| Literature DB >> 28299323 |
Pritika Singh1, Rupam Guleri1, Amrita Angurala1, Kuldeep Kaur1, Kulwinder Kaur1, Sunil C Kaul2, Renu Wadhwa2, Pratap Kumar Pati1.
Abstract
Withania somnifera is a highly valued medicinal plant in traditional home medicine and is known for a wide range of bioactivities. Its commercial cultivation is adversely affected by poor seed viability and germination. Infestation by various pests and pathogens, survival under unfavourable environmental conditions, narrow genetic base, and meager information regarding biosynthesis of secondary metabolites are some of the other existing challenges in the crop. Biotechnological interventions through organ, tissue, and cell culture provide promising options for addressing some of these issues. In vitro propagation facilitates conservation and sustainable utilization of the existing germplasms and broadening the genetic base. It would also provide means for efficient and rapid mass propagation of elite chemotypes and generating uniform plant material round the year for experimentation and industrial applications. The potential of in vitro cell/organ cultures for the production of therapeutically valuable compounds and their large-scale production in bioreactors has received significant attention in recent years. In vitro culture system further provides distinct advantage for studying various cellular and molecular processes leading to secondary metabolite accumulation and their regulation. Engineering plants through genetic transformation and development of hairy root culture system are powerful strategies for modulation of secondary metabolites. The present review highlights the developments and sketches current scenario in this field.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28299323 PMCID: PMC5337329 DOI: 10.1155/2017/3278494
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Shoot multiplication of W. somnifera.
| Explant | Response | Medium | Number of shoots/explant | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nodes | Multiple shoots | MS + 4.4 | 21.8 | [ |
| MS + 4.44 | 2.6 | [ | ||
| MS + 2.5 | 61.7 | [ | ||
| MS + 2.5 | 66.1 | |||
| MS + 6.66 | 46.4 | [ | ||
|
| ||||
| Cotyledonary nodes | Multiple shoots | MS + 4.44 | 16.93 | [ |
|
| ||||
| Shoot tips | Multiple shoots | MS + 4.44 | 10.0 | [ |
| NN + 4.44 | 120.0 | [ | ||
| MS + 8.88 | 17.0 | [ | ||
| MS + 13.2 | 20–25 | [ | ||
| MS + 4.4 | 120.0 | [ | ||
| MS + 4.4 | 145.0 | |||
|
| ||||
| Alginate encapsulated shoot tips | Shoot formation | MS | 75.0 | |
| MS + 2.46 | 87.0 | [ | ||
|
| ||||
| Axillary buds | Multiple shoots | MS + 8.8 | 12.0 | [ |
|
| ||||
| Apical buds | Multiple shoots | Revised Tobacco medium (RT) + 4.5 | 13.72 | [ |
|
| ||||
| Seeds | Multiple shoots | MS + 2.66 | 9.9 | [ |
| MS + 4.4 | 120.0 | [ | ||
Figure 1Micropropagation of W. somnifera. (a) Initiation of aseptic cultures from seeds; (b) nodal explants in MS basal medium; (c) shoots growing in BAP (5 µM); (d) shoot proliferation; (e) rooted microshoots in IBA (10 µM); (f) hardened plant.
Direct regeneration in W. somnifera.
| Explant | Response | Medium | RR, SE | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leaf | Shoot buds | MS + 4.4 | 63.3 (RR), 9.33 (SE) | [ |
| MS + 13.2 | 70.0 (RR), 13.37 (SE) | [ | ||
| MS + 4.0 | 90 (RR), 12.1 (SE) | [ | ||
| MS + 8.88 | 23.0 (SE) | [ | ||
| MS + 8.88 | 17.67 (SE) | |||
| MS + 6.66 | 100 (RR), 68.0 (SE) | |||
|
| ||||
| Node | Shoot buds | MS + 2.22 | 12.5 (SE) | [ |
| MS + 22.2 | 10.22 (SE) | |||
| MS + 0.91 | 10.1 (SE) | |||
| MS + 1.36 | 12.3 (SE) | |||
| MS + 2.5 | 95 (RR), 36.1 (SE) | [ | ||
| MS + 6.66 | 90 (RR), 42.4 (SE) | [ | ||
|
| ||||
| Internodes | Shoot buds | MS + 4.44 | >25 (SE) | [ |
| MS + 22.2 | >40 (SE) | |||
|
| ||||
| Epicotyl | Shoot buds | MS + 8.88 | 85 (RR), 15.5 (SE) | [ |
|
| ||||
| Hypocotyl | Shoot buds | MS + 2.22 | 12.88 (SE) | [ |
|
| ||||
| Embryo | Shoot buds | MS + 0.91 | 10.0 (SE) | [ |
|
| ||||
| Shoot tip | Shoot buds | MS + 2.5 | 92 (RR), 15.1 (SE) | [ |
|
| ||||
| Petiole | Shoot bud | MS + 8.88 | 3.67 (SE) | [ |
| MS +8.88 | 2.67 (SE) | |||
RR: regeneration response (%); SE: shoots/explant.
Indirect regeneration in W. somnifera.
| Explant | Response | Medium | C, RR, SE | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leaf | Callus induction and shoot regeneration | MS + 9.05 | 92.0 (C), 8.0 (RR), 3.0 (SE) | [ |
| Callus induction | MS + 56 | 70 (C) | [ | |
| Callus induction and shoot regeneration | MS + 8.88 | 92 (C), 89.5 (RR) | [ | |
| Callus induction | MS + 1.5 | 95 (C) | [ | |
| Callus induction | MS + 4.44 | 43.4 (C) | [ | |
| Shoot regeneration | MS + 8.88 | 82.3 (RR), 4.8 (SE) | ||
| Callus induction | MS + 13.5 | 93 (C) | [ | |
| Shoot regeneration | MS + 17.6 | 85 (RR) | ||
| Callus induction | MS + 2.26 | 98.33 (C) | [ | |
| Shoot regeneration | MS + 8.88 | 98.33 (RR) | ||
|
| ||||
| Shoot | Callus induction and shoot regeneration | MS + 8.87 | 84.0 (C), 70.0 (RR), 8.0 (SE) | [ |
| Callus induction | MS + 57 | 100 (C) | [ | |
|
| ||||
| Node | Callus induction | MS + 4.44 | 85 (C) | [ |
| Shoot regeneration | MS + 4.44 | 80 (RR), 4.35 (SE) | ||
|
| ||||
| Internode | Callus induction | MS + 4.44 | 38.3 (C) | [ |
|
| ||||
| Cotyledon | Callus induction | MS + 9.05 | 100.0 (C) | [ |
|
| ||||
| Epicotyl | Callus induction | MS + 9.05 | 98.3 (C) | [ |
| Shoot regeneration | MS + 4.44 | 86.7 (RR), 25.3 (SE) | ||
|
| ||||
| Hypocotyl | Callus induction and shoot regeneration | MS + 9.05 | 90.0 (C), 44.0 (RR), 4.0 (SE) | [ |
| Callus induction and shoot regeneration | MS + 9.05 | 90.7 (C), 44.0 (RR), 4.0 (SE) | [ | |
|
| ||||
| Stem | Callus induction and Shoot regeneration | MS + 2.26 | 70.0 (RR), 6.2 (SE) | [ |
|
| ||||
| Root | Callus induction and shoot regeneration | MS + 9.05 | 100.0 (C) | [ |
| Callus induction | MS + 9.05 | 100.0 (C) | [ | |
C: callus induction (%); RR: regeneration response (%); SE: shoots/explant.
Somatic embryogenesis of W. somnifera.
| Explant | Medium | Response | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cotyledonary leaf callus | MS + 13.95 | Somatic embryogenesis | [ |
| Internode and cotyledonary leaf callus | MS + 8.88 | Somatic embryogenesis | |
| Leaf calli | MS + 2.26 | Somatic embryogenesis | [ |
Figure 2Regeneration from W. somnifera leaf explants. (a) Leaf explant from in vitro shoots; (b) initiation of callus formation in BAP (15 µM); (c) shoot bud formation in the same medium; (d) shoot buds observed under stereomicroscope; (e) emergence of shoots in BAP (5 µM); (f) proliferation of shoots in BAP (5 µM); (g) rooting of microshoots in IBA (10 µM); (h) hardening of microshoots.
A. tumefaciens mediated genetic transformation in W. somnifera.
| Explant | Strain | Transgene cassettes | Response/comments | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leaf | C58, N2/73, T37, A281, Ach5 and disarmed strain LBA 4404 | — | Shooty teratomas showed increase in withanolide production | [ |
| LBA 4404 | pIG121Hm carry 3 expression cassettes | Transformation frequency, 1.67% | [ | |
| GV3101 | pBWsSS (derived from pBI121) carry 2 expression cassettes | Transformation frequency, 70% | [ | |
|
| ||||
| Node | EHA105 | pGA492 carry 3 expression cassettes | Transformation frequency, 3.16% | [ |
| LBA 4404 | pCAMBIA2301 carry 2 expression cassettes | Transformation frequency, 10% | [ | |
|
| ||||
| Node and apical segment | GV2260 | pCAMBIA1301 carry 3 expression cassette | Efficiency of | [ |
|
| ||||
| Seed | MTCC-431 | — | Seeds were infected with bacteria for 24 h and then germinated on MS medium containing GA (5.7 | [ |
A. rhizogenes mediated genetic transformation in W. somnifera.
| Explant | Strain | Response/comment | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Leaf | A4, LBA 9402 and LBA 9360 | Strain specificity of the | [ |
| MTCC 2364, MTCC 532 | Transformation efficiency, 20%. The growth rate of hairy root was tenfold more than control | [ | |
| LBA 9402, A4 | Observed variations in phenotype and withasteroid accumulation of transformed hairy roots | [ | |
| R1601 | Withanolide A content was 2.7-fold higher in transformed hairy roots compared to control | [ | |
| R1601 | Withanolide A production was favoured at 4% sucrose and initial medium pH – 6.0 results in highest withanolide A production | [ | |
| R1000 | Transformation efficiency in petiole 64%, leaf 42.5%, and internode 37.7%. Efficiency was further enhanced to 93.2% by incorporating acetosyringone in different stages of infection | [ | |
| R1601 | Studying the effect of macroelements and ammonia-nitrate ratio on withanolide A production. Maximum withanolide A production was recorded in ammonia-nitrate ratio of 0.00/18.80 mM | [ | |
| R1000 | Transformation efficiency, 90%. Acetosyringone (100 | [ | |
| LBA9402 | Constitutive expression of fungal elicitor protein, | [ | |
| R1000 | High transformation efficiency (93.3%) was achieved by sonication and heat treatment | [ | |
| R1000/A4 | Transformation efficiency 88.4% with R1000 and 79% with A4. High efficiency was obtained by supplementing cocultivation medium with acetosyringone (100 | [ | |
|
| |||
| Cotyledon | R1601 | Withanolide A content was 2.7-fold higher in transformed hairy roots as compared to control | [ |
| R1601 | A correlation was made between macroelements, ammonia-nitrate ratio, and withanolide A production. Maximum production of withanolide A was shown in ammonia-nitrate ratio of 0.00/18.80 mM | [ | |
| R1000/A4 | Transformation efficiency 64.2% with R1000 and 38.8% with A4. Cocultivation medium was supplemented with acetosyringone (100 | [ | |
|
| |||
| Shoot | LBA 9402 | Root cultures synthesized various withanolides. Withanolide D was isolated and identified. Yield of withanolide D was almost 7-fold higher than control | [ |