4.3 Article

Assessment of Daucus carota L. (Apiaceae) subspecies by chemotaxonomic and DNA content analyses

Journal

BIOCHEMICAL SYSTEMATICS AND ECOLOGY
Volume 55, Issue -, Pages 222-230

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.bse.2014.03.031

Keywords

Carrot; Essential oils; Flow cytometry; Fruit morphology; Scanning electron microscopy

Funding

  1. Center of Pharmaceutical Studies of the University of Coimbra
  2. EDP/Electricity Portuguese Foundation
  3. FCT
  4. European Social Fund [FCT/BPD/41200/2007]
  5. [III/05/2007]
  6. [IF/01267/2013]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

For a clearer distinction between the four subspecies of Daucus carota native from Portugal (subsp. carota, subsp. maximus, subsp. gummifer and subsp. halophilus), morphological features of the fruits, DNA content analyses by flow cytometiy, and chemical characterization of the essential oils were undertaken. We found chemotaxonomic evidences to consider D. carota subsp. maximus as a separate species rather than a subspecies of D. carota. This separation is based on the morphometric analysis of the fruits and in the high levels of asarone present only in the essential oil of the subsp. maximus. The remaining subspecies are difficult to distinguish from each other based on the morphology of the fruits and in DNA content. However, based on the essential oils, it was possible to distinguish the subspecies halophilus from the other two (subsp. gummifer and subsp. carota) because of its high content of elemicin, with the other two having high levels of geranyl acetate. Based on these results, the subspecies maximus is proposed as a different species (Daucus maximus Desf.) and the taxonomic status of other three subspecies (subsp. carota, subsp. gummier and subsp. halophilus) is maintained. Still, the latter three taxa need to be further studied for a more precise taxonomic characterization. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available