| Literature DB >> 30669669 |
Bilal Haider Abbasi1,2,3,4, Aisha Siddiquah5, Duangjai Tungmunnithum6,7,8, Shankhamala Bose9, Muhammad Younas10, Laurine Garros11,12,13, Samantha Drouet14,15, Nathalie Giglioli-Guivarc'h16, Christophe Hano17,18.
Abstract
Isodon rugosus (Wall. ex Benth.) Codd accumulates large amounts of phenolics and pentacyclic triterpenes. The present study deals with the in vitro callus induction from stem and leaf explants of I. rugosus under various plant growth regulators (PGRs) for the production of antioxidant and anti-ageing compounds. Among all the tested PGRs, thidiazuron (TDZ) used alone or in conjunction with α-napthalene acetic acid (NAA) induced highest callogenesis in stem-derived explants, as compared to leaf-derived explants. Stem-derived callus culture displayed maximum total phenolic content and antioxidant activity under optimum hormonal combination (3.0 mg/L TDZ + 1.0 mg/L NAA). HPLC analysis revealed the presence of plectranthoic acid (373.92 µg/g DW), oleanolic acid (287.58 µg/g DW), betulinic acid (90.51 µg/g DW), caffeic acid (91.71 µg/g DW), and rosmarinic acid (1732.61 µg/g DW). Complete antioxidant and anti-aging potential of extracts with very contrasting phytochemical profiles were investigated. Correlation analyses revealed rosmarinic acid as the main contributor for antioxidant activity and anti-aging hyaluronidase, advance glycation end-products inhibitions and SIRT1 activation, whereas, pentacyclic triterpenoids were correlated with elastase, collagenase, and tyrosinase inhibitions. Altogether, these results clearly evidenced the great valorization potential of I. rugosus calli for the production of antioxidant and anti-aging bioactive extracts for cosmetic applications.Entities:
Keywords: Isodon rugosus; anti-aging; antioxidant; pentacyclic triterpenoid; phenolic acid; plant growth regulators
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30669669 PMCID: PMC6358864 DOI: 10.3390/ijms20020452
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Callogenesis, initiation (day) and morphology of stem and leaf callus under different PGRs after 5 weeks of culture.
| S. No. | Treatment (mg/L) | Callus Initiation (day) | Callus Induction Frequency (%) | Callus Color | Callus Texture | Degree of Callus Formation | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stem | Leaf | Stem | Leaf | |||||
| 0 | Control (MS0) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 1 | MS + TDZ 1.0 | 10 | 14 | 80–100 | DG | F | C | +++ |
| 2 | MS + TDZ 2.0 | 10 | 14 | 80–100 | DG | F | C | +++ |
| 3 | MS + TDZ 3.0 | 10 | 14 | 80–100 | DG | F | C | +++ |
| 4 | MS + TDZ 4.0 | 10 | 14 | 80–100 | DG | F | C | +++ |
| 5 | MS + TDZ 5.0 | 10 | 14 | 80–100 | DG | F | C | +++ |
| 6 | MS + NAA 1.0 | 12 | 12 | 40–60 | SG | F | C | ++ |
| 7 | MS + NAA 2.0 | 12 | 12 | 40–60 | SG | F | C | ++ |
| 8 | MS + NAA 3.0 | 12 | 12 | 40–60 | SG | F | C | ++ |
| 9 | MS + NAA 4.0 | 12 | 12 | 40–60 | SG | F | C | ++ |
| 10 | MS + NAA 5.0 | 12 | 12 | 40–60 | SG | F | C | ++ |
| 11 | MS + BAP 1.0 | 20 | 20 | 20–30 | SLG | F | C | + |
| 12 | MS + BAP 2.0 | 20 | 20 | 20–30 | SLG | F | C | + |
| 13 | MS + BAP 3.0 | 20 | 20 | 20–30 | SLG | F | C | + |
| 14 | MS + BAP 4.0 | 20 | 20 | 20–30 | SLG | F | C | + |
| 15 | MS + BAP 5.0 | 20 | 20 | 20–30 | SLG | F | C | + |
| 16 | MS + TDZ 1.0 + NAA 1.0 | 8 | 8 | 90–100 | FG | F | C | +++ |
| 17 | MS + TDZ 1.0 + NAA 2.0 | 8 | 8 | 90–100 | FG | F | C | +++ |
| 18 | MS + TDZ 1.0 + NAA 3.0 | 8 | 8 | 90–100 | FG | F | C | +++ |
| 19 | MS + TDZ 1.0 + NAA 4.0 | 8 | 8 | 90–100 | FG | F | C | +++ |
| 20 | MS + TDZ 1.0 + NAA 5.0 | 8 | 8 | 90–100 | FG | F | C | +++ |
| 21 | MS + TDZ 1.0 + BAP 1.0 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 22 | MS + TDZ 1.0 + BAP 2.0 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 23 | MS + TDZ 1.0 + BAP 3.0 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 24 | MS + TDZ 1.0 + BAP 4.0 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 25 | MS + TDZ 1.0 + BAP 5.0 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Values are means ± SD from three replicates. Note: No callus (−), Scanty callus (+), Moderate callus (++), profuse callus (+++). F friable, DG dark green, FG fresh green, SG snowy green, SLG snowy light green.
Figure 1(A) Callus induction frequency (%) for stem and leaf explants under different PGRs concentrations. Values are means ± SE from three replicates; (B) Effect of 5 weeks old culture media containing various PGRs on callus induction and growth of stem explants; (B1) TDZ 1.0 mg/L; (B2) NAA 4.0 mg/L; (B3) BAP 2.0 mg/L; (B4) 1:1 TDZ 1.0 + NAA 1.0 mg/L; (B5) TDZ 1.0 + BAP 4.0 mg/L; (C) Effect of 5 weeks old culture media containing various PGRs on callus induction and growth of leaf explants; (C1) TDZ 3.0 mg/L; (C2) NAA 3.0 mg/L; (C3) BAP 4.0 mg/L; (C4) TDZ 1.0 + NAA 1.0 mg/L; and (C5) TDZ 1.0 + BAP 5.0 mg/L.
Figure 2Time-course fresh and dry weight of callus cultures at different PGRs (in mg/L). (A) Fresh weight for stem-derived callus culture (in g/L); (B) dry weight for stem-derived callus culture (in g/L); (C) fresh weight for leaf-derived callus culture (in g/L); and (D) dry weight for leaf-derived callus (in g/L) cultured on MS medium fortified with TDZ, NAA, BAP (1.0–5.0 mg/L), TDZ (1.0 mg/L) + NAA (1.0–5.0 mg/L), TDZ (1.0 mg/L) + BAP (1.0–5.0 mg/L). Values are means of three replicates with standard deviation.
Figure 3Comparison of total phenolic content (TPC) and total phenolic productivity (TPP) of extracts at different PGRs. (A) TPC (in mg/g DW) for stem-derived callus culture; (B) TPC (in mg/g DW) for leaf-derived callus culture; (C) TPP (in mg/L) for stem-derived callus culture; and (D) TPP (in mg/L) for leaf-derived callus cultured on MS medium fortified with PRG (TDZ, NAA, BAP (1.0–5.0 mg/L), TDZ (1.0 mg/L) + NAA (1.0–5.0 mg/L), TDZ (1.0 mg/L) + BAP (1.0–5.0 mg/L)). Values are means of three replicates with standard deviation.
Quantification of the main phytochemicals accumulated in twelve I. rugosus callus sample extracts (culture conditions are presented in Table S1).
| Sample | CA (µg/g DW) | RA (µg/g DW) | BA (µg/g DW) | OA (µg/g DW) | PA (µg/g DW) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ir#1 | 614.8 ± 20.2 | 1074.7 ± 18.9 | 98.0 ± 14.3 | 536.2 ± 18.8 | 454.8 ± 39.1 |
| Ir#2 | 488.4 ± 24.6 | 751.6 ± 24.1 | 91.8 ± 19.5 | 201.7 ± 5.3 | 113.7 ± 33.9 |
| Ir#3 | 784.0 ± 14.8 | 1519.5 ± 17.8 | 104.3 ± 18.8 | 348.4 ± 16.3 | 304.6 ± 33.0 |
| Ir#4 | 735.6 ± 26.9 | 1158.3 ± 27.1 | 141.8 ± 16.3 | 317.1 ± 19.5 | 207.6 ± 28.2 |
| Ir#5 | 728.2 ± 7.6 | 1685.2 ± 44.7 | 132.5 ± 24.8 | 631.0 ± 24.8 | 379.7 ± 14.2 |
| Ir#6 | 979.5 ± 12.1 | 1259.0 ± 27.5 | 66.7 ± 9.4 | 198.2 ± 9.4 | 116.8 ± 23.6 |
| Ir#7 | 575.6 ± 20.7 | 1279.0 ± 9.0 | 54.2 ± 5.4 | 389.0 ± 19.6 | 132.5 ± 18.8 |
| Ir#8 | 901.6 ± 10.3 | 1708.9 ± 57.1 | 85.7 ± 9.1 | 386.0 ± 24.8 | 207.6 ± 8.8 |
| Ir#9 | 647.2 ± 19.8 | 936.7 ± 13.1 | 22.9 ± 5.8 | 204.4 ± 23.6 | 69.9 ± 14.3 |
| Ir#10 | 779.3 ± 18.0 | 797.1 ± 37.0 | 91.8 ± 10.8 | 248.3 ± 14.3 | 145.0 ± 23.6 |
| Ir#11 | 886.8 ± 24.2 | 2013.5 ± 18.7 | 171.2 ± 9.2 | 331.2 ± 16.4 | 313.8 ± 14.1 |
| Ir#12 | 835.8 ± 9.9 | 1335.9 ± 67.2 | 145.4 ± 5.1 | 429.8 ± 23.9 | 429.8 ± 14.3 |
Values are means ± standard deviations (n = 3).
Figure 4(A) Chemical structures of main phytochemicals accumulated in callus cultures of I. rugosus caffeic acid (CA, 1) rosmarinic acid (RA, 2) betulinic acid (BA, 3) oleanolic acid and (OA, 4) plectranthoic acid (PA, 5); (B) Magnification of typical HPLC chromatograms showing the correct separation of the main phytochemicals accumulated in callus cultures of I. rugosus.
Antioxidant activities of 12 I. rugosus callus sample extracts. (Culture conditions are presented in Table S1).
| Sample | DPPH (TEAC) | ABTS (TEAC) | ORAC (TEAC) | FRAP (AEAC) | CUPRAC (AEAC) | Chelation (µmol Fe2+) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ir#1 | 674.4 ± 4.7 | 585.5 ± 9.0 | 421.8 ± 23.1 | 285.4 ± 6.3 | 260.3 ± 4.7 | 31.6 ± 0.9 |
| Ir#2 | 474.4 ± 13.5 | 434.5 ± 15.4 | 306.7 ± 18.5 | 211.9 ± 3.2 | 193.3 ± 8.4 | 23.0 ± 1.4 |
| Ir#3 | 911.7 ± 14.2 | 798.8 ± 15.1 | 529.4 ± 18.3 | 393.4 ± 6.9 | 354.2 ± 8.7 | 41.6 ± 1.0 |
| Ir#4 | 721.2 ± 5.9 | 659.6 ± 25.1 | 453.2 ± 22.3 | 318.1 ± 6.4 | 273.5 ± 7.1 | 33.8 ± 1.7 |
| Ir#5 | 1005.5 ± 13.8 | 879.5 ± 60.1 | 624.8 ± 9.0 | 456.8 ± 2.6 | 401.3 ± 2.7 | 45.2 ± 2.7 |
| Ir#6 | 779.4 ± 5.4 | 708.1 ± 9.3 | 470.9 ± 14.5 | 354.8 ± 13.6 | 312.5 ± 8.8 | 34.3 ± 2.5 |
| Ir#7 | 780.8 ± 6.2 | 688.2 ± 8.2 | 466.8 ± 9.6 | 349.3 ± 12.3 | 277.8 ± 8.4 | 34.9 ± 3.3 |
| Ir#8 | 1043.2 ± 15.9 | 945.8 ± 6.4 | 641.0 ± 11.5 | 475.3 ± 10.0 | 410.8 ± 7.8 | 47.3 ± 1.5 |
| Ir#9 | 563.1 ± 15.3 | 522.4 ± 5.2 | 350.1 ± 5.5 | 251.3 ± 9.0 | 235.7 ± 10.7 | 26.6 ± 2.8 |
| Ir#10 | 516.3 ± 9.2 | 444.7 ± 18.2 | 318.1 ± 13.0 | 231.0 ± 8.8 | 186.1 ± 13.4 | 27.0 ± 2.8 |
| Ir#11 | 1203.7 ± 53.2 | 944.7 ± 37.1 | 733.53 ± 7.3 | 535.8 ± 9.9 | 460.2 ± 5.5 | 54.8 ± 2.2 |
| Ir#12 | 823.1 ± 25.6 | 727.1 ± 13.4 | 581.3 ± 173.5 | 353.8 ± 8.9 | 317.0 ± 4.8 | 35.9 ± 4.1 |
TEAC: Trolox C Equivalent Antioxidant Capacity (µM); AEAC: Ascorbic acid Equivalent Antioxidant Capacity (µM); Values are means ± standard deviations (n = 3).
Anti-aging activities of 12 I. rugosus callus sample extracts expressed as percentage activities of control (DMSO) (culture conditions of the callus are presented in Table S1).
| Sample | Elastase | Collagenase | Hyaluronidase | Tyrosinase | AGEs | SIRT1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ir#1 | 77.8 ± 2.9 | 64.3 ± 3.0 | 85.8 ± 1.7 | 62.9 ± 2.3 | 78.5 ± 0.7 | 140.8 ± 5.0 |
| Ir#2 | 90.7 ± 0.8 | 86.2 ± 2.2 | 88.4 ± 1.4 | 85.4 ± 1.7 | 79.8 ± 1.4 | 88.9 ± 3.3 |
| Ir#3 | 79.8 ± 1.2 | 77.7 ± 3.0 | 88.6 ± 0.9 | 27.8 ± 12.1 | 84.4 ± 0.8 | 162.0 ± 7.0 |
| Ir#4 | 83.0 ± 2.2 | 75.0 ± 3.3 | 87.7 ± 2.0 | 75.6 ± 2.6 | 77.6 ± 2.7 | 134.3 ± 10.3 |
| Ir#5 | 76.8 ± 4.6 | 63.5 ± 4.3 | 80.1 ± 1.4 | 52.1 ± 4.4 | 73.8 ± 1.9 | 194.1 ± 6.4 |
| Ir#6 | 87.9 ± 2.2 | 84.8 ± 0.3 | 85.6 ± 1.5 | 87.6 ± 1.9 | 76.1 ± 2.2 | 124.3 ± 11.0 |
| Ir#7 | 85.8 ± 1.7 | 77.1 ± 1.9 | 86.6 ± 2.8 | 79.3 ± 1.4 | 76.9 ± 2.6 | 137.8 ± 5.8 |
| Ir#8 | 85.9 ± 2.7 | 78.5 ± 0.9 | 89.2 ± 0.9 | 82.8 ± 1.7 | 83.2 ± 1.9 | 185.4 ± 11.0 |
| Ir#9 | 90.2 ± 1.2 | 85.8 ± 1.6 | 88.7 ± 1.2 | 87.2 ± 1.5 | 83.7 ± 1.7 | 94.8 ± 4.2 |
| Ir#10 | 86.2 ± 1.3 | 79.7 ± 1.3 | 91.5 ± 0.9 | 85.2 ± 1.1 | 85.1 ± 1.3 | 92.6 ± 3.2 |
| Ir#11 | 79.2 ± 1.9 | 68.8 ± 2.1 | 78.7 ± 0.9 | 74.5 ± 2.7 | 70.8 ± 1.8 | 203.3 ± 6.2 |
| Ir#12 | 74.7 ± 1.1 | 65.8 ± 2.2 | 77.8 ± 0.9 | 63.9 ± 2.5 | 65.9 ± 2.7 | 154.4 ± 7.9 |
Values are means ± standard deviations (n = 3).
Figure 5Hierarchical clustering analysis (HCA) of twelve I. rugosus callus extracts related to their phytochemical profile.
Figure 6Principal component analysis (PCA) of the different phytochemicals and biological activities of I. rugosus callus extracts. Variance of factor 1 (F1) = 70.13% and of factor 2 (F2) = 18.14%.
Pearson coefficient correlation linking the mains phytochemicals accumulated in I. rugosus callus extracts to their antioxidant and anti-aging activities.
| CA | RA | BA | OA | PA | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DPPH | 0.546 | 0.997 *** | 0.471 | 0.477 | 0.537 |
| ABTS | 0.575 | 0.982 *** | 0.484 | 0.447 | 0.466 |
| ORAC | 0.562 | 0.975 *** | 0.511 | 0.550 | 0.604 * |
| FRAP | 0.555 | 0.997 *** | 0.447 | 0.423 | 0.510 |
| CUPRAC | 0.566 | 0.992 *** | 0.454 | 0.466 | 0.513 |
| Chelation | 0.534 | 0.992 *** | 0.456 | 0.465 | 0.559 |
| Elastase | 0.126 | 0.525 | 0.827 ** | 0.902 *** | 0.748 * |
| Collagenase | 0.097 | 0.571 | 0.900 *** | 0.936 *** | 0.720 ** |
| Hyaluronidase | 0.467 | 0.897 *** | 0.572 | 0.602 * | 0.538 |
| Tyrosinase | -0.221 | 0.072 | 0.440 | 0.603 * | 0.622 * |
| AGEs | 0.608 * | 0.943 *** | 0.527 | 0.522 | 0.447 |
| SIRT1 | 0.435 | 0.970 *** | 0.665 * | 0.646 * | 0.625 * |
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.