EDIT: Protocol entry has been deleted from the database. Please follow the reference below.
Reference:
Lata, H., Chandra, S., Khan, I. A., & ElSohly, M. A. (2010). High frequency plant regeneration from leaf derived callus of high Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol yielding Cannabis sativa L. Planta medica, 76(14): 1629-1633.
Important Addendum:
Numerous attempts failed to reproduce protocols using MS based media without experiencing strong performance issues, such as hyperhydricity, nutrient deficiency symptoms, leading to low multiplication rate or even death of the explants. The results of the above mentioned paper should therefore be considered with some caution.
“[…] despite the publication of this ostensibly successful protocol over a decade ago and the implications it has for advances in Cannabis biotechnology, it has not since been replicated in the literature by any independent research groups, including the original authors.” (Monthony et al. 2020)
This protocol could work better when DKW is used instead of MS. Despite it’s still not optimal.
See the paper from Page, Monthony & Jones (2021) or their preprint from 2020 (preprint PDF is free available at bioRxiv). The difference between basal MS and DKW - without TDZ - is obvious:
Representative photographs of the phenotypic response to different basal salt media. (a) BA-1 explant on Gamborg basal salt medium. (b) BA-1 explant on BABI basal salt medium. (c) BA-1 explant on DKW basal salt medium. (d) BA-1 explant on MS basal salt medium. Scale bar: 1 cm. (Page, Monthony & Jones, 2021)
Hesami & Jones (2021) used a machine-learning based approach to improve PGR composition, suggesting that 0.46 mg/l 2,4-D + 0.38 mg/l Kinetin could improve regeneration. Unfortunately their work based on MS media only. According to the above mentioned results, that would have been quite interesting with DKW instead.
