4.5 Article

Mutagenic effects of heavy-ion beam irradiation on in vitro nodal segments of Artemisia annua L.

期刊

PLANT CELL TISSUE AND ORGAN CULTURE
卷 119, 期 1, 页码 131-139

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11240-014-0519-z

关键词

Artemisia annua; Artemisinin; Ion beam irradiation; Induced mutation

资金

  1. Office of the Higher Education Commission, Thailand under Strategic Scholarships for Frontier Research Network program
  2. Graduate School of Science and Technology, Niigata University, Japan under Global Circus Project at Niigata University, Japan
  3. Faculty of Science, Mahidol University, Thailand

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Artemisia annua L. is a commercial source of artemisinin. Nevertheless, artemisinin content within the plant is relatively low and varies depending on genotype and environment. To broaden the genetic variability, the mutation effect of C-12-ion beam irradiation on A. annua was examined. Irradiation at 2.5 Gy had a slight lethal effect to nodal segments while a noticeable lethal effect was observed at 5 and 10 Gy. Furthermore, at higher doses (20 and 50 Gy), a severe lethal effect was observed. Mutations at the DNA level of axillary bud-derived shoots were performed by RAPD. The mutation frequency at 10 Gy was about 1.7 and 2.1 times higher than that at 2.5 and 5 Gy, respectively. After growth and artemisinin production observation of 72 irradiated mutants, around 14 and 7 % of them showed higher artemisinin content and artemisinin yield compared to the controls, respectively. The highest artemisinin content in a mutant was 1.43 % DW, which was 3.2-fold higher than the original wild type. Additionally, the highest artemisinin yield in mutants was 3.68 mg/plant, which was around 1.4-fold higher than in the wild type. Moreover, irradiated mutants exhibited antibacterial activity against S. aureus, but the wild types did not. This study presents an effective application of heavy ion beam irradiation to create variations and improve artemisinin production in A. annua.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据