4.4 Article

Efficacy of the core DNA barcodes in identifying processed and poorly conserved plant materials commonly used in South African traditional medicine

期刊

ZOOKEYS
卷 -, 期 365, 页码 215-233

出版社

PENSOFT PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.3897/zookeys.365.5730

关键词

Core DNA barcodes; medicinal plants; species identification; South Africa

类别

资金

  1. National Research Foundation (NRF) South Africa
  2. International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Canada
  3. Government of Canada through Genome Canada
  4. Ontario Genomics Institute [2008-OGI-ICI-03]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Medicinal plants cover a broad range of taxa, which may be phylogenetically less related but morphologically very similar. Such morphological similarity between species may lead to misidentification and inappropriate use. Also the substitution of a medicinal plant by a cheaper alternative (e.g. other non-medicinal plant species), either due to misidentification, or deliberately to cheat consumers, is an issue of growing concern. In this study, we used DNA barcoding to identify commonly used medicinal plants in South Africa. Using the core plant barcodes, matK and rbcLa, obtained from processed and poorly conserved materials sold at the muthi traditional medicine market, we tested efficacy of the barcodes in species discrimination. Based on genetic divergence, PCR amplification efficiency and BLAST algorithm, we revealed varied discriminatory potentials for the DNA barcodes. In general, the barcodes exhibited high discriminatory power, indicating their effectiveness in verifying the identity of the most common plant species traded in South African medicinal markets. BLAST algorithm successfully matched 61% of the queries against a reference database, suggesting that most of the information supplied by sellers at traditional medicinal markets in South Africa is correct. Our findings reinforce the utility of DNA barcoding technique in limiting false identification that can harm public health.

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

4.4
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