| Literature DB >> 23936316 |
Tarandeep Kaur1, Khadim Hussain, Sushma Koul, Ram Vishwakarma, Dhiraj Vyas.
Abstract
Lepidium latifolium Linn. (perennial pepperweed) is one of the preferred phytofoods among cold arid region of Ladakh, India and its leaves contribute significantly toEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23936316 PMCID: PMC3732271 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0069112
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Locations from where the plants of Lepidium latifolium were collected from Ladakh region of Jammu and Kashmir State, India; Kargil (▪), Leh (•), Nyoma (▴). The figure is for illustrative purposes only.
Relative proportion of methanolic fraction in different position of leaves and roots of Lepidium latifolium expressed as percentage of total amount of crude extract used for the fractionation (n = 3).
| Kargil | Leh | Nyoma | ||||||||||
| Leaves | Roots | Leaves | Roots | Leaves | Roots | |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||
| Total Yield (mg) | 55.2 | 41.0 | 42.2 | 46.1 | 39.7 | 33.8 | 38.2 | 55.3 | 65.1 | 32.1 | 49.9 | 30.7 |
| % Yield | 11.0 | 8.2 | 8.4 | 9.2 | 7.9 | 7.6 | 6.7 | 11.0 | 13.0 | 6.4 | 8.5 | 6.1 |
Each value is a mean of a triplicate analysis performed on different samples.
Figure 2Metabolic content of eight reference glucosinolates in leaves of Lepidium latifolium at three different locations of Kargil, Leh and Nyoma.
* represents statistically significant values at p≤0.05.
Figure 3Representation of the major glucosinolates in native plant species of Lepidium latifolium in Ladakh.
Values represent the average of all the three locations.
Percentage (%) fatty acid composition of Lepidium latifolium from different locations of Ladakh.
| Kargil | Leh | Nyoma | ||||||||||
| Leaves | Roots | Leaves | Roots | Leaves | Roots | |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||
|
| 1.15 | 0.93 | 2.11 | 1.39 | 1.05 | 1.29 | 0.68 | 1.17 | 0.77 | 1.01 | 1.97 | 1.78 |
|
| 0.99 | 1.11 | 1.69 | 1.29 | 1.04 | 1.25 | 0.76 | 1.19 | 0.78 | 1.16 | 1.76 | 1.16 |
|
| – | – | – | 1.12 | – | – | – | 6.54 | – | – | – | 7.00 |
|
| 26.21 | 27.99 | 30.34 | 25.39 | 24.41 | 25.74 | 22.48 | 19.14 | 23.61 | 24.59 | 31.32 | 20.53 |
|
| – | – | – | 0.31 | – | – | – | 0.38 | – | – | – | 0.29 |
|
| 17.50 | 22.85 | 29.49 | 30.38 | 16.40 | 21.77 | 12.70 | 17.55 | 10.73 | 15.88 | 32.95 | 17.85 |
|
| 1.61 | 2.13 | 1.85 | 4.36 | 2.45 | 2.39 | 2.15 | 1.61 | 1.03 | 1.37 | 1.91 | 4.07 |
|
| 5.18 | 6.55 | 4.30 | 5.23 | 5.70 | 5.02 | 6.53 | 3.62 | 6.28 | 3.99 | 2.75 | 3.65 |
|
| 47.33 | 38.41 | 30.18 | 9.72 | 48.02 | 42.52 | 54.67 | 7.39 | 56.76 | 51.97 | 27.31 | 12.37 |
|
| 45.86 | 52.90 | 63.65 | 59.57 | 42.91 | 50.06 | 36.63 | 45.60 | 35.90 | 42.65 | 68.01 | 48.34 |
|
| 1.61 | 2.13 | 1.85 | 4.67 | 2.45 | 2.39 | 2.15 | 1.99 | 1.03 | 1.37 | 1.91 | 4.36 |
|
| 52.51 | 44.96 | 34.49 | 14.95 | 53.73 | 47.54 | 61.21 | 11.02 | 63.05 | 55.96 | 30.06 | 16.02 |
|
| 1.14 | 0.84 | 0.54 | 0.25 | 1.25 | 0.94 | 1.67 | 0.24 | 1.75 | 1.31 | 0.44 | 0.33 |
|
| 10.77 | 8.99 | 6.98 | 2.68 | 10.98 | 9.72 | 12.50 | 1.98 | 12.91 | 11.65 | 6.20 | 3.08 |
C12:0, lauric acid; C14:0, myristic acid; C15:0, pentadecanoic acid; C16:0, palmitic acid; C16:1 n-7, palmitoleic acid; C18:0, stearic acid; C18:1 n-9, oleic acid; C18:2 n-6, linoleic acid; C18:3 n-3, linolenic acid; SFA, saturated fatty acid; MUFA, monounsaturated fatty acids; PUFA, polyunsaturated fatty acids; Cox: calculated oxidizability value. Each value is a mean of a duplicate analysis performed on different samples.
Elemental analysis in leaves and roots of Lepidium latifolium from three different locations of Ladakh.
| Leaves | Roots | |||||
| Kargil | Leh | Nyoma | Kargil | Leh | Nyoma | |
|
| 33.41±1.30 | 41.53±0.57 | 40.23±0.28 | 42.37±1.62 | 41.94±0.48 | 40.76±2.10 |
|
| 5.54±0.13 | 6.29±0.06 | 5.98±0.03 | 6.32±0.14 | 6.15±0.13 | 6.00±0.11 |
|
| 2.91±0.21 | 3.07±0.20 | 4.15±0.17 | 1.74±0.18 | 0.59±0.15 | 0.61±0.12 |
|
| 3.12±0.15 | 1.10±0.17 | 1.44±0.12 | 0.40±0.02 | 0.44±0.17 | 0.20±0.04 |
|
| 0.93 | 2.79 | 2.88 | 4.35 | 1.34 | 3.05 |
%C: percentage carbon; %H: percentage hydrogen; %N: percentage nitrogen; %S: percentage sulfur; N:S: nitrogen to sulfur ratio. Each value is a mean of a duplicate analysis performed on different samples.
Figure 4Total glucose content as observed in Kargil (□), Leh (∥∥) and Nyoma (▪) by the action of glucose oxidase.
Means with the different letter represents statistically significant values at p≤0.05 using ANOVA.
Figure 5Total crude protein as observed in Kargil (□), Leh (∥∥) and Nyoma (▪) using Bradford reagent.
Means with the different letter represents statistically significant values at p≤0.05 using ANOVA.
Antioxidant capacity in Lepidium latifolium suggested by total phenols, total flavanoids, reducing and chelation power in different leaf positions and roots at three different locations of Ladakh.
| Kargil | Leh | Nyoma | ||
|
| 30.56±1.04a | 36.87±3.25*a b | 29.21±0.23b | |
|
|
| 33.33±3.05a | 41.13±1.40*a | 31.69±1.82b |
| (mg GAE g−1) |
| 26.89±0.20*b | 33.74±4.87*b | 50.51±1.17*a |
|
| 19.64±2.79c | 17.92±0.83c | 24.74±3.26*d | |
|
| 44.66±3.05*b | 76.00±8.03*a | 58.00±5.06*b | |
|
|
| 54.00±6.03a | 58.66±3.05b | 71.33±6.36*a |
| (mg QE g−1) |
| 38.66±3.05*b | 68.66±4.26*a | 54.00±4.16*b |
|
| 20.67±6.11c | 22.00±1.15c | 36.00±6.36*c | |
|
| 0.68±0.04*a | 0.82±0.02b | 0.82±0.03b | |
|
|
| 0.68±0.02*a | 0.83±0.01b | 0.89±0.03a |
| ( |
| 0.59±0.03*b | 0.97±0.04*a | 0.83±0.02*b |
|
| 0.48±0.05c | 0.55±0.06*c | 0.46±0.06c | |
|
| 41.71±2.57*d | 13.71±2.15*b | 32.85±2.46*b | |
|
|
| 48.85±2.47*c | 8.28±3.96*c | 38.57±4.05*b |
| (% Inhibition) |
| 51.71±0.49*b | 28.28±3.92*a | 21.42±3.014*c |
|
| 59.99±0.52a | 16.85±3.45*b | 56.28±0.84a |
mg GAE g−1: milligram gallic acid equivalents per gram dry weight of sample; mg QE g−1: milligram quercetin equivalents per gram dry weight of sample; A: absorbance at 700 nm. Each value is a mean of a triplicate analysis performed on different samples. * represents statistically significant values among rows whereas, different letters represents significant statistical variations at p≤0.05 among columns.
Figure 6Antioxidant activity of methanolic plant extracts of Lepidium latifolium at Kargil (□), Leh (∥∥) and Nyoma (▪).
Panel ‘A’ represents superoxide, panel ‘B’ represents hydroxyl and panel ‘C’ represents DPPH radicals. Antioxidant activity was represented as % inhibition of respective free radicals * represents statistically significant values at p≤0.05.
Figure 7DNA protective activity of methanolic plant extracts of Lepidium latifolium.
Panel ‘A’ represents 1.2% agarose gel stained with ethidium bromide visualised under UV whereas, panel ‘B’ represents Integrated Density Values (IDV) of bands using densitometry analysis. P: plasmid; FR: Fenton's reaction; K: Kargil; L: Leh; N: Nyoma.
Position wise analysis of total protein, phenols, flavanoids and antioxidant capacity of leaves and roots in Lepidium latifolium.
| Top Leaf | Middle Leaf | Bottom Leaf | Root | |
|
| 29.3 | 39.4 | 28.1 | 25.8 |
|
| ||||
|
| 32.2 | 35.4 | 37.0 | 20.8* |
|
| ||||
|
| 59.6 | 61.3 | 53.8 | 26.2* |
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
|
| 81.8 | 82.6 | 80.8 | 62.4* |
|
| 37.7 | 41.7 | 40.6 | 41.6 |
|
| 39.9 | 35.9 | 41.4 | 24.6* |
mg g-1 FW: mg protein (BSA) per gram fresh weight; mg GAE g−1: milligram gallic acid equivalents per gram dry weight of sample; mg QE g−1: milligram quercetin equivalents per gram dry weight of sample; Each value is a mean of all the values obtained for similar position at different locations. * represents statistically significant values among columns at p≤0.05