4.6 Article

Metabolic Characteristics of Hairy Root Clones of Scutellaria pycnoclada and Scutellaria baicalensis

期刊

PROCESSES
卷 11, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/pr11072102

关键词

Scutellaria baicalensis; Scutellaria pycnoclada; hairy roots; secondary metabolism; HPLC-MS; MS; baicalin; baicalein; wogonin; wogonoside; tenaxin I

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ten lines of hairy roots of Scutellaria pycnoclada, a poorly studied endemic species, were obtained through Agrobacterium rhizogenes A4. HPLC MS/MS analysis detected 14 flavonoids in S. pycnoclada and 17 in S. baicalensis. S. pycnoclada had lower diversity of methylated flavones and no tenaxin I in agar medium.
Scutellaria baicalensis is the most studied species of the genus, while Scutellaria pycnoclada is a poorly studied endemic species. Ten lines of the hairy roots of S. pycnoclada were obtained using Agrobacterium rhizogenes A4. The hairy root cultures of S. pycnoclada and the previously obtained roots of S. baicalensis were cultured on liquid and agar Gamborg media. A total of 14 flavonoids were detected via HPLC MS/MS in S. pycnoclada, and 17 were detected in S. baicalensis. Among them were flavones characteristic of both the roots and the aboveground parts of the plants. S. pycnoclada had a lower diversity of methylated flavones than S. baicalensis. Moreover, tenaxin I was absent in all S. pycnoclada lines on agar medium. HPLC analysis revealed that the flavone content in the different hairy root lines was 1.4-12.7 times higher on liquid medium than on agar medium. S. baicalensis and S. pycnoclada differed significantly in the ratio of the main flavones. In S. baicalensis, baicalin (7.83 mg/g DW) and wogonoside (6.29 mg/g DW) dominated when cultured on liquid medium, and wogonin (2.08 mg/g DW) dominated when cultured on solid medium. In S. pycnoclada, baicalin predominated (52-88% of the total content). S. pycnoclada is assumed to have a different set of O-methyltransferases and less biosynthetic enzyme activity than S. baicalensis.

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

4.6
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