| Literature DB >> 35009127 |
Anna A Erst1, Anastasia A Petruk1, Andrey S Erst1,2, Denis A Krivenko3, Nadezhda V Filinova3, Svetlana Y Maltseva4, Maxim S Kulikovskiy4, Evgeny V Banaev1.
Abstract
Rhodiola rosea L. is a valuable medicinal plant with adaptogenic, neuroprotective, antitumor, cardioprotective, and antidepressant effects. In this study, design of experiments methodology was employed to analyze and optimize the interacting effects of mineral compounds (concentration of NO3- and the ratio of NH4+ to K+) and two plant growth regulators [total 6-benzylaminopurine (BAP) and α-naphthylacetic acid (NAA) concentration and the ratio of BAP to NAA] on the growth and the production of total phenolic compounds (TPCs) in R. rosea calluses. The overall effect of the model was highly significant (p < 0.0001), indicating that NH4+, K+, NO3-, BAP, and NAA significantly affected growth. The best callus growth (703%) and the highest production of TPCs (75.17 mg/g) were achieved at an NH4+/K+ ratio of 0.33 and BAP/NAA of 0.33, provided that the concentration of plant growth regulators was 30 μM and that of NO3- was ≤40 mM. According to high-performance liquid chromatography analyses of aerial parts (leaves and stems), in vitro seedlings and callus cultures of R. rosea contain no detectable rosarin, rosavin, rosin, and cinnamyl alcohol. This is the first report on the creation of an experiment for the significant improvement of biomass accumulation and TPC production in callus cultures of R. rosea.Entities:
Keywords: HPLC; design of experiments; histochemistry; in vitro culture; methyl jasmonate; nitrogen source; phenolic compound; plant growth regulator; roseroot
Year: 2022 PMID: 35009127 PMCID: PMC8747766 DOI: 10.3390/plants11010124
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
ANOVA and summary statistics for the % fresh weight increase and dry weights of callus culture of R. rosea.
| Fresh Weight | Dry Weight | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| F-Value | F-Value | |||
| Model | 107.14 | <0.0001 | 35.83 | <0.0001 |
| Linear × Linear Mixture | 274.28 | <0.0001 | 80.74 | <0.0001 |
| NH4+ * K+ *BAP | 140.46 | <0.0001 | 31.82 | <0.0001 |
| NH4+ * K+ *NAA | 22.00 | <0.0001 | 13.40 | 0.0008 |
| NH4+ *BAP*NAA | 38.42 | <0.0001 | 6.61 | 0.0142 |
| NH4+ *BAP* NO3− | 5.78 | 0.0218 | 1.01 | 0.3208 |
| NH4+ *BAP*BAP + NAA | 21.64 | <0.0001 | 6.87 | 0.0126 |
| NH4+ * K+ *BAP* NO3− | 19.65 | <0.0001 | - | - |
| NH4+ * K+ *BAP* BAP + NAA | 19.84 | <0.0001 | 2.74 | 0.1058 |
| NH4+ * K+ *NAA* NO3− | 7.92 | 0.0081 | 1.70 | 0.2002 |
| NH4+ * K+ *NAA* BAP + NAA | 15.35 | 0.0004 | 6.63 | 0.0141 |
| NH4+ *BAP*NAA* NO3− | 76.36 | <0.0001 | 17.88 | 0.0001 |
| NH4+ *BAP*NAA* BAP + NAA | 68.45 | <0.0001 | - | - |
| NH4+ *BAP* NO3−* BAP + NAA | 21.51 | <0.0001 | 25.17 | <0.0001 |
| NH4+ * NAA* NO3−* BAP + NAA | 12.34 | 0.0013 | - | - |
| K+ *BAP* [NO3−]2 | 1.84 | 0.1842 | - | - |
| NH4+ * K+ *BAP* NO3−* BAP + NAA | 4.74 | 0.0364 | 7.54 | 0.0092 |
| NH4+ *BAP*NAA* NO3−* BAP + NAA | 23.44 | <0.0001 | 1.83 | 0.1840 |
| NH4+ * K+ *BAP*[ NO3−]2 | 61.34 | <0.0001 | 16.24 | 0.0003 |
| NH4+ * K+ *BAP*[ BAP + NAA]2 | 7.57 | 0.0095 | 3.79 | 0.0590 |
| Lack of Fit | ||||
| R2 | 0.9851 | 0.9413 | ||
| Adjusted R2 | 0.9759 | 0.9150 | ||
| Predicted R2 | 0.9235 | 0.8162 | ||
| Adeq Precision | 40.4608 | 23.0849 | ||
| Std. Dev. | 25.21 | 0.0142 | ||
| Mean | 178.00 | 0.1071 | ||
| C.V.% | 14.16 | 13.26 | ||
| Model type | Reduced Quadratic × Quadratic × Quadratic model | Reduced Quadratic × Quadratic × Quadratic model | ||
Note: “-”: no hierarchical relationships.
Figure 1Three-dimensional (3D) response surface plots showing the effects of various factors on R. rosea callus fresh and dry weight. (A,B) The impact of the NH4+/K+ ratio and NO3−. (C,D) The influence of the BAP/NAA ratio and NH4+/K+. (E,F) The effect of the concentrations of BAP + NAA and NO3−.
Figure 2Callus culture of R. rosea cultivated on a modified MS medium at the NH4+/K+ ratio of 0.33, 40 mM NO3−, the BAP/NAA ratio of 1.0, and concentrations of plant growth regulators at 30 μM. (A) Numerous small vacuoles in immature cells seen under a light microscope and (B) under a fluorescence microscope. (C) Mature cells with a single vacuole under the light microscope and (D) under the fluorescence microscope. (E) Lugol’s solution for starch (orange arrows). (F) Fragments of spiral vessels as seen under the fluorescence microscope (black arrows).
Figure 3Effect of composition of the nutrient medium and different concentrations of MJ on (A) total phenolic content and (B) number of phenolic compounds in callus cultures of R. rosea. Values are mean ± standard error (vertical error bars) of three replicates. Means with similar letters are not significantly different at p ≤ 0.05 according to LSD test. Legend. Treatment group 1: NH4+/K+ 0.33, NO3− 20 mM, BAP/NAA 1.0, BAP + NAA 5 μM; 2: NH4+/K+ 0.33, NO3− 20 mM, BAP/NAA 0.33, BAP + NAA 30 μM; 3: NH4+/K+ 0.33, NO3− 20 mM, BAP/NAA 1.0, BAP + NAA 30 μM; 4: NH4+/K+ 0.33, NO3− 40 mM, BAP/NAA 0.33, BAP + NAA 17.5 μM; 5: NH4+/K+ 0.33, NO3− 40 mM, BAP/NAA 0.33, BAP + NAA 30 μM; 6: NH4+/K+ 0.33, NO3− 40 mM, BAP/NAA 1.0, BAP + NAA 30 μM; 7: NH4+/K+ 0.33, NO3− 60 mM, BAP/NAA 0.33, BAP + NAA 30 μM; 8: NH4+/K+ 0.33, NO3− 60 mM, BAP/NAA 1.0, BAP + NAA 30 μM; 9: NH4+/K+ 1.0, NO3− 20 mM, BAP/NAA 0.33, BAP + NAA 17.5 μM; 10: NH4+/K+ 1.0, NO3− 20 mM, BAP/NAA 0.33, BAP + NAA 30 μM; 11: NH4+/K+ 1.0, NO3− 20 mM, BAP/NAA 1.0, BAP + NAA 30 μM; 12: NH4+/K+ 1.0, NO3− 30 mM, BAP/NAA 1.0, BAP + NAA 17.5 μM; 13: NH4+/K+ 1.0, NO3− 40 mM, BAP/NAA 1.0, BAP + NAA 30 μM; 14: NH4+/K+ 0.33, NO3− 40 mM, BAP/NAA 1.0, BAP + NAA 30 μM, MJ 100 μM; 15: NH4+/K+ 0.33, NO3− 40 mM, BAP/NAA 1.0, BAP + NAA 30 μM, MJ 200 μM; 16: control 1.
Figure 4The principal component analysis (PCA) plot showing two clusters of callus cultures and control 1 of R. rosea. Blue ellipse: callus culture after treatment with MJ; orange ellipse: all other callus cultures in the experiment, except No. 7; No. 7: callus culture obtained on the medium that had NH4+/K+ of 0.33, NO3− at 60 mM, BAP/NAA 0.33, BAP + NAA 30 μM; No. 16: control 1. Note: see Figure 3.
Characteristics and levels of the phenolic compounds detected by HPLC in the extracts from rhizomes and roots of R. rosea.
| Compound | Spectral Characteristics: λmax, nm | Retention Time (tR), min | Content, mg/g of Air-Dried Material | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rhizomes | Roots | |||
| Gallic acid | 272 | 1.8 | 26.15 | 21.20 |
| Compound 2 | 216,280 | 2.9 | 3.20 | 2.30 |
| Compound 3 | 228,296 | 6.5 | 0.51 | 0.23 |
| Compound 4 | 218,274 | 8.5 | 0.41 | - |
| Rosarin | 253 | 10.7 | 16.33 | 7.41 |
| Rosavin | 253 | 12.5 | 41.73 | 11.73 |
| Rosin | 253 | 13.5 | 25.10 | 11.25 |
| Cinnamyl alcohol | 205,253 | 24.3 | 42.74 | 32.10 |
| Rhodiosin | 277,333,385 | 39.9 | 0.81 | 0.72 |
| Rhodionin | 277,333,385 | 40.5 | 2.11 | 1.74 |
| TPC | 159.09 | 88.68 | ||
“-”: not detected.