Table 1.
Transgenic lines | Kanamycin sensitivity | Plant growth b | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Kan R | Kan S | WT-like | Variegated | Variegated plant (%) b | |
3a | 85 | 23 | 86 | 27 | 24 |
8 | 82 | 15 | 24 | 113 | 82 |
57a | 172 | 67 | 56 | 12 | 18 |
3-12 | 80 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 100 |
3-9 | 55 | 0 | 0 | 31 | 100 |
3-11 | 77 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 100 |
8-4 | 53 | 47 | 3 | 21 | 88 |
8-6 | 98 | 2 | 4 | 20 | 83 |
8-12 | 77 | 23 | 4 | 20 | 83 |
57-3 | 49 | 0 | 7 | 17 | 71 |
57-4 | 97 | 0 | 13 | 11 | 46 |
57-6 | 63 | 0 | 7 | 17 | 71 |
aindicates that both segregation ratios of KanR to KanS and WT-like to variegated accept the hypothesis of single recessive gene genetics as determined by χ2 test. bindicates the plants that were sown and grown directly on soil without kanamycin selection. Lines 3, 8 and 57 represent T2 generation plants and the others represent corresponding T3 generation transgenic plants.