Home
Class 12
BIOLOGY
A : Somatic hybrids may be used for the...

A : Somatic hybrids may be used for the production of useful plants.
R : Genetic manipulation can be carried out more rapidly when plant cells are in protoplast state.

A

If both Assertion & Reason are true and the reason is the correct explanation of the assertion, then mark (1).

B

If both Assertion & Reason are true and the reason is not the correct explanation of the assertion, then mark (2).

C

If Assertion is true statement but Reason is false, then mark (3).

D

If both Assertion and Reason are false statements, then mark (4)

Text Solution

AI Generated Solution

The correct Answer is:
### Step-by-Step Solution: 1. **Understanding Somatic Hybridization**: - Somatic hybridization refers to the fusion of somatic cells (non-reproductive cells) to create a hybrid organism. This process involves the fusion of protoplasts, which are plant cells that have had their cell walls removed. 2. **Production of Useful Plants**: - The main goal of somatic hybridization is to combine desirable traits from two different plant species to produce a new plant that exhibits the best characteristics of both. For example, fusing the protoplasts of a tomato and a potato can yield a hybrid plant that has traits from both species. 3. **Role of Protoplasts in Genetic Manipulation**: - Protoplasts are essential for genetic manipulation because they lack cell walls, making it easier for scientists to introduce new genetic material. The absence of the cell wall allows for more efficient uptake of DNA or other genetic materials. 4. **Rapid Genetic Manipulation**: - Genetic manipulation can be performed more rapidly in protoplasts because the process of introducing new genes does not require the additional steps needed to penetrate the cell wall. Enzymes such as pectinase and cellulase are used to digest the cell wall, allowing for quicker access to the cell membrane. 5. **Conclusion**: - Both the assertion (A) and the reason (R) are true. Somatic hybrids can indeed be used to produce useful plants, and genetic manipulation is expedited when plant cells are in a protoplast state. ### Final Statement: - Therefore, the assertion (A) is true, and the reason (R) is also true, and they are related. ---
Doubtnut Promotions Banner Mobile Dark
|

Topper's Solved these Questions

  • STRATEGIES FOR ENHANCEMENT IN FOOD PRODUCTION

    AAKASH INSTITUTE ENGLISH|Exercise Assignment (Section - C)|47 Videos

  • SEXUAL REPRODUCTION IN FLOWERING PLANTS

    AAKASH INSTITUTE ENGLISH|Exercise Assignment (SECTION D)|20 Videos

  • STRUCTURAL ORGANISATION IN ANIMALS ( ANIMAL TISSUES )

    AAKASH INSTITUTE ENGLISH|Exercise Assignment (Section-D)|20 Videos

Similar Questions

Explore conceptually related problems

Read the assertion and reason carefully to mark the correct option out of the option given below: Assertion: Carbohydrates are more suitable for the production of energy in the body than proteins and fats. Reason : Carbohydrates can be stored in the tissues as glycogen for use in the production of energy, whenever necessary. If both assertion and reason are true and reason is the correct explanation of assertion. If both assertion and reason are true but reason is not the correct explanation of assertion. If assertion is true but reason is false. If both assertion and reason are false.

GM plants, whose genes have been altered by manipulation, are useful in many ways. Match column-I (Genetic modification) to column-II (example) and choose the correct option.

Knowledge Check

  • Plants are more rapidly manipulated by genetic engineering than animals due to

    A
    Single somatic cell can regenerate a whole plant body
    B
    A group of somatic cells can regenerate a whole plant body
    C
    May be (a) or (b)
    D
    None of the above

  • Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for legal protection from import competition into a major line of work. Since 1980 the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) has received about 280 complaints alleging damage from imports that benefit from subsidies by foreign governments. Another 340 charge that foreign companies "dumped" their products in the United States at "less than fair value." Even when no unfair practices are alleged, the simple claim that an industry has been injured by imports is sufficient grounds to seek relief. Contrary to the general impression, this quest for import relief has hurt more companies than it has helped. As corporations begin to function globally, they develop an intricate web of marketing, production, and research relationships, The complexity of these relationships makes it unlikely that a system of import relief laws will meet the strategic needs of all the units under the same parent company. Internationalization increases the danger that foreign companies will use import relief laws against the very companies the laws were designed to protect. Suppose a United States-owned company establishes an Overseas plant to manufacture a product while its competitor makes the same product in the United States. If the competitor can prove injury from the imports and that the United States company received a subsidy from a foreign government to build its plant abroad - the United States company's products will be un competitive in the United States, since they would be subject to duties. Perhaps the most brazen case occurred when the ITC investigated allegations that Canadian companies were injuring the United States salt industry by dumping rock salt, used to de-ice roads. The bizarre aspect of the complaint was that a foreign conglomerate with United States operations was crying for help against a United States company with foreign operations. The "United States” company claiming injury was a subsidiary of a Dutch conglomerate, while the "Canadian" companies included a subsidiary of a Chicago firm that was the second-largest domestic producer of rock salt. For each word given below choose the correct meaning (as used in the passage) from the options provided: alleging

    A
    Inculpate
    B
    Arraign
    C
    Incriminate
    D
    Exculpate

  • Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for legal protection from import competition into a major line of work. Since 1980 the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) has received about 280 complaints alleging damage from imports that benefit from subsidies by foreign governments. Another 340 charge that foreign companies "dumped" their products in the United States at "less than fair value." Even when no unfair practices are alleged, the simple claim that an industry has been injured by imports is sufficient grounds to seek relief. Contrary to the general impression, this quest for import relief has hurt more companies than it has helped. As corporations begin to function globally, they develop an intricate web of marketing, production, and research relationships, The complexity of these relationships makes it unlikely that a system of import relief laws will meet the strategic needs of all the units under the same parent company. Internationalization increases the danger that foreign companies will use import relief laws against the very companies the laws were designed to protect. Suppose a United States-owned company establishes an Overseas plant to manufacture a product while its competitor makes the same product in the United States. If the competitor can prove injury from the imports and that the United States company received a subsidy from a foreign government to build its plant abroad - the United States company's products will be un competitive in the United States, since they would be subject to duties. Perhaps the most brazen case occurred when the ITC investigated allegations that Canadian companies were injuring the United States salt industry by dumping rock salt, used to de-ice roads. The bizarre aspect of the complaint was that a foreign conglomerate with United States operations was crying for help against a United States company with foreign operations. The "United States” company claiming injury was a subsidiary of a Dutch conglomerate, while the "Canadian" companies included a subsidiary of a Chicago firm that was the second-largest domestic producer of rock salt. For each word given below choose the correct meaning (as used in the passage) from the options provided: intricate

    A
    Labyrinth
    B
    Lugubrious
    C
    Lachrymose
    D
    Ludicrous

    • Similar Questions

    Explore conceptually related problems

    Enzyme used for obtaining protoplast from isolated single cell of plant are :-

    Find out which among the following is true and which is false (i) Recombinant DNA technology has made it possible to engineer microbes, plants and animals such that they have novel capabilities. (ii) Genetically modified organisms have been created by using methods other than natural methods to transfer one or more genes from organism to another, generally using techniques such as recombinant DNA technology. (iii) GM plants have been useful in increasing crop yields, reduce post harvest losses and make crops more tolerant of stressess. (iv) Recombinant DNA technology process have made immense impact in the area of healthcare by enabling mass production of safe and more effective therapeutics. (v) since the recombinant therapeutics are identical to human proteins, they do not induced unwanted immunological responses.

    Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for legal protection from import competition into a major line of work. Since 1980 the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) has received about 280 complaints alleging damage from imports that benefit from subsidies by foreign governments. Another 340 charge that foreign companies "dumped" their products in the United States at "less than fair value." Even when no unfair practices are alleged, the simple claim that an industry has been injured by imports is sufficient grounds to seek relief. Contrary to the general impression, this quest for import relief has hurt more companies than it has helped. As corporations begin to function globally, they develop an intricate web of marketing, production, and research relationships, The complexity of these relationships makes it unlikely that a system of import relief laws will meet the strategic needs of all the units under the same parent company. Internationalization increases the danger that foreign companies will use import relief laws against the very companies the laws were designed to protect. Suppose a United States-owned company establishes an Overseas plant to manufacture a product while its competitor makes the same product in the United States. If the competitor can prove injury from the imports and that the United States company received a subsidy from a foreign government to build its plant abroad - the United States company's products will be un competitive in the United States, since they would be subject to duties. Perhaps the most brazen case occurred when the ITC investigated allegations that Canadian companies were injuring the United States salt industry by dumping rock salt, used to de-ice roads. The bizarre aspect of the complaint was that a foreign conglomerate with United States operations was crying for help against a United States company with foreign operations. The "United States” company claiming injury was a subsidiary of a Dutch conglomerate, while the "Canadian" companies included a subsidiary of a Chicago firm that was the second-largest domestic producer of rock salt. For each word given below choose the correct meaning (as used in the passage) from the options provided: brazen

    Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for legal protection from import competition into a major line of work. Since 1980 the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) has received about 280 complaints alleging damage from imports that benefit from subsidies by foreign governments. Another 340 charge that foreign companies "dumped" their products in the United States at "less than fair value." Even when no unfair practices are alleged, the simple claim that an industry has been injured by imports is sufficient grounds to seek relief. Contrary to the general impression, this quest for import relief has hurt more companies than it has helped. As corporations begin to function globally, they develop an intricate web of marketing, production, and research relationships, The complexity of these relationships makes it unlikely that a system of import relief laws will meet the strategic needs of all the units under the same parent company. Internationalization increases the danger that foreign companies will use import relief laws against the very companies the laws were designed to protect. Suppose a United States-owned company establishes an Overseas plant to manufacture a product while its competitor makes the same product in the United States. If the competitor can prove injury from the imports and that the United States company received a subsidy from a foreign government to build its plant abroad - the United States company's products will be un competitive in the United States, since they would be subject to duties. Perhaps the most brazen case occurred when the ITC investigated allegations that Canadian companies were injuring the United States salt industry by dumping rock salt, used to de-ice roads. The bizarre aspect of the complaint was that a foreign conglomerate with United States operations was crying for help against a United States company with foreign operations. The "United States” company claiming injury was a subsidiary of a Dutch conglomerate, while the "Canadian" companies included a subsidiary of a Chicago firm that was the second-largest domestic producer of rock salt. For each word given below choose the correct meaning (as used in the passage) from the options provided: conglomeration

    Many United States companies have, unfortunately, made the search for legal protection from import competition into a major line of work. Since 1980 the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) has received about 280 complaints alleging damage from imports that benefit from subsidies by foreign governments. Another 340 charge that foreign companies "dumped" their products in the United States at "less than fair value." Even when no unfair practices are alleged, the simple claim that an industry has been injured by imports is sufficient grounds to seek relief. Contrary to the general impression, this quest for import relief has hurt more companies than it has helped. As corporations begin to function globally, they develop an intricate web of marketing, production, and research relationships, The complexity of these relationships makes it unlikely that a system of import relief laws will meet the strategic needs of all the units under the same parent company. Internationalization increases the danger that foreign companies will use import relief laws against the very companies the laws were designed to protect. Suppose a United States-owned company establishes an Overseas plant to manufacture a product while its competitor makes the same product in the United States. If the competitor can prove injury from the imports and that the United States company received a subsidy from a foreign government to build its plant abroad - the United States company's products will be un competitive in the United States, since they would be subject to duties. Perhaps the most brazen case occurred when the ITC investigated allegations that Canadian companies were injuring the United States salt industry by dumping rock salt, used to de-ice roads. The bizarre aspect of the complaint was that a foreign conglomerate with United States operations was crying for help against a United States company with foreign operations. The "United States” company claiming injury was a subsidiary of a Dutch conglomerate, while the "Canadian" companies included a subsidiary of a Chicago firm that was the second-largest domestic producer of rock salt. It can be inferred from the passage that the minimal basis for a complaint to the International Trade Commission is which of the following?

    Home
    Profile