milliliter, but typically range from&#x20;5&#x20;&#xd7; 10<sup>4</sup>&#x2013;1 &#xd7; 10<sup>6</sup> protoplasts/ml (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">Table&#x20;2</xref>). In a comparison of plating densities of petunia (<italic>Petunia hybrida</italic>) leaf protoplast culture, 1&#x20;&#xd7; 10<sup>6</sup> protoplasts/ml produced a significantly higher division frequency and number of calli than 5&#x20;&#xd7; 10<sup>4</sup> protoplasts/ml (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B45">Kang et&#x20;al., 2020</xref>). However, the microcolony viability decreased with the plating density increasing to 1.5 &#xd7; 10<sup>6</sup> protoplasts/ml, potentially due to high&#x20;phenolics accumulation. Over-crowding the protoplasts can also result in a lower viability due to a lack of available nutrients (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">Kie&#x142;kowska and Adamus, 2012</xref>). In contrast, a lower&#x20;density may also be desired to track an individual protoplast after transformation or fusion (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">Bhojwani and Dantu, 2013</xref>). However, a lower protoplast density can be more costly and time consuming. Additionally, protoplasts can release growth factors which can stimulate mitotic division non-cell-autonomously. This is also the basis for nurse cultures.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s3-2-4">
<title>Nurse Cultures</title>
<p>Nurse cultures are the culture of target protoplasts with additional actively dividing protoplasts or suspension cells, either from the same species (e.g. in crocus (<italic>Crocus cancellatus</italic>) embryogenic calli-derived protoplast culture (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B47">Karamian and Ebrahimzadeh, 2001</xref>)) or from another, often closely related species (e.g. in desert banana (<italic>Musa paradisiacal</italic>) embryonic cell suspension protoplast culture (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Dai et&#x20;al., 2010</xref>) and cauliflower (<italic>Brassica oleracea</italic> var. <italic>botrytis</italic>) hypocotyl protoplast culture (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B94">Sheng et&#x20;al., 2011</xref>)). There are many nurse culture techniques, one example is feeder layer-cultures, which can be embedding the target protoplasts in agar layers with the nurse cells in a liquid surrounding the layers (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B94">Sheng et&#x20;al., 2011</xref>), or the target protoplasts in liquid culture with the nurse cells embedded in agarose (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Dai et&#x20;al., 2010</xref>). Alginate bead cultures, which can be performed by embedding the target protoplasts in alginate beads and having the nurse cells in liquid medium (e.g<italic>.</italic> with rice (<italic>Oryza sativa</italic>) suspension culture protoplasts (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B57">Kyozuka et&#x20;al., 1987</xref>)). An alternate method for ensuring a separation of the nurse cells and the target protoplasts is using a nitrocellulose filter which allows growth factors, signaling molecules, and nutrients to pass through, but not cells (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Dai et&#x20;al., 2010</xref>).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="s3-3">
<title>Plant Regeneration From Protoplast Culture</title>
<sec id="s3-3-1">
<title>Callus Formation</title>
<p>From microcalli, regeneration could come from organogenesis or embryogenesis. Organogenesis-oriented microcalli can be moved to a callus proliferation medium to increase the callus size, whereas embryogenesis-oriented microcalli can be moved to embryo formation medium; however, either could also proliferate callus or form embryos on the microcallus medium, depending on the genotype, source tissue, and medium composition.</p>
<p>Organogenesis typically relies on moving callus to a medium containing both a cytokinin and auxin or a shooting medium followed by a rooting medium. When it comes to the timeframe for regeneration, it is difficult to directly compare organogenesis and embryogenesis between different species and source tissues (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T3">Table&#x20;3</xref>). Intuitively, embryogenesis should take less time than organogenesis due to the extended time the callus needs to shoot and then root versus an embryo&#x2019;s ability to grow and differentiate both organs at the same&#x20;time.</p>
<table-wrap id="T3" position="float">
<label>TABLE 3</label>
<caption>
<p>Regeneration from Protoplast Culture.</p>
</caption>
<table>
<thead valign="top">
<tr>
<th align="left">Species</th>
<th align="center">Callus Proliferation/Embryo Formation Medium</th>
<th align="center">Callus/Embryo PGRs</th>
<th align="center">Time to Calli/Embryo</th>
<th align="center">Regeneration Medium</th>
<th align="center">Regeneration PGRs</th>
<th align="center">Time to Regeneration</th>
<th align="center">Regeneration Process</th>
<th align="center">Reference</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody valign="top">
<tr>
<td align="left">American Elm <italic>(Ulmus americana)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Microcalli not transferred</td>
<td align="left">N/A</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: solid ESM medium (DKW medium (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B113">Driver and Kuniyuki, 1984</xref>), 3% sucrose, 0.3&#xa0;&#x3bc;M GA<sub>3</sub>, 0.22% Phytagel); Roots: solid RM medium (DKW medium (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B113">Driver and Kuniyuki, 1984</xref>), 3% sucrose, 0.6% activated charcoal, 0.22% Phytagel)</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP; Roots: 0.5&#xa0;&#x3bc;M IBA</td>
<td align="left">4&#x2013;6&#xa0;weeks from calli to shoots; 1,2&#xa0;months from shoots to roots</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">Jones et&#x20;al. (2015)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Amur cork tree <italic>(Phellodendron amurense)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Microcalli not transferred</td>
<td align="left">N/A</td>
<td align="left">4&#xa0;months to calli</td>
<td align="left">Solid MS medium (MS medium, 3% sucrose, 0.2% Gellan gum)</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: 2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP and 1&#x20;&#x3bc;M NAA or 2.5&#x20;&#x3bc;M IBA; Roots: 2&#x20;&#x3bc;M IBA</td>
<td align="left">5&#xa0;weeks from callus to shoots; 1&#xa0;week from shoots to roots</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Azad (2012)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Arabidopsis <italic>(Arabidopsis thaliana)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Callus induction medium (B5 medium, 2% sucrose)</td>
<td align="left">2.3&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 8.9&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">2,3&#xa0;weeks from microcalli to calli</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: Shoot induction medium (MS medium, 3% sucrose, 2.41&#xa0;mM MES, 0.8% plant agar); Roots: rooting medium (1/2 MS medium containing vitamin, 1% sucrose, 2.41&#xa0;mM MES, 0.8% plant agar)</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: 0.9&#xa0;&#x3bc;M IAA, 2.5&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2iP; Roots: 5&#xa0;&#x3bc;M IBA</td>
<td align="left">0&#x2013;3&#xa0;weeks from transfering calli to shoots; 2&#xa0;weeks from shoots to roots</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">Jeong et&#x20;al. (2021)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Banana <italic>(Musa paradisiacal)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Solid M6 (MS medium, 3% sucrose, 0.2% gelrite)</td>
<td align="left">2.3&#xa0;&#x3bc;M IAA, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">3&#xa0;months to germinated embryos</td>
<td align="left">Solid rooting media (MS medium, 0.1% activated charcoal, 3% sucrose, 0.7% agar)</td>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">1&#xa0;month from germinated embryo to plantlet</td>
<td align="left">Embryogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Dai et&#x20;al. (2010)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="4" align="left">Cabbage <italic>(Brassica oleracea var. capitata)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Solid MS medium (MS medium, 3% sucrose, 8% myo-inositol, 0.4% Gelrite)</td>
<td align="left">9.05&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: MS medium; Roots: half-strength MS medium</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: 2.7&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 8.9&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP and ; Roots: none</td>
<td align="left">3&#xa0;weeks from calli to shoots</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B42">Jie et&#x20;al. (2011)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Microcalli not transferred</td>
<td align="left">N/A</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">MS medium (0.1&#x20;&#x3bc;M PSK-&#x3b1;)</td>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">4-6&#xa0;weeks from calli to shoots</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B52">Kie&#x142;kowska and Adamus (2019)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Microcalli not transferred</td>
<td align="left">N/A</td>
<td align="left">4-6&#xa0;weeks from microcalli to calli</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: Solid MS2 medium (MS medium, 2% sucrose, 0.25% Gelrite); Roots: MS medium</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: 2.7&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 8.8&#x20;&#x3bc;M BAP; Roots: none</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B51">Kie&#x142;kowska and Adamus (2021)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Microcalli not transferred</td>
<td align="left">N/A</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Solid MS medium (MS medium, 2% sucrose, 0.25% Phytagel)</td>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">4&#xa0;weeks from calli to shoots</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">Kie&#x142;kowska and Adamus (2012)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Canola <italic>(Brassica napus)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Microcalli proliferation medium (MS medium, 3.5% sucrose, 2.56&#xa0;mM MES, 0.7% agarose)</td>
<td align="left">5&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 5&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 5&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">1&#xa0;week from microcalli to calli</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: shoot regeneration medium (SRM) (MS medium, 3% sucrose, 2.56&#xa0;mM MES, 0.05% PVP, 29.4&#x20;&#x3bc;M silver nitrate, 0.3&#x20;&#x3bc;M GA<sub>3</sub>, 0.7% agarose); shoot elongation medium (SEM) (MS medium, B5 vitamins, 2% sucrose, 2.56&#xa0;mM MES, 0.1&#xa0;&#x3bc;M GA<sub>3</sub>, 0.8% agar); Roots: root induction media (RIM) (1&#x2044;2 strength MS, B5 vitamins, 1% sucrose, 2.56&#xa0;mM MES, 0.6% agar)</td>
<td align="left">SRM: 0.5&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 2.5&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2iP; SEM: 2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP; RIM: 2.5&#xa0;&#x3bc;M IBA</td>
<td align="left">4-6&#xa0;weeks from calli to shoots; 4&#xa0;weeks for shoot elongation; 3-7&#xa0;days from elongated shoots to roots</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B121">Sahab et&#x20;al. (2019)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="3" align="left">Carrot <italic>(Daucus spp.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Microcalli not transferred</td>
<td align="left">N/A</td>
<td align="left">2&#xa0;months to calli and embryos</td>
<td align="left">Solid R medium (MS medium, 2% sucrose, 0.3&#xa0;mM thiamine, 0.49&#xa0;&#x3bc;M pyridoxine, 4.06&#xa0;&#x3bc;M nicotinic acid, 40&#xa0;&#x3bc;M glycine, 0.56&#x20;mM myo-inozytol, 0.25% phytagel)</td>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">2,3&#xa0;weeks from calli/embryos to plantlets</td>
<td align="left">Undetermined</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Grzebelus and Skop (2014)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Microcalli not transferred</td>
<td align="left">N/A</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left"/>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">Somatic embryos; 1&#xa0;month from calli to plants; 2-3&#x20;months total to plantlet</td>
<td align="left">Embryogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">Grzebelus et&#x20;al. (2012)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Microcalli not transferred</td>
<td align="left">N/A</td>
<td align="left">2&#xa0;months to calli and embryos</td>
<td align="left"/>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">5&#xa0;weeks from calli or embryo to plantlet</td>
<td align="left">Undetermined</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B66">Ma&#x107;kowska et&#x20;al. (2014)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Cauliflower <italic>(Brassica oleracea var. botrytis)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Microcalli not transferred</td>
<td align="left">N/A</td>
<td align="left">5&#x2013;7&#xa0;weeks to calli</td>
<td align="left">Solid regeneration medium (MS medium, 3% sucrose, 0.8% plant agar)</td>
<td align="left">4.6&#xa0;&#x3bc;M zeatin and 1.15&#xa0;&#x3bc;M IAA</td>
<td align="left">10&#xa0;weeks to shoots</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B94">Sheng et&#x20;al. (2011)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Chicory and Endive <italic>(Cichorium intybus and endivia)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Microcalli not transferred</td>
<td align="left">N/A</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Solid MC3 medium (1/2 MS macro elements, Heller micro elements, Morel &#x26; Wetmore vitamins, 1% sucrose, .55&#xa0;mM inositol, 0.05&#xa0;mM FeNa-EDTA, 0.5% agar)</td>
<td align="left">2.85&#xa0;&#x3bc;M IAA, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">14&#xa0;weeks total to plantlet</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Deryckere et&#x20;al. (2012)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" align="left">Chrysanthemum <italic>(Chrysanthemum&#xa0;morifolium)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Soild proliferation medium (1&#x2044;2 MS medium, 2% sucrose, 0.25% gelrite)</td>
<td align="left">10.75&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 4.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Shoot induction medium (MS medium, 3% sucrose, 0.3% gelrite)</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: 2.7&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 4.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP; Roots: 9.05&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 13.3&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">16&#xa0;weeks from calli to plantlet</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Adedeji et&#x20;al. (2020)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Semi-solid proliferation media (1/2 MS salts, KM vitamins, 1% sucrose, 26.6&#x20;&#x3bc;M glycine, 0.4% Phytagel)</td>
<td align="left">0.11&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">2&#xa0;weeks from microcalli to calli</td>
<td align="left">Regeneration media (MS medium, KM vitamins, 2% sucrose, 26.6&#xa0;&#x3bc;M glycine, 0.6% MC29 agar)</td>
<td align="left">0.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M TDZ</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">Eeckhaut et&#x20;al. (2020)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Coriander <italic>(Coriandrum sativum vars.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Microcalli not transferred</td>
<td align="left">N/A</td>
<td align="left">3,4&#xa0;weeks to calli; 4&#xa0;weeks from calli to embryos</td>
<td align="left">MS medium (1.44&#xa0;&#x3bc;M GA<sub>3</sub>)</td>
<td align="left">4.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">4,5&#xa0;months to outdoor plant</td>
<td align="left">Embryogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B111">Ali et&#x20;al. (2018)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Cottonwood <italic>(Populus beijingensis)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Callus proliferation media (MS medium (without NH4NO3), 3% sucrose, 0.6% agar)</td>
<td align="left">4.52&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 0.89&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: MS medium; Roots: rooting medium (1/2 MS medium, 3% sucrose, 0.6% agar)</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: 2.22&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BA, 0.54&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA; Roots: 2.46&#xa0;&#x3bc;M IBA</td>
<td align="left">4&#xa0;weeks from calli to shoots; 12&#xa0;weeks totals to shoots</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Cai and Kang (2014)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Crown imperial <italic>(Fritillaria imperialis L.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Microcalli not transferred</td>
<td align="left">N/A</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Solid MS medium</td>
<td align="left">2.7&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 6.66&#x20;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">Chamani and Tahami (2016)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Florist Kalanchoe <italic>(Kalanchoe blossfeldiana)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Colonies cultured in liquid BMb for 15&#xa0;days, then added liquid BMc (MS medium, SH vitamins (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B92">Shahin, 1985</xref>), 3.8% mannitol, 3% sucrose, 0.6&#xa0;mM myo-inositol) for calli proliferation, then small calli moved to solid BMc (0.8% agar)</td>
<td align="left">5.4&#xa0;uM NAA and 8.9&#xa0;uM BAP</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Solid BMa (MS medium, ST vitamins (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B122">Staba, 1969</xref>), 3% sucrose, 0.6&#xa0;mM myo-inositol, 3&#xa0;&#x3bc;M thiamine, 0.8% agar)</td>
<td align="left">0.6&#xa0;&#x3bc;M IAA</td>
<td align="left">5&#xa0;months total to plantlet</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Castelblanque et&#x20;al. (2010)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Gentian <italic>(Gentiana decumbens)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Agar-solidified CPM3 (MS medium, 3% sucrose, 0.217&#x20;mM adenine sulfate), then non-embryo calli moved to agar-solidified PRM3 (MS medium, 3% sucrose, 2% coconut water, 1.44&#xa0;&#x3bc;M GA<sub>3</sub>, 0.217&#x20;mM adenine sulfate) for embryo formation</td>
<td align="left">CPM3: 0.54&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 8.9&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP, 4.53&#xa0;&#x3bc;M dicamba; PRM3: 4.65&#xa0;&#x3bc;M kinetin</td>
<td align="left">Somatic embryos 6&#xa0;weeks on CPM3 or 12&#xa0;weeks on CPM3/PRM3</td>
<td align="left">Agar-solidified half-strength MS medium (1/2&#xa0;MS medium, 1.5% sucrose)</td>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Embryogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B99">Tomiczak et&#x20;al. (2015)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" align="left">Ginger <italic>(Zingiber officinale Roscoe.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Solid MS medium (MS medium, 3% sucrose, 0.7% agar)</td>
<td align="left">0.9&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 22.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">6&#xa0;months to embryos</td>
<td align="left">MS medium</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: none; Roots: 3.22&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 8.9&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">15&#xa0;months total to plantlet</td>
<td align="left">Embryogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B115">Guan et&#x20;al. (2010)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Microcalli not transferred</td>
<td align="left">N/A</td>
<td align="left">40&#x2013;60&#xa0;days to calli</td>
<td align="left">Solid MS medium (MS medium, 4% mannitol, 3% sucrose)</td>
<td align="left">5.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 4.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B118">Nirmal Babu et&#x20;al. (2016)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Grape hyacinth <italic>(Muscari neglectum)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Solid half-strength MS agar medium</td>
<td align="left">Callus proliferation: 0.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP; Embryo formation: none</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">half strength MS medium</td>
<td align="left">4.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">3&#xa0;months from embryo to plantlet</td>
<td align="left">Embryogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B117">Karamian and Ranjbar (2011)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Grapevine (<italic>Vitis vinifera</italic> L.)</td>
<td align="left">Embryo germination medium (Nitsch&#x2019;s medium, 3% sucrose, 0.2% gellan gum)</td>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">3-4&#xa0;months to embryos; 4&#xa0;weeks for embyo germination</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: C2D4B medium (C2D medium, 3% sucrose, 0.7% TC agar); Roots: MS medium (3% sucrose, 0.7% TC agar)</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: 4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP; Roots: 0.5&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA</td>
<td align="left">3-4&#xa0;weeks from germinated embryo to shoots; 6&#xa0;month total to outdoor plants</td>
<td align="left">Embryogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Bertini et&#x20;al. (2019)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Guava <italic>(Psidium guajava)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Solidified culture media (8% agar)</td>
<td align="left">5.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: shoot regeneration medium; Roots: MS medium (medium specifics not disclosed)</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: 11.15&#xa0;&#x3bc;M kinetin, 7.1&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP; Roots: 0.5&#xa0;&#x3bc;M IBA</td>
<td align="left">8&#xa0;weeks from microcalli to shoots; 4&#xa0;weeks from shoots to roots</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B87">Rezazadeh and Niedz (2015)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Hydrangea <italic>(Hydrangea spp.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Solid PPM3 medium (MS medium, MW vitamins, 0.5% PVP 10, 3.48&#x20;mM MES, 3% sucrose, 5% mannitol, 0.6&#xa0;mM Timentin, 1.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M ascorbic acid, 0.13&#xa0;mM citric acid, 67&#xa0;nM Karrikinolide, 0.25% Phytagel)</td>
<td align="left">10.75&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA with 8.9&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">8&#xa0;weeks from microcalli to calli</td>
<td align="left">Solid SRM medium (B5 salts and vitamins, 2.18% sucrose, 0.615&#xa0;mM myo-inositol, 0.6&#xa0;mM Timentin, 0.142&#xa0;mM ascorbic acid, 0.13&#xa0;mM citric acid, 0.068% Gelrite, 0.3% bactoagar)</td>
<td align="left">0.54&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 8.9&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">15&#xa0;months total to plantlet</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">K&#xe4;stner et&#x20;al. (2017)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" align="left">Lettuce (<italic>Lactuca sativa</italic>)</td>
<td align="left">Microcalli not transferred</td>
<td align="left">N/A</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: Regeneration medium (MS medium, 3% sucrose, 0.6% plant agar); Roots: 1/2&#xa0;MS medium</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: 0.54&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP; Roots: none</td>
<td align="left">4&#xa0;weeks from microcalli to shoots</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B102">Woo et&#x20;al. (2015)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Microcalli not transferred</td>
<td align="left">N/A</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Shoot induction medium (MS medium, 3% sucrose, 0.6% agar); Roots: MS medium</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: 0.54&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP; Roots: none</td>
<td align="left">4&#xa0;weeks from calli to shoots</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B119">Park et&#x20;al. (2019)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Lily <italic>(Lilium ledebourii)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Microcalli not transferred</td>
<td align="left">N/A</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">semi-solidified MS medium</td>
<td align="left">0.54&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 6.66&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BA</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B123">Tahami et&#x20;al. (2014)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Love-in-a-Mist <italic>(Nigella damascena&#xa0;L.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Embryo formation media (MS medium, 3% sucrose, 0.7% agar)</td>
<td align="left">5.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 9.3&#xa0;&#x3bc;M kinetin</td>
<td align="left">3&#xa0;months to calli; 3&#xa0;weeks from calli to embryo</td>
<td align="left">Regeneration media (MS medium, 13.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M glycine, 2% sucrose, 0.2% phytagel)</td>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">2&#xa0;months from embryo to plantlet</td>
<td align="left">Embryogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B55">Klimek-Chodacka et&#x20;al. (2020)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Oil palm <italic>(Elaeis guineensis)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Solid Y3 medium (1.14&#xa0;mM ascorbic acid)</td>
<td align="left">1&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 0.1&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">4-12&#xa0;weeks to calli; 20-24&#xa0;weeks from calli to embryos</td>
<td align="left">ECI solid medium (media specifics not disclosed)</td>
<td align="left">1&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA and 0.1&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">12&#xa0;weeks from embryo to plantlet; 56-68&#xa0;weeks total to plantlet</td>
<td align="left">Embryogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69">Masani et&#x20;al. (2013)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" align="left">Petunia <italic>(Petunia&#xa0;hybrids)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">KM proliferation medium (KM medium, B5 vitamin, 3.0% sucrose)</td>
<td align="left">2.7&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">4&#xa0;weeks from microcalli to calli</td>
<td align="left">MS medium (MS medium, 3% sucrose, 0.8% plant agar)</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: 1&#xa0;&#x3bc;M IBA, 4.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP; Roots: none</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B45">Kang et&#x20;al. (2020)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Callus induction medium (MS medium, 3% sucrose)</td>
<td align="left">2.7&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 8.9&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">2,3&#xa0;weeks from microcalli to calli</td>
<td align="left">Regeneration medium (MS medium, 3% sucrose)</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: 4.6&#xa0;&#x3bc;M zeatin; Roots: none</td>
<td align="left">2,3&#xa0;weeks from calli to shoots</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B107">Yu et&#x20;al. (2020)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Qin-jiao <italic>(Gentiana macrophylla)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Solidified MS medium (MS medium, 3% sucrose, 0.05% casein hydrolysate, 0.85% agar)</td>
<td align="left">Callus proliferation: 9.05&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP; Embryo formation: 2.3&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D</td>
<td align="left">6&#xa0;weeks from microcalli to proembryos</td>
<td align="left">Solidified MS medium (MS medium, 0.05% casein hydrolysate, 3 % sucrose, and 0.85 % agar)</td>
<td align="left">Germination: 8.9&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP; Rooting: none</td>
<td align="left">2&#xa0;weeks from proembryo to germination; 3&#xa0;weeks from germination to plantlet</td>
<td align="left">Embryogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B116">Hu et&#x20;al. (2015)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Silk tree <italic>(Albizia julibrissin)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Solid MSB5 medium (MS medium, B5 vitamins, 3% sucrose, 0.02% casein hydrolysate)</td>
<td align="left">10.8&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 4.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: MS medium; Roots: half-strength MS medium</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: 4.6&#xa0;&#x3bc;M zeatin, 13.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP; Roots: 4.9&#xa0;&#x3bc;M IBA</td>
<td align="left">5&#xa0;weeks from calli to shoots; 4,5&#xa0;weeks from shoots to roots</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B120">Rahmani et&#x20;al. (2016)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" align="left">Sowbread <italic>(Cyclamen spp.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Callus proliferation: 2.31.S medium (1/2 MS medium, 0.38% Gelrite); Embryo formation: 2.25.S medium (2&#xd7; MgSO4 , 2&#xd7; CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 2&#xd7; microelements, 0.3% Gelrite) (medium specifics not disclosed)</td>
<td align="left">2.31.S: 4.5&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2iP; 2.25.S: none</td>
<td align="left">8-16&#xa0;weeks to calli; 8-16&#xa0;weeks from calli to embryos</td>
<td align="left">2.41.S (3&#xd7; CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 0.1% activated charcoal) (medium specifics not disclosed)</td>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">2.5&#xa0;weeks from germinated embryo to plantlet</td>
<td align="left">Embryogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B83">Prange et&#x20;al. (2010a)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Solid 2.1.S (1/2 MS medium, 0.38% Gelrite) (medium specifics not disclosed)</td>
<td align="left">9.05&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2iP</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Solid 2.2.S (half-strength MS medium, 2 x CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 0.37% Gelrite) (media specifics not disclosed)</td>
<td align="left">None</td>
<td align="left">16&#xa0;weeks from calli to plantlet; 24-28&#xa0;weeks total to plantlet</td>
<td align="left">Embryogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B84">Prange et&#x20;al. (2010b)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Stevia <italic>(Stevia rebaudiana)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Solidified MS medium (MS medium, 3% sucrose, 0.05% casein hydrolysate, 0.3% Gelrite)</td>
<td align="left">0.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 4.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">4&#xa0;weeks to embryogenic calli</td>
<td align="left">MS medium</td>
<td align="left">5.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA</td>
<td align="left">8&#xa0;weeks from embryogenic calli to plantlet; 1&#xa0;month from embryo to plantlet</td>
<td align="left">Embryogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B63">Lopez-Arellano et&#x20;al. (2014)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Strawberry <italic>(Fragaria ananassa)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Agar-solidified modified KM8p medium (KM medium, 6.8% sucrose)</td>
<td align="left">0.54&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 4.45&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Solid MS medium (MS medium, 6.8% sucrose, 0.3% agarose)</td>
<td align="left">1.08&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 13.62&#xa0;&#x3bc;M TDZ</td>
<td align="left">4&#xa0;weeks from calli to shoots; 16&#xa0;weeks total to shoots</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Barcel&#xf3; et&#x20;al. (2019)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left">Widow&#x27;s-thrill <italic>(Kalancho&#xeb; spp.)</italic>
</td>
<td align="left">Liquid media (MS medium, 3% sucrose, 0.56&#xa0;mM myo-inositol, 2.56&#xa0;mM MES, 3.5% mannitol, 0.15&#xa0;mM timentin)</td>
<td align="left">5.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 2.3&#xa0;&#x3bc;M 2,4-D, 2.2&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP</td>
<td align="left">Not disclosed</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: solidified MS medium (MS medium, 3% sucrose, 3.5% mannitol, 0.56&#xa0;mM myo-inositol, 2.56&#xa0;mM MES, 0.15&#xa0;mM timentin, 0.3% gelrite); Roots: solidified MS medium (MS medium, 3% sucrose, 2.56&#x20;mM MES, 0.15&#xa0;mM timentin, 0.3% gelrite, 0.1% Atamon)</td>
<td align="left">Shoots: 5.4&#xa0;&#x3bc;M NAA, 8.9&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP or 9.12&#xa0;&#x3bc;M zeatin; Roots: IAA</td>
<td align="left">17-21&#xa0;weeks total to shoots</td>
<td align="left">Organogenesis</td>
<td align="left">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B112">Cui et&#x20;al. (2019)</xref>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
<p>Embryogenic callus formation can be from somatic protoplasts (somatic embryogenesis) or from embryogenic callus-derived protoplasts (secondary embryogenesis). Embryogenesis relies on cells within the microcalli presenting embryogenic properties, i.e. isodiametric, cytoplasm-rich cells (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Dai et&#x20;al., 2010</xref>). The embryogenic microcalli can then proliferate into embryogenic callus or form embryos directly. Embryos that form from the (micro)callus can be moved to media for germination and plantlet maturation.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s3-3-2">
<title>Rooting and Shooting Media</title>
<p>When it comes to regenerating plants from protoplast-derived callus, either embryogenic or somatic callus, the media composition can determine the efficiency of the regeneration. A majority of methods use solid MS media supplemented with auxin and cytokinin (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T3">Table&#x20;3</xref>). Typically, shooting is the primary goal with rooting coming shortly after, then planting in soil for maturation. It is generally easier to get roots from shoots than shoots from&#x20;roots.</p>
<p>In cabbage leaf protoplast shoot regeneration, MS versus Gamborg B5 based media supplemented with PSK-&#x3b1; and with or without plant growth regulators was compared (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B52">Kie&#x142;kowska and Adamus, 2019</xref>). Microcolonies were freed from alginate layers and, after transferring to regeneration medium, the callus would turn green, remain white, or begin to brown. The browning callus was considered dead, the white callus grew slightly but did not form shoots, and the green callus led to shoot regeneration roughly 4&#x2013;6&#xa0;weeks after transfer. It was found that the highest shoot regeneration came from callus placed on MS media with PSK-&#x3b1; and without PGRs across a majority of the genotypes tested.</p>
<p>When determining the effect of cytokinin on shoot induction from guava (<italic>Psidium guajava</italic>) leaf protoplast-derived callus, BAP and kinetin concentrations were investigated (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B87">Rezazadeh and Niedz, 2015</xref>). Concentrations of 7.1&#xa0;&#x3bc;M BAP and 11.15&#xa0;&#x3bc;M kinetin were optimal for shoot production; a higher concentration did not significantly increase the number of shoots. It was also found that changing the kinetin level was more effective than&#x20;BAP.</p>
<p>Some methods involve the addition of other supplements to the regeneration medium to assist the callus growth and differentiation. Activated charcoal is a common addition, with its ability to prevent browning of callus by adsorbing growth inhibitors (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B83">Prange et&#x20;al., 2010a</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69">Masani et&#x20;al., 2013</xref>). <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69">Masani et&#x20;al. (2013)</xref> also examined the effects of ascorbic acid to reduce discoloration and promote embryogenesis. They found that ascorbic acid increased the number of embryogenic calli which subsequentially improved the regeneration efficiency of oil palm embryogenic cell suspension-derived protoplasts.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s3-3-3">
<title>Somaclonal Variation</title>
<p>Somaclonal variation is the genetic or phenotypic variation that occurs in plants from tissue culture. A phenotypic change can be explained by either a genetic or epigenetic modification. Somaclonal variation can influence the fertility of the regenerant as well as the potential for changing the ploidy level, which is crucial for breeding.</p>
<p>Somaclonal variation is a potential occurrence in protoplast regeneration that can reveal itself in morphological or ploidy variation (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B84">Prange et&#x20;al., 2010b</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B94">Sheng et&#x20;al., 2011</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">Grzebelus et&#x20;al., 2012</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B99">Tomiczak et&#x20;al., 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Barcel&#xf3; et&#x20;al., 2019</xref>). In strawberry (<italic>Fragaria ananassa</italic>), morphological differences between the control and regenerated protoclones were observed (including plant size and leaflets per leaf) that were not explained by ploidy level changes but rather genetic variation detected by microsatellite markers (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Barcel&#xf3; et&#x20;al., 2019</xref>). <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B84">Prange et&#x20;al. (2010b)</xref> and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B99">Tomiczak et&#x20;al. (2015)</xref> both collected regenerated plants that were tetraploid from protoplasts that were initially diploid. In <italic>Cyclamen coum</italic>, it was observed that a single callus would give rise to both tetraploid and diploid regenerants which was reasoned could be a result from either the chromosomes doubling during callus culture or an error in separation of callus during culturing (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B84">Prange et&#x20;al., 2010b</xref>). With <italic>Gentiana decumbens</italic>, there was no morphological difference in the regenerants, besides wider leaf blades (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B99">Tomiczak et&#x20;al., 2015</xref>), yet 100% of the regenerated plants were tetraploid.</p>
<p>When considering the culture method&#x2019;s role in this somaclonal variation, one hypothesis is that if genome duplication occurred during protoplast culture, it is most likely due to the possibility that tetraploid protoplasts divide faster than diploid protoplasts, as shown in tobacco (<italic>Nicotiana plumbaginifolia</italic>) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B67">Magnien et&#x20;al., 1982</xref>) and rapeseed (<italic>Brassica napus</italic>) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B67">Magnien et&#x20;al., 1982</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">Chen et&#x20;al., 1994</xref>). If the polyploidization occurred during callus formation, the hypothesis is endoreduplication (amplification of DNA without mitosis) in callus cells, shown previously in pea (<italic>Pisum sativum</italic>) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B78">Ochatt et&#x20;al., 2000</xref>) and barrelclover (<italic>Medicago truncatula</italic>) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">Elmaghrabi and Ochatt, 2006</xref>) and would explain this increase of DNA content. It has also been shown that plant growth regulators typically added to protoplast culture media have an effect on endoreduplication frequency in sugar beet (<italic>Beta vulgaris</italic>) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B64">Lukaszewska et&#x20;al., 2012</xref>).</p>
<p>Time in tissue culture increases chances of somaclonal variation. Isolating protoplast from plant tissue may therefore be favorable over isolating from callus tissue in order to avoid somaclonal variation due to the additional <italic>in&#x20;vitro</italic> step that is required to obtain callus. This additional step has the potential to introduce genetic variation and effect the protoplast regeneration efficiency.</p>
<p>While somaclonal variation is undesirable in commercial crop production, it does have the benefit of creating phenotypic variability with a large number of regenerants that can be obtained through protoplast regeneration. This gives the potential for the identification of mutations that could be beneficial for a variety of uses, such as biotic resistance (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">Grzebelus et&#x20;al., 2013</xref>), abiotic resistance (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B53">Kie&#x142;kowska et&#x20;al., 2019</xref>), or create a desirable ornamental property.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="s4">
<title>Protoplast Transformation</title>
<p>Electroporation as a method for protoplast transformation is not as popular as PEG-mediated transformation. With electroporation, there are more factors to consider that potentially have effects on transfection efficiency and cell survival: pulse voltage, pulse length, pulse number, cell number, DNA concentration, and electroporation buffer composition (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B59">Lee et&#x20;al., 2020</xref>). However, when optimized, electroporation can be very efficient. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B59">Lee et&#x20;al. (2020)</xref> found that when electroporation transformation was optimized for cabbage protoplasts, the transformation efficiency was nearly double that of PEG-mediated delivery, although both transformation rates were low (3.4 and 1.8%, respectively). <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B101">W&#xf3;jcik and Rybczy&#x144;ski (2015)</xref> studied the effect of electroporation the culture of embryogenic cell suspension-derived protoplasts from gentian (<italic>Gentiana kurroo</italic>). A high electric field voltage over 1&#xa0;kV/cm significantly decreased protoplast survival and division. A single pulse had nine-fold higher protoplast viability than two pulses. Comparing the effect of length of the electric pulse on protoplast viability, it was found that 5&#xa0;ms completely killed the protoplasts and 40&#xa0;&#x3bc;s was too long and resulted in no division of the protoplast. A 20&#xa0;&#x3bc;s pulse had the highest protoplast viability and division, 70 and 44.5% respectively. Significantly higher protoplast viability was obtained with an electroporation buffer with KCl, higher MgCl<sub>2</sub> and pH, and lower MES (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B101">W&#xf3;jcik and Rybczy&#x144;ski, 2015</xref>).</p>
<p>The more common PEG-mediated transformation requires less materials than electroporation but does require chemicals that could potentially damage the protoplasts. The main factors to consider with regards to transformation efficiency and cell survival are PEG concentration, transfection time, DNA concentration, and cell number (which has previously been shown to influence the results (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Burris et&#x20;al., 2016</xref>)). Transformation with PEG can reach a high transformation rate, such as 90% in petunia leaf protoplasts (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B96">Subburaj et&#x20;al., 2016</xref>) and 80% in both wheat leaf protoplasts and rice sheath protoplasts (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B93">Shan et&#x20;al., 2013</xref>). Although, a high transformation rate does not translate to a large number of transformed regenerants. For example, petunia leaf protoplasts transiently transformed with PEG for CRISPR/Cas9 ribonuclear protein multiplexing of two genes had a 55% transfection efficiency, but only eight of the 67 regenerated plants (11.9%) had indel mutations (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B107">Yu et&#x20;al., 2020</xref>). PEG-mediated transformation of potato (<italic>Solanum tuberosum</italic>) leaf protoplasts resulted in more callus formation when treated with 12.5% PEG than 20% PEG; however, even the 12.5% PEG treatment resulted in a ten-fold decrease in callus formation compared to the untreated control (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">Craig et&#x20;al., 2005</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s5">
<title>Outlooks and Obstacles</title>
<p>In our opinion, the use of protoplast regeneration in NPBT has a promising future. It has been used in numerous applications of gene-editing for crop trait improvement; e.g. the knock-out of the BRASSINOSTEROID INSENSITIVE 2 (BIN2) gene in lettuce (<italic>Lactuca sativa</italic>) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B102">Woo et&#x20;al., 2015</xref>) and the granule bound starch synthase (GBSS) gene in potato (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Andersson et&#x20;al., 2018</xref>) or the oligo-directed mutagenesis of the 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS) gene in flax (<italic>Linum usitatissimum</italic>) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B90">Sauer et&#x20;al., 2016</xref>). We expect to see many more examples of its successful application in the coming&#x20;years.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, there are obstacles that need to be addressed in order to overcome some of the challenges associated with protoplast regeneration. It is a process that demands specialized tissue culture expertise, requires complex manipulation, and can be time-consuming. Overall, current methods for protoplast regeneration are very genotype-specific and need to be made more universal for increased applicability and success.</p>
<p>One potential approach for making protoplast regeneration universally available is to gain fundamental knowledge of the transcriptional regulation of the regeneration process via transcriptomic analysis. While transcriptomic analysis of protoplast culture (e.g. in moss (<italic>Physcomitrella patens</italic>) protonema protoplasts for the initial 72&#xa0;h of culture (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B104">Xiao et&#x20;al., 2012</xref>)) has previously been investigated, there is a lack of and difficulty in knowing the transcriptional activity of solely protoplasts destined for regeneration. Single-cell transcriptome profiling has been demonstrated (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B95">Shulse et&#x20;al., 2019</xref>), but the question remains on how to differentiate between protoplasts with regeneration capability and the larger, doomed protoplast population. Additional challenges arise when taking the cell-type composition of the source organ as well as the genotype into account.</p>
<p>Another process that can potentially improve universal application of protoplast regeneration technologies is through ectopic expression of embryogenic or morphogenic factors. Theoretically, if an ample number of protoplasts can directly develop into embryos, the regeneration frequency would multiply, resulting in a large number of regenerated plantlets. The direct development of protoplasts into embryos could also decrease the time in tissue culture, reducing the potential of somaclonal variation. The embryogenic or morphogenic transcription factors would need be to be transiently expressed in order to avoid any developmental effects that constitutive expression may cause (e.g<italic>.</italic> ectopic expression of BABY BOOM causing embryogenic growth on vegetative tissue (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Boutilier et&#x20;al., 2002</xref>)). Identification of appropriate embryogenic or morphogenic transcription factors, which could function individually or as a collective, as well as the timing of expression would need to be investigated. Recently, a study using Arabidopsis mesophyll protoplasts showed that timed transcriptional activation of auxin biosynthesis can significantly enhance regeneration success (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B89">Sakamoto et&#x20;al., 2021</xref>). It will be interesting to see whether this approach is applicable to divergent species.</p>
</sec>
</body>
<back>
<sec id="s6">
<title>Author Contributions</title>
<p>All authors listed have made a substantial, direct, and intellectual contribution to the work and approved it for publication.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s7">
<title>Funding</title>
<p>Research in the Bargmann lab is supported in part by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Hatch project VA-160133, Multistate S-009 project VA-136377, the Virginia Tech School of Plant and Environmental Sciences, and the Virginia Tech Open Access Subvention Fund.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="COI-statement" id="s8">
<title>Conflict of Interest</title>
<p>The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s9" sec-type="disclaimer">
<title>Publisher&#x2019;s Note</title>
<p>All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.</p>
</sec>
<ref-list>
<title>References</title>
<ref id="B1">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Adedeji</surname>
<given-names>O. S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Naing</surname>
<given-names>A. H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kim</surname>
<given-names>C. K.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>Protoplast Isolation and Shoot Regeneration from Protoplast-Derived Calli of Chrysanthemum Cv. White ND</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Tiss. Organ. Cult</source> <volume>141</volume>, <fpage>571</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>581</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11240-020-01816-3</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B111">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Ali</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Mujib</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zafar</surname>
<given-names>N.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Tonk</surname>
<given-names>D.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Protoplast Isolation and Plant Regeneration in Two Cultivated Coriander Varieties, Co-1 and RS</article-title>. <source>bta</source> <volume>99</volume>, <fpage>345</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>355</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5114/bta.2018.79965</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B2">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Andersson</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Turesson</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Olsson</surname>
<given-names>N.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>F&#xe4;lt</surname>
<given-names>A.-S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ohlsson</surname>
<given-names>P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Gonzalez</surname>
<given-names>M. N.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Genome Editing in Potato via CRISPR-Cas9 Ribonucleoprotein Delivery</article-title>. <source>Physiol. Plantarum</source> <volume>164</volume>, <fpage>378</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>384</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/ppl.12731</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B3">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Appert</surname>
<given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zo&#x144;</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Amrhein</surname>
<given-names>N.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2003</year>). <article-title>Kinetic Analysis of the Inhibition of Phenylalanine Ammonia-Lyase by 2-Aminoindan-2-Phosphonic Acid and Other Phenylalanine Analogues</article-title>. <source>Phytochemistry</source> <volume>62</volume>, <fpage>415</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>422</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/s0031-9422(02)00561-7</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B4">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Ara</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Jaiswal</surname>
<given-names>U.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Jaiswal</surname>
<given-names>V. S.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2000</year>). <article-title>Plant Regeneration from Protoplasts of Mango ( Mangifera Indica L.) through Somatic Embryogenesis</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Rep.</source> <volume>19</volume>, <fpage>622</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>627</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s002990050783</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B5">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Azad</surname>
<given-names>M. A. K.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2012</year>). <article-title>Plant Regeneration through Callus-Derived Protoplasts of Phellodendron Amurense Rupr</article-title>. <source>BioTechnology</source> <volume>6</volume>, <fpage>317</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>326</lpage>. </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B6">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Barcel&#xf3;</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Wallin</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Medina</surname>
<given-names>J.&#x20;J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Gil-Ariza</surname>
<given-names>D. J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>L&#xf3;pez-Casado</surname>
<given-names>G.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Juarez</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Isolation and Culture of Strawberry Protoplasts and Field Evaluation of Regenerated Plants</article-title>. <source>Scientia Horticulturae</source> <volume>256</volume>, <fpage>108552</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.scienta.2019.108552</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B7">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Bertini</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Tornielli</surname>
<given-names>G. B.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Pezzotti</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zenoni</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Regeneration of Plants from Embryogenic Callus-Derived Protoplasts of Garganega and Sangiovese grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) Cultivars</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Tiss. Organ. Cult.</source> <volume>138</volume>, <fpage>239</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>246</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11240-019-01619-1</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B8">
<citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Bhatia</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2015</year>). &#x201c;<article-title>Plant Tissue Culture</article-title>,&#x201d; in <source>Modern Applications of Plant Biotechnology in Pharmaceutical Sciences</source>. Editors <person-group person-group-type="editor">
<name>
<surname>Bhatia</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Sharma</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Dahiya</surname>
<given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Bera</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<publisher-loc>Boston</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Academic Press</publisher-name>), <fpage>31</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>107</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/b978-0-12-802221-4.00002-9</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B9">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Bhattacharya</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Sood</surname>
<given-names>P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Citovsky</surname>
<given-names>V.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2010</year>). <article-title>The Roles of Plant Phenolics in Defence and Communication during Agrobacterium and Rhizobium Infection</article-title>. <source>Mol. Plant Pathol.</source> <volume>11</volume>, <fpage>705</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>719</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1364-3703.2010.00625.x</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B10">
<citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Bhojwani</surname>
<given-names>S. S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Dantu</surname>
<given-names>P. K.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2013</year>). &#x201c;<article-title>Parasexual Hybridization</article-title>,&#x201d; in <source>Plant Tissue Culture: An Introductory Text</source>. Editors <person-group person-group-type="editor">
<name>
<surname>Bhojwani</surname>
<given-names>S. S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Dantu</surname>
<given-names>P. K.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<publisher-loc>India</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Springer</publisher-name>), <fpage>173</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>198</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/978-81-322-1026-9_14</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B11">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Boutilier</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Offringa</surname>
<given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Sharma</surname>
<given-names>V. K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kieft</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ouellet</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhang</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2002</year>). <article-title>Ectopic Expression of BABY BOOM Triggers a Conversion from Vegetative to Embryonic Growth</article-title>. <source>Plant Cell</source> <volume>14</volume>, <fpage>1737</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1749</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1105/tpc.001941</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B12">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Brown</surname>
<given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lucas</surname>
<given-names>J.&#x20;A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Power</surname>
<given-names>J.&#x20;B.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1987</year>). <article-title>Plant Regeneration from Protoplasts of a Wild Lettuce Species (Lactuca Saligna L.)</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Rep.</source> <volume>6</volume>, <fpage>180</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>182</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/bf00268472</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B13">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Bull</surname>
<given-names>S. E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Alder</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Barsan</surname>
<given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kohler</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Hennig</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Gruissem</surname>
<given-names>W.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2017</year>). <article-title>FLOWERING LOCUS T Triggers Early and Fertile Flowering in Glasshouse Cassava (Manihot Esculenta Crantz)</article-title>. <source>Plants (Basel)</source> <volume>6</volume>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/plants6020022</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B14">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Burris</surname>
<given-names>K. P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Dlugosz</surname>
<given-names>E. M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Collins</surname>
<given-names>A. G.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Stewart</surname>
<given-names>C. N.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lenaghan</surname>
<given-names>S. C.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Development of a Rapid, Low-Cost Protoplast Transfection System for Switchgrass (Panicum Virgatum L.)</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Rep.</source> <volume>35</volume>, <fpage>693</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>704</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00299-015-1913-7</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B15">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Cai</surname>
<given-names>X.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Wei</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Liu</surname>
<given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ren</surname>
<given-names>X.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Thi</surname>
<given-names>L. T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Jeong</surname>
<given-names>B. R.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>Synergistic Effect of NaCl Pretreatment and PVP on Browning Suppression and Callus Induction from Petal Explants of Paeonia Lactiflora Pall. &#x2018;Festival Maxima&#x27;</article-title>. <source>Plants (Basel)</source> <volume>9</volume>, <fpage>13</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/plants9030346</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B16">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Cai</surname>
<given-names>X.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kang</surname>
<given-names>X.-Y.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Plant Regeneration from Cell Suspension-Derived Protoplasts of Populus &#xd7; Beijingensis</article-title>. <source>
<italic>In Vitro</italic> Cell.Dev.Biol.-Plant</source> <volume>50</volume>, <fpage>92</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>98</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11627-013-9540-x</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B17">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Castelblanque</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Garc&#xed;a-Sogo</surname>
<given-names>B.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Pineda</surname>
<given-names>B.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Moreno</surname>
<given-names>V.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2010</year>). <article-title>Efficient Plant Regeneration from Protoplasts of Kalanchoe Blossfeldiana via Organogenesis</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Tiss. Organ. Cult.</source> <volume>100</volume>, <fpage>107</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>112</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11240-009-9617-8</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B18">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>&#x10c;erm&#xe1;k</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Baltes</surname>
<given-names>N. J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>&#x10c;egan</surname>
<given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhang</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Voytas</surname>
<given-names>D. F.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>High-frequency, Precise Modification of the Tomato Genome</article-title>. <source>Genome Biol.</source> <volume>16</volume>, <fpage>232</fpage>. </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B19">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Chamani</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Tahami</surname>
<given-names>S. k.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Efficient Protocol for Protoplast Isolation and Plant Regeneration of Fritillaria Imperialis L</article-title>. <source>J.&#x20;Agric. Sci. Technol.</source> <volume>18</volume>, <fpage>467</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>482</lpage>. </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B20">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Charrier</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Vergne</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Dousset</surname>
<given-names>N.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Richer</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Petiteau</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Chevreau</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Efficient Targeted Mutagenesis in Apple and First Time Edition of Pear Using the CRISPR-Cas9 System</article-title>. <source>Front. Plant Sci.</source> <volume>10</volume>, <fpage>40</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fpls.2019.00040</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B21">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Chen</surname>
<given-names>D.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Shao</surname>
<given-names>Q.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Yin</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Younis</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zheng</surname>
<given-names>B.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Polyamine Function in Plants: Metabolism, Regulation on Development, and Roles in Abiotic Stress Responses</article-title>. <source>Front. Plant Sci.</source> <volume>9</volume>, <fpage>1945</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fpls.2018.01945</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B22">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Chen</surname>
<given-names>Z.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Hsiao</surname>
<given-names>K.-C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Bornman</surname>
<given-names>C. H.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1994</year>). <article-title>Ploidy and Division Efficiency of Petiolar Protoplasts of Brassica Napus</article-title>. <source>Hereditas</source> <volume>120</volume>, <fpage>41</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>46</lpage>. </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B23">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Chikkala</surname>
<given-names>V. R. N.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Nugent</surname>
<given-names>G. D.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Dix</surname>
<given-names>P. J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Stevenson</surname>
<given-names>T. W.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2009</year>). <article-title>Regeneration from Leaf Explants and Protoplasts of <italic>Brassica oleracea</italic> Var. Botrytis (Cauliflower)</article-title>. <source>Scientia Horticulturae</source> <volume>119</volume>, <fpage>330</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>334</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.scienta.2008.07.036</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B24">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Craig</surname>
<given-names>W.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Gargano</surname>
<given-names>D.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Scotti</surname>
<given-names>N.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Nguyen</surname>
<given-names>T. T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lao</surname>
<given-names>N. T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kavanagh</surname>
<given-names>T. A.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2005</year>). <article-title>Direct Gene Transfer in Potato: A Comparison of Particle Bombardment of Leaf Explants and PEG-Mediated Transformation of Protoplasts</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Rep.</source> <volume>24</volume>, <fpage>603</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>611</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00299-005-0018-0</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B112">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Cui</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kuligowska Mackenzie</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Eeckhaut</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>M&#xfc;ller</surname>
<given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>L&#xfc;tken</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Protoplast Isolation and Culture from Kalancho&#xeb; Species: Optimization of Plant Growth Regulator Concentration for Efficient Callus Production</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Tiss. Organ. Cult.</source> <volume>138</volume>, <fpage>287</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>297</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11240-019-01624-4</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B25">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Dai</surname>
<given-names>X.-M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Xiao</surname>
<given-names>W.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Huang</surname>
<given-names>X.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhao</surname>
<given-names>J.-T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Chen</surname>
<given-names>Y.-F.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Huang</surname>
<given-names>X.-L.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2010</year>). <article-title>Plant Regeneration from Embryogenic Cell Suspensions and Protoplasts of Dessert Banana Cv. &#x27;Da Jiao&#x27; (Musa Paradisiacal ABB Linn.) via Somatic Embryogenesis</article-title>. <source>
<italic>In Vitro</italic> Cell.Dev.Biol.-Plant</source> <volume>46</volume>, <fpage>403</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>410</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11627-010-9314-7</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B26">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Deryckere</surname>
<given-names>D.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Eeckhaut</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Van Huylenbroeck</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Van Bockstaele</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2012</year>). <article-title>Low Melting point Agarose Beads as a Standard Method for Plantlet Regeneration from Protoplasts within the Cichorium Genus</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Rep.</source> <volume>31</volume>, <fpage>2261</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>2269</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00299-012-1335-8</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B27">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Dovzhenko</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Dal Bosco</surname>
<given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Meurer</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Koop</surname>
<given-names>H. U.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2003</year>). <article-title>Efficient Regeneration from Cotyledon Protoplasts in <italic>Arabidopsis thaliana</italic>
</article-title>. <source>Protoplasma</source> <volume>222</volume>, <fpage>107</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>111</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00709-003-0011-9</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B28">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Dovzhenko</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Koop</surname>
<given-names>H.-U.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2003</year>). <article-title>Sugarbeet ( Beta Vulgaris L.): Shoot Regeneration from Callus and Callus Protoplasts</article-title>. <source>Planta</source> <volume>217</volume>, <fpage>374</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>381</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00425-003-1006-7</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B113">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Driver</surname>
<given-names>J. A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kuniyuki</surname>
<given-names>A. H.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1984</year>). <article-title>In Vitro propagation of Paradox walnut Rootstock [Juglans Hindsii X Juglans Regia, Tissue Culture]</article-title>. <source>Hort. Sci.</source> <volume>19</volume>, <fpage>507</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>509</lpage>. </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B29">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Eeckhaut</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Van Houtven</surname>
<given-names>W.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Bruznican</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Leus</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Van Huylenbroeck</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>Somaclonal Variation in Chrysanthemum &#xd7; Morifolium Protoplast Regenerants</article-title>. <source>Front. Plant Sci.</source> <volume>11</volume>, <fpage>607171</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fpls.2020.607171</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B30">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Eeuwens</surname>
<given-names>C. J.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1976</year>). <article-title>Mineral Requirements for Growth and Callus Initiation of Tissue Explants Excised from Mature Coconut Palms (Cocos Nucifera) and Cultured <italic>In Vitro</italic>
</article-title>. <source>Physiol. Plant</source> <volume>36</volume>, <fpage>23</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>28</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1399-3054.1976.tb05022.x</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B31">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Elmaghrabi</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ochatt</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2006</year>). <article-title>Isoenzymes and Flow Cytometry for the Assessment of True-To-Typeness of Calluses and Cell Suspensions of Barrel Medic Prior to Regeneration</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Tiss. Organ. Cult</source> <volume>85</volume>, <fpage>31</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>43</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11240-005-9046-2</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B114">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Frearson</surname>
<given-names>E. M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Power</surname>
<given-names>J. B.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Cocking</surname>
<given-names>E. C.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1973</year>). <article-title>The Isolation, Culture and Regeneration of Petunia Leaf Protoplasts</article-title>. <source>Developmental Biol.</source> <volume>33</volume>, <fpage>130</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>137</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/0012-1606(73)90169-3</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B32">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Galun</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Raveh</surname>
<given-names>D.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1975</year>). <article-title>
<italic>In Vitro</italic> culture of Tobacco Protoplasts: Survival of Haploid and Diploid Protoplasts Exposed to X-ray Radiation at Different Times after Isolation</article-title>. <source>Radiat. Bot.</source> <volume>15</volume>, <fpage>79</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>82</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/s0033-7560(75)80017-2</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B33">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Gamborg</surname>
<given-names>O. L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Miller</surname>
<given-names>R. A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ojima</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1968</year>). <article-title>Nutrient Requirements of Suspension Cultures of Soybean Root Cells</article-title>. <source>Exp. Cel. Res.</source> <volume>50</volume>, <fpage>151</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>158</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/0014-4827(68)90403-5</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B34">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Grzebelus</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kruk</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Macko-Podg&#xf3;rni</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Grzebelus</surname>
<given-names>D.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2013</year>). <article-title>Response of Carrot Protoplasts and Protoplast-Derived Aggregates to Selection Using a Fungal Culture Filtrate of Alternaria Radicina</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Tiss. Organ. Cult.</source> <volume>115</volume>, <fpage>209</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>222</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11240-013-0353-8</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B35">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Grzebelus</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Skop</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Effect of &#x3b2;-lactam Antibiotics on Plant Regeneration in Carrot Protoplast Cultures</article-title>. <source>
<italic>In Vitro</italic> Cell.Dev.Biol.-Plant</source> <volume>50</volume>, <fpage>568</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>575</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11627-014-9626-0</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B36">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Grzebelus</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Szklarczyk</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Baranski</surname>
<given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2012</year>). <article-title>An Improved Protocol for Plant Regeneration from Leaf- and Hypocotyl-Derived Protoplasts of Carrot</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Tiss. Organ. Cult.</source> <volume>109</volume>, <fpage>101</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>109</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11240-011-0078-5</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B115">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Guan</surname>
<given-names>Q.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Guo</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Wei</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Meng</surname>
<given-names>F.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhang</surname>
<given-names>Z.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2010</year>). <article-title>Regeneration of Somatic Hybrids of Ginger via Chemical Protoplast Fusion</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Tiss. Organ. Cult.</source> <volume>102</volume>, <fpage>279</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>284</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11240-010-9730-8</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B37">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Hu</surname>
<given-names>Q.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Andersen</surname>
<given-names>S. B.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Hansen</surname>
<given-names>L. N.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1999</year>). <article-title>Plant Regeneration Capacity of Mesophyll Protoplasts from Brassica Napus and Related Species</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Tissue Organ. Cult.</source> <volume>59</volume>, <fpage>189</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>196</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1023/a:1006417530587</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B116">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Hu</surname>
<given-names>X.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Yin</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>He</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Plant Regeneration from Protoplasts of Gentiana Macrophylla Pall. Using agar-pool Culture</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Tiss. Organ. Cult.</source> <volume>121</volume>, <fpage>345</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>351</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11240-014-0705-z</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B38">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Hwang</surname>
<given-names>H.-H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Yu</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lai</surname>
<given-names>E.-M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2017</year>). <article-title>Agrobacterium-mediated Plant Transformation: Biology and Applications</article-title>. <source>Arab</source> <volume>15</volume>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1199/tab.0186</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B39">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Imbrie-Milligan</surname>
<given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kamo</surname>
<given-names>K. K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Hodges</surname>
<given-names>T. K.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1987</year>). <article-title>Microcallus Growth from maize Protoplasts</article-title>. <source>Planta</source> <volume>171</volume>, <fpage>58</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>64</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/bf00395067</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B40">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Ishii</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1988</year>). <article-title>Factors Influencing Protoplast Viability of Suspension-Cultured Rice Cells during Isolation Process</article-title>. <source>Plant Physiol.</source> <volume>88</volume>, <fpage>26</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>29</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1104/pp.88.1.26</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B41">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Jeong</surname>
<given-names>Y. Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lee</surname>
<given-names>H.-Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kim</surname>
<given-names>S. W.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Noh</surname>
<given-names>Y.-S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Seo</surname>
<given-names>P. J.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2021</year>). <article-title>Optimization of Protoplast Regeneration in the Model Plant <italic>Arabidopsis thaliana</italic>
</article-title>. <source>Plant Methods</source> <volume>17</volume>, <fpage>21</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s13007-021-00720-x</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B42">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Jie</surname>
<given-names>E.-Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kim</surname>
<given-names>S.-W.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Jang</surname>
<given-names>H.-R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>In</surname>
<given-names>D.-S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Liu</surname>
<given-names>J.-R.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2011</year>). <article-title>Myo-inositol Increases the Plating Efficiency of Protoplast Derived from Cotyledon of Cabbage (<italic>Brassica oleracea</italic> Var. Capitata)</article-title>. <source>J.&#x20;Plant Biotechnol.</source> <volume>38</volume>, <fpage>69</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>76</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5010/jpb.2011.38.1.069</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B43">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Jones</surname>
<given-names>A. M. P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Chattopadhyay</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Shukla</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zo&#x144;</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Saxena</surname>
<given-names>P. K.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2012</year>). <article-title>Inhibition of Phenylpropanoid Biosynthesis Increases Cell wall Digestibility, Protoplast Isolation, and Facilitates Sustained Cell Division in American Elm (Ulmus Americana)</article-title>. <source>BMC Plant Biol.</source> <volume>12</volume>, <fpage>75</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/1471-2229-12-75</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B44">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Jones</surname>
<given-names>A. M. P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Shukla</surname>
<given-names>M. R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Biswas</surname>
<given-names>G. C. G.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Saxena</surname>
<given-names>P. K.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Protoplast-to-plant Regeneration of American Elm (Ulmus Americana)</article-title>. <source>Protoplasma</source> <volume>252</volume>, <fpage>925</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>931</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00709-014-0724-y</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B45">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Kang</surname>
<given-names>H. H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Naing</surname>
<given-names>A. H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kim</surname>
<given-names>C. K.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>Protoplast Isolation and Shoot Regeneration from Protoplast-Derived Callus of Petunia Hybrida Cv. Mirage Rose</article-title>. <source>Biology</source> <volume>9</volume>, <fpage>228</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/biology9080228</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B46">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Kao</surname>
<given-names>K. N.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Michayluk</surname>
<given-names>M. R.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1975</year>). <article-title>Nutritional Requirements for Growth of Vicia Hajastana Cells and Protoplasts at a Very Low Population Density in Liquid media</article-title>. <source>Planta</source> <volume>126</volume>, <fpage>105</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>110</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/bf00380613</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B47">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Karamian</surname>
<given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ebrahimzadeh</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2001</year>). <article-title>Plantlet Regeneration from Protoplast-Derived Embryogenic Calli of Crocus Cancellatus</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Tissue Organ. Cult.</source> <volume>65</volume>, <fpage>115</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>121</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1023/a:1010661620753</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B117">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Karamian</surname>
<given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ranjbar</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2011</year>). <article-title>Somatic Embryogenesis and Plantlet Regeneration from Protoplast Culture of Muscari Neglectum Guss</article-title>. <source>Afr. J. Biotechnol.</source> <volume>10</volume>, <fpage>4602</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>4607</lpage>. </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B48">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>K&#xe4;stner</surname>
<given-names>U.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Klocke</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Abel</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2017</year>). <article-title>Regeneration of Protoplasts after Somatic Hybridisation of Hydrangea</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Tiss. Organ. Cult</source> <volume>129</volume>, <fpage>359</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>373</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11240-017-1183-x</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B49">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Kaur</surname>
<given-names>N. D.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Vyvadilov&#xe1;</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kl&#xed;ma</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Bechyn&#x11b;</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2006</year>). <article-title>A Simple Procedure for Mesophyll Protoplast Culture and Plant Regeneration in <italic>Brassica oleracea</italic> L. And Brassica Napus L. Czech</article-title>. <source>J.&#x20;Genet. Plant Breed.</source> <volume>42</volume>, <fpage>103</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>110</lpage>. </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B50">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Kie&#x142;kowska</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Adamus</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2012</year>). <article-title>An Alginate-Layer Technique for Culture of <italic>Brassica oleracea</italic> L. protoplastsIn Vitro</article-title>. <source>Cel. Dev. Biol. Plant.</source> <volume>48</volume>, <fpage>265</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>273</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11627-012-9431-6</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B51">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Kie&#x142;kowska</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Adamus</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2021</year>). <article-title>Exogenously Applied Polyamines Reduce Reactive Oxygen Species, Enhancing Cell Division and the Shoot Regeneration from <italic>Brassica oleracea</italic> L. Var. Capitata Protoplasts</article-title>. <source>Agronomy</source> <volume>11</volume>, <fpage>735</fpage>. </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B52">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Kie&#x142;kowska</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Adamus</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Peptide Growth Factor Phytosulfokine-&#x3b1; Stimulates Cell Divisions and Enhances Regeneration from <italic>B. oleracea</italic> Var. Capitata L. Protoplast Culture</article-title>. <source>J.&#x20;Plant Growth Regul.</source> <volume>38</volume>, <fpage>931</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>944</lpage>. </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B53">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Kie&#x142;kowska</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Grzebelus</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lis-Krzy&#x15b;cin</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ma&#x107;kowska</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Application of the Salt Stress to the Protoplast Cultures of the Carrot (Daucus Carota L.) and Evaluation of the Response of Regenerants to Soil Salinity. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult</article-title>. <source>PCTOC</source> <volume>137</volume>, <fpage>379</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>395</lpage>. </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B54">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Klejdus</surname>
<given-names>B.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kov&#xe1;&#x10d;ik</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Babula</surname>
<given-names>P.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2013</year>). <article-title>PAL Inhibitor Evokes Different Responses in Two Hypericum Species</article-title>. <source>Plant Physiol. Biochem.</source> <volume>63</volume>, <fpage>82</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>88</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.plaphy.2012.11.019</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B55">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Klimek-Chodacka</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kadluczka</surname>
<given-names>D.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lukasiewicz</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Malec-Pala</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Baranski</surname>
<given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Grzebelus</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>Effective Callus Induction and Plant Regeneration in Callus and Protoplast Cultures of Nigella Damascena L</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Tiss. Organ. Cult</source> <volume>143</volume>, <fpage>693</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>707</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11240-020-01953-9</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B56">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Kobayashi</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kameya</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ichihashi</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1993</year>). <article-title>Plant Regeneration from Protoplasts Derived from Callus of Phalaenopsis</article-title>. <source>Plant Tissue Cult. Lett.</source> <volume>10</volume>, <fpage>267</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>270</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5511/plantbiotechnology1984.10.267</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B57">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Kyozuka</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Hayashi</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Shimamoto</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1987</year>). <article-title>High Frequency Plant Regeneration from rice Protoplasts by Novel Nurse Culture Methods</article-title>. <source>Mol. Gen. Genet.</source> <volume>206</volume>, <fpage>408</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>413</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/bf00428879</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B58">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Lassoued</surname>
<given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Phillips</surname>
<given-names>P. W. B.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Macall</surname>
<given-names>D. M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Hesseln</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Smyth</surname>
<given-names>S. J.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2021</year>). <article-title>Expert Opinions on the Regulation of Plant Genome Editing</article-title>. <source>Plant Biotechnol. J.</source> <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/pbi.13597</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B59">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Lee</surname>
<given-names>M. H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lee</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Choi</surname>
<given-names>S. A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kim</surname>
<given-names>Y.-S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Koo</surname>
<given-names>O.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Choi</surname>
<given-names>S. H.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>Efficient Genome Editing Using CRISPR-Cas9 RNP Delivery into Cabbage Protoplasts via Electro-Transfection</article-title>. <source>Plant Biotechnol. Rep.</source> <volume>14</volume>, <fpage>695</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>702</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11816-020-00645-2</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B60">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Liang</surname>
<given-names>Z.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Chen</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhang</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Liu</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Yin</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Qiu</surname>
<given-names>J.-L.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Genome Editing of Bread Wheat Using Biolistic Delivery of CRISPR/Cas9&#x20;<italic>In Vitro</italic> Transcripts or Ribonucleoproteins</article-title>. <source>Nat. Protoc.</source> <volume>13</volume>, <fpage>413</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>430</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nprot.2017.145</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B61">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Lin</surname>
<given-names>C.-S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Hsu</surname>
<given-names>C.-T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Yang</surname>
<given-names>L.-H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lee</surname>
<given-names>L.-Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Fu</surname>
<given-names>J.-Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Cheng</surname>
<given-names>Q.-W.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Application of Protoplast Technology to CRISPR/Cas9 Mutagenesis: from Single-Cell Mutation Detection to Mutant Plant Regeneration</article-title>. <source>Plant Biotechnol. J.</source> <volume>16</volume>, <fpage>1295</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1310</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/pbi.12870</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B62">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Lin</surname>
<given-names>Q.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zong</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Xue</surname>
<given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Wang</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Jin</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhu</surname>
<given-names>Z.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>Prime Genome Editing in rice and Wheat</article-title>. <source>Nat. Biotechnol.</source> <volume>38</volume>, <fpage>582</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>585</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/s41587-020-0455-x</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B63">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Lopez-Arellano</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Dhir</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Albino</surname>
<given-names>C. N.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Santiago</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Morris</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Dhir</surname>
<given-names>S. K.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Somatic Embryogenesis and Plantlet Regeneration from Protoplast Culture of Stevia rebaudiana</article-title>. <source>Br. Biotechnol. J.</source> <volume>5</volume>, <fpage>1</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>12</lpage>. </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B64">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Lukaszewska</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Virden</surname>
<given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Sliwinska</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2012</year>). <article-title>Hormonal Control of Endoreduplication in Sugar Beet (Beta Vulgaris L.) Seedlings Growing <italic>In Vitro</italic>
</article-title>. <source>Plant Biol. (Stuttg)</source> <volume>14</volume>, <fpage>216</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>222</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1438-8677.2011.00477.x</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B65">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Ma</surname>
<given-names>X.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhang</surname>
<given-names>X.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Liu</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Li</surname>
<given-names>Z.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>Highly Efficient DNA-free Plant Genome Editing Using Virally Delivered CRISPR-Cas9</article-title>. <source>Nat. Plants</source> <volume>6</volume>, <fpage>773</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>779</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/s41477-020-0704-5</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B66">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Ma&#x107;kowska</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Jarosz</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Grzebelus</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Plant Regeneration from Leaf-Derived Protoplasts within the Daucus Genus: Effect of Different Conditions in Alginate Embedding and Phytosulfokine Application. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult</article-title>. <source>PCTOC</source> <volume>117</volume>, <fpage>241</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>252</lpage>. </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B67">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Magnien</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Dalschaert</surname>
<given-names>X.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Faraoni-Sciamanna</surname>
<given-names>P.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1982</year>). <article-title>Transmission of a Cytological Heterogeneity from the Leaf to the Protoplasts in Culture</article-title>. <source>Plant Sci. Lett.</source> <volume>25</volume>, <fpage>291</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>303</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/0304-4211(82)90159-6</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B68">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Majewska-Sawka</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Niklas</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ja&#x17c;d&#x17c;ewska</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1997</year>). <article-title>The Effect of Polyamines on the Development of Sugar Beet Protoplasts</article-title>. <source>Biol. Plant.</source> <volume>39</volume>, <fpage>561</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>567</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1023/a:1000926714622</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B69">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Masani</surname>
<given-names>M. Y. A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Noll</surname>
<given-names>G.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Parveez</surname>
<given-names>G. K. A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Sambanthamurthi</surname>
<given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Pr&#xfc;fer</surname>
<given-names>D.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2013</year>). <article-title>Regeneration of Viable Oil palm Plants from Protoplasts by Optimizing media Components, Growth Regulators and Cultivation Procedures</article-title>. <source>Plant Sci.</source> <volume>210</volume>, <fpage>118</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>127</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.plantsci.2013.05.021</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B70">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Masson</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Paszkowski</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1992</year>). <article-title>The Culture Response ofArabidopsis Thalianaprotoplasts Is Determined by the Growth Conditions of Donor Plants</article-title>. <source>Plant J.</source> <volume>2</volume>, <fpage>829</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>833</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1365-313x.1992.tb00153.x</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B71">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Meyer</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Serek</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Winkelmann</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2009</year>). <article-title>Protoplast Isolation and Plant Regeneration of Different Genotypes of Petunia and Calibrachoa</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Tiss. Organ. Cult.</source> <volume>99</volume>, <fpage>27</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>34</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11240-009-9572-4</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B72">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Mizuhiro</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kenichi</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ito</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kadowaki</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ohashi</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Mii</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2001</year>). <article-title>Plant Regeneration from Cell Suspension-Derived Protoplasts of Primula Malacoides and Primula Obconica</article-title>. <source>Plant Sci.</source> <volume>160</volume>, <fpage>1221</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1228</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/s0168-9452(01)00390-9</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B73">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Murashige</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Skoog</surname>
<given-names>F.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1962</year>). <article-title>A Revised Medium for Rapid Growth and Bio Assays with Tobacco Tissue Cultures</article-title>. <source>Physiol. Plant</source> <volume>15</volume>, <fpage>473</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>497</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1399-3054.1962.tb08052.x</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B74">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Nagata</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ishii</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1979</year>). <article-title>A Rapid Method for Isolation of Mesophyll Protoplasts</article-title>. <source>Can. J.&#x20;Bot.</source> <volume>57</volume>, <fpage>4</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1139/b79-226</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B75">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Nassour</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Dorion</surname>
<given-names>N.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2002</year>). <article-title>Plant Regeneration from Protoplasts of Micropropagated Pelargonium X Hortorum &#x2018;Alain&#x27;: Effect of Some Environmental and Medium Factors on Protoplast System Efficiency</article-title>. <source>Plant Sci.</source> <volume>163</volume>, <fpage>169</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>176</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/s0168-9452(02)00093-6</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B118">
<citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Nirmal Babu</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Samsudeen</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Divakaran</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Pillai</surname>
<given-names>G. S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Sumathi</surname>
<given-names>V.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Praveen</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2016</year>). &#x201c;<article-title>Protocols for In Vitro Propagation, Conservation, Synthetic Seed Production, Embryo Rescue, Microrhizome Production, Molecular Profiling, and Genetic Transformation in Ginger (Zingiber Officinale Roscoe.)</article-title>,&#x201d; in <source>Protocols for in Vitro Cultures and Secondary Metabolite Analysis of Aromatic and Medicinal Plants</source>. <source>Methods in Molecular Biology</source>. Editor <person-group person-group-type="editor">
<name>
<surname>Jain</surname>
<given-names>S. M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> <edition>Second Edition</edition> (<publisher-loc>New York, NY</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Springer</publisher-name>), <fpage>403</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>426</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/978-1-4939-3332-7_28</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B76">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Nitsch</surname>
<given-names>J.&#x20;P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Nitsch</surname>
<given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1969</year>). <article-title>Haploid Plants from Pollen Grains</article-title>. <source>Science</source> <volume>163</volume>, <fpage>85</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>87</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1126/science.163.3862.85</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B77">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Nybakken</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Keski-Saari</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Falck</surname>
<given-names>M. A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Julkunen-Tiitto</surname>
<given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2007</year>). <article-title>Restoration of Secondary Metabolism in Birch Seedlings Relieved from PAL-Inhibitor</article-title>. <source>Trees</source> <volume>21</volume>, <fpage>273</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>281</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00468-006-0120-0</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B78">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Ochatt</surname>
<given-names>S. J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Mousset-D&#xe9;clas</surname>
<given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Rancillac</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2000</year>). <article-title>Fertile Pea Plants Regenerate from Protoplasts when Calluses Have Not Undergone Endoreduplication</article-title>. <source>Plant Sci.</source> <volume>156</volume>, <fpage>177</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>183</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/s0168-9452(00)00250-8</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B79">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Osakabe</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Liang</surname>
<given-names>Z.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ren</surname>
<given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Nishitani</surname>
<given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Osakabe</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Wada</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>CRISPR-Cas9-mediated Genome Editing in Apple and grapevine</article-title>. <source>Nat. Protoc.</source> <volume>13</volume>, <fpage>2844</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>2863</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/s41596-018-0067-9</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B119">
<citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Park</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Choi</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Park</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Yoon</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Park</surname>
<given-names>A. Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Choe</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2019</year>). &#x201c;<article-title>DNA-free Genome Editing via Ribonucleoprotein (RNP) Delivery of CRISPR/Cas in Lettuce</article-title>,&#x201d; in <source>Plant Genome Editing with CRISPR Systems: Methods and Protocols</source>. <source>Methods in Molecular Biology</source>. Editor <person-group person-group-type="editor">
<name>
<surname>Qi</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<publisher-loc>New York, NY</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Springer</publisher-name>), <fpage>337</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>354</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/978-1-4939-8991-1_25</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B80">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Pauk</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Fekete</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Vilkki</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Pulli</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1991</year>). <article-title>Protoplast Culture and Plant Regeneration of Different Agronomically Important Brassica Species and Varieties</article-title>. <source>AFSci</source> <volume>63</volume>, <fpage>371</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>378</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.23986/afsci.72416</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B81">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Pearce</surname>
<given-names>R. S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Cocking</surname>
<given-names>E. C.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1973</year>). <article-title>Behaviour in Culture of Isolated Protoplasts from .Paul&#x27;s Scarlet. Rose Suspension Culture Cells</article-title>. <source>Protoplasma</source> <volume>77</volume>, <fpage>165</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>180</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/bf01276755</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B82">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Prakash</surname>
<given-names>A. H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Rao</surname>
<given-names>K. S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kumar</surname>
<given-names>M. U.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1997</year>). <article-title>Plant Regeneration from Protoplasts ofCapsicum Annuum L. Cv. California Wonder</article-title>. <source>J.&#x20;Biosci.</source> <volume>22</volume>, <fpage>339</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>344</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/bf02703236</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B83">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Prange</surname>
<given-names>A. N. S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Bartsch</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Serek</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Winkelmann</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2010a</year>). <article-title>Regeneration of Different Cyclamen Species via Somatic Embryogenesis from Callus, Suspension Cultures and Protoplasts</article-title>. <source>Scientia Horticulturae</source> <volume>125</volume>, <fpage>442</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>450</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.scienta.2010.04.018</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B84">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Prange</surname>
<given-names>A. N. S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Serek</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Bartsch</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Winkelmann</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2010b</year>). <article-title>Efficient and Stable Regeneration from Protoplasts of Cyclamen Coum Miller via Somatic Embryogenesis</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Tiss. Organ. Cult.</source> <volume>101</volume>, <fpage>171</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>182</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11240-010-9674-z</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B85">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Qin</surname>
<given-names>Y. H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Teixeira da Silva</surname>
<given-names>J.&#x20;A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Bi</surname>
<given-names>J.&#x20;H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhang</surname>
<given-names>S. L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Hu</surname>
<given-names>G. B.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2011</year>). <article-title>Response of <italic>In Vitro</italic> Strawberry to Antibiotics</article-title>. <source>Plant Growth Regul.</source> <volume>65</volume>, <fpage>183</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>193</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s10725-011-9587-9</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B120">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Rahmani</surname>
<given-names>M.-S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Pijut</surname>
<given-names>P. M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Shabanian</surname>
<given-names>N.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Protoplast Isolation and Genetically True-to-type Plant Regeneration from Leaf- and Callus-Derived Protoplasts of Albizia Julibrissin</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Tiss. Organ. Cult.</source> <volume>127</volume>, <fpage>475</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>488</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11240-016-1072-8</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B86">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Reustle</surname>
<given-names>G.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Natter</surname>
<given-names>I.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1994</year>). <article-title>Effect of Polyvinylpyrrolidone and Activated Charcoal on Formation of Microcallus from grapevine Protoplasts (Vitis sp.)</article-title>. <source>VITIS - J.&#x20;Grapevine Res.</source> <volume>33</volume>, <fpage>117</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>121</lpage>. </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B87">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Rezazadeh</surname>
<given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Niedz</surname>
<given-names>R. P.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Protoplast Isolation and Plant Regeneration of Guava (Psidium Guajava L.) Using Experiments in Mixture-Amount Design</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Tiss. Organ. Cult.</source> <volume>122</volume>, <fpage>585</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>604</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11240-015-0790-7</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B88">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Ruesink</surname>
<given-names>A. W.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1978</year>). <article-title>Leucine Uptake and Incorporation by Convolvulus Tissue Culture Cells and Protoplasts under Severe Osmotic Stress</article-title>. <source>Physiol. Plant</source> <volume>44</volume>, <fpage>48</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>56</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1399-3054.1978.tb01612.x</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B121">
<citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Sahab</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Hayden</surname>
<given-names>M. J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Mason</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Spangenberg</surname>
<given-names>G.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2019</year>). &#x201c;<article-title>Mesophyll Protoplasts and PEG-Mediated Transfections: Transient Assays and Generation of Stable Transgenic Canola Plants</article-title>,&#x201d; in <source>Transgenic Plants: Methods and Protocols</source>. <source>Methods in Molecular Biology</source>. Editors <person-group person-group-type="editor">
<name>
<surname>Kumar</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Barone</surname>
<given-names>P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Smith</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<publisher-loc>New York, NY</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Springer</publisher-name>), <fpage>131</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>152</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/978-1-4939-8778-8_10</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B89">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Sakamoto</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kawamura</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Suzuki</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Segami</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Maeshima</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Polyn</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group>&#x20;(<year>2021</year>). <article-title>Transcriptional Activation of Auxin Biosynthesis Drives Developmental Reprogramming of Differentiated Cells</article-title>. <source>bioRxiv</source>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1101/2021.06.26.450054</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B90">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Sauer</surname>
<given-names>N. J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Narv&#xe1;ez-V&#xe1;squez</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Mozoruk</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Miller</surname>
<given-names>R. B.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Warburg</surname>
<given-names>Z. J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Woodward</surname>
<given-names>M. J.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Oligonucleotide-Mediated Genome Editing Provides Precision and Function to Engineered Nucleases and Antibiotics in Plants</article-title>. <source>Plant Physiol.</source> <volume>170</volume>, <fpage>1917</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1928</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1104/pp.15.01696</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B91">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Saxena</surname>
<given-names>P. K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Gill</surname>
<given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1986</year>). <article-title>Removal of browning and Growth Enhancement&#x20;by Polyvinylpolypyrrolidone in Protoplast Cultures of Cyamopsis Tetragonoloba L</article-title>. <source>Biol. Plant</source> <volume>28</volume>, <fpage>313</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>315</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/bf02902302</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B92">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Shahin</surname>
<given-names>E. A.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1985</year>). <article-title>Totipotency of Tomato Protoplasts</article-title>. <source>Theoret. Appl. Genet.</source> <volume>69</volume>, <fpage>235</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>240</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/bf00662431</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B93">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Shan</surname>
<given-names>Q.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Wang</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Li</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhang</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Chen</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Liang</surname>
<given-names>Z.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2013</year>). <article-title>Targeted Genome Modification of Crop Plants Using a CRISPR-Cas System</article-title>. <source>Nat. Biotechnol.</source> <volume>31</volume>, <fpage>686</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>688</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nbt.2650</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B94">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Sheng</surname>
<given-names>X.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhao</surname>
<given-names>Z.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Yu</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Wang</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Xiaohui</surname>
<given-names>Z.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Gu</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2011</year>). <article-title>Protoplast Isolation and Plant Regeneration of Different Doubled Haploid Lines of Cauliflower (<italic>Brassica oleracea</italic> Var. Botrytis)</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Tiss. Organ. Cult.</source> <volume>107</volume>, <fpage>513</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>520</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11240-011-0002-z</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B95">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Shulse</surname>
<given-names>C. N.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Cole</surname>
<given-names>B. J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ciobanu</surname>
<given-names>D.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lin</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Yoshinaga</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Gouran</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>High-Throughput Single-Cell Transcriptome Profiling of Plant Cell Types</article-title>. <source>Cel. Rep.</source> <volume>27</volume>, <fpage>2241</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>2247</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.celrep.2019.04.054</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B122">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Staba</surname>
<given-names>E. J.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1969</year>). <article-title>Plant Tissue Culture as a Technique for the Phytochemist</article-title>. <source>Recent Adv. Phytochem.</source> <volume>2</volume>, <fpage>75</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>105</lpage>. </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B96">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Subburaj</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Chung</surname>
<given-names>S. J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lee</surname>
<given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ryu</surname>
<given-names>S.-M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kim</surname>
<given-names>D. H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kim</surname>
<given-names>J.-S.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Site-directed Mutagenesis in Petunia &#xd7; Hybrida Protoplast System Using Direct Delivery of Purified Recombinant Cas9 Ribonucleoproteins</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Rep.</source> <volume>35</volume>, <fpage>1535</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1544</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00299-016-1937-7</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B97">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Svitashev</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Schwartz</surname>
<given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lenderts</surname>
<given-names>B.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Young</surname>
<given-names>J.&#x20;K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Mark Cigan</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Genome Editing in maize Directed by CRISPR-Cas9 Ribonucleoprotein Complexes</article-title>. <source>Nat. Commun.</source> <volume>7</volume>, <fpage>13274</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/ncomms13274</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B123">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Tahami</surname>
<given-names>S. K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Chamani</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zare</surname>
<given-names>N.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Plant Regeneration from Protoplasts of Lilium Ledebourii (Baker) Boiss</article-title>. <source>J. Agric. Sci. Technology</source> <volume>16</volume>, <fpage>1133</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1144</lpage>. </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B98">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Tang</surname>
<given-names>W.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Harris</surname>
<given-names>L. C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Outhavong</surname>
<given-names>V.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Newton</surname>
<given-names>R. J.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2004</year>). <article-title>Antioxidants Enhance <italic>In Vitro</italic> Plant Regeneration by Inhibiting the Accumulation of Peroxidase in Virginia pine (Pinus Virginiana Mill.)</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Rep.</source> <volume>22</volume>, <fpage>871</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>877</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00299-004-0781-3</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B99">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Tomiczak</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Miku&#x142;a</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Sliwinska</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Rybczy&#x144;ski</surname>
<given-names>J.&#x20;J.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Autotetraploid Plant Regeneration by Indirect Somatic Embryogenesis from Leaf Mesophyll Protoplasts of Diploid Gentiana Decumbens L.F</article-title>. <source>
<italic>In Vitro</italic> Cell.Dev.Biol.-Plant</source> <volume>51</volume>, <fpage>350</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>359</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11627-015-9674-0</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B100">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Vessabutr</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Grant</surname>
<given-names>W. F.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1995</year>). <article-title>Isolation, Culture and Regeneration of Protoplasts from Birdsfoot Trefoil (<italic>Lotus corniculatus</italic>)</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Tiss. Organ. Cult.</source> <volume>41</volume>, <fpage>9</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>15</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/bf00124081</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B101">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>W&#xf3;jcik</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Rybczy&#x144;ski</surname>
<given-names>J.&#x20;J.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Electroporation and Morphogenic Potential of Gentiana Kurroo (Royle) Embryogenic Cell Suspension Protoplasts</article-title>. <source>bta</source> <volume>1</volume>, <fpage>19</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>29</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5114/bta.2015.54170</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B102">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Woo</surname>
<given-names>J.&#x20;W.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kim</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kwon</surname>
<given-names>S. I.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Corval&#xe1;n</surname>
<given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Cho</surname>
<given-names>S. W.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kim</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>DNA-free Genome Editing in Plants with Preassembled CRISPR-Cas9 Ribonucleoproteins</article-title>. <source>Nat. Biotechnol.</source> <volume>33</volume>, <fpage>1162</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1164</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/nbt.3389</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B103">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Wu</surname>
<given-names>F.-H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Shen</surname>
<given-names>S.-C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lee</surname>
<given-names>L.-Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lee</surname>
<given-names>S.-H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Chan</surname>
<given-names>M.-T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lin</surname>
<given-names>C.-S.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2009</year>). <article-title>Tape-Arabidopsis Sandwich - a Simpler Arabidopsis Protoplast Isolation Method</article-title>. <source>Plant Methods</source> <volume>5</volume>, <fpage>16</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/1746-4811-5-16</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B104">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Xiao</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhang</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Yang</surname>
<given-names>G.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhu</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>He</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2012</year>). <article-title>Transcriptome of Protoplasts Reprogrammed into Stem Cells in Physcomitrella Patens</article-title>. <source>PLoS ONE</source> <volume>7</volume>, <fpage>e35961</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1371/journal.pone.0035961</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B105">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Yang</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Matsubayashi</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Nakamura</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Sakagami</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1999</year>). <article-title>Oryza Sativa PSK Gene Encodes a Precursor of Phytosulfokine-Alpha, a Sulfated Peptide Growth Factor Found in Plants</article-title>. <source>Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.</source> <volume>96</volume>, <fpage>13560</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>13565</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1073/pnas.96.23.13560</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B106">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Yong</surname>
<given-names>J.&#x20;W.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ge</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ng</surname>
<given-names>Y. F.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Tan</surname>
<given-names>S. N.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2009</year>). <article-title>The Chemical Composition and Biological Properties of Coconut (Cocos Nucifera L.) Water</article-title>. <source>Molecules</source> <volume>14</volume>, <fpage>5144</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>5164</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/molecules14125144</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B107">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Yu</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Tu</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Subburaj</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Bae</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lee</surname>
<given-names>G.-J.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>Simultaneous Targeting of Duplicated Genes in Petunia Protoplasts for Flower Color Modification via CRISPR-Cas9 Ribonucleoproteins</article-title>. <source>Plant Cel. Rep</source>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00299-020-02593-1</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B151">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Zafar</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Nenz</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Damiani</surname>
<given-names>F.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Pupilli</surname>
<given-names>F.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Arcioni</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1995</year>). <article-title>Plant regeneration from explant and protoplast derived calluses of Medicago littoralis</article-title>. <source>Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult.</source> <volume>41</volume>: <fpage>41</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>48</lpage>. </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B108">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Zhang</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Liang</surname>
<given-names>Z.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zong</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Wang</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Liu</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Chen</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group> (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Efficient and Transgene-free Genome Editing in Wheat through Transient Expression of CRISPR/Cas9 DNA or RNA</article-title>. <source>Nat. Commun.</source> <volume>7</volume>, <fpage>12617</fpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/ncomms12617</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B109">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Zhang</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Malzahn</surname>
<given-names>A. A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Sretenovic</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Qi</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>The Emerging and Uncultivated Potential of CRISPR Technology in Plant Science</article-title>. <source>Nat. Plants</source> <volume>5</volume>, <fpage>778</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>794</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/s41477-019-0461-5</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B110">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Zhou</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Wang</surname>
<given-names>B.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhu</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2005</year>). <article-title>Conditioned Culture for Protoplasts Isolated from chrysanthemum: An Efficient Approach</article-title>. <source>Colloids Surf. B: Biointerfaces</source> <volume>45</volume>, <fpage>113</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>119</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.colsurfb.2005.07.012</pub-id> </citation>
</ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>