| Literature DB >> 35159295 |
Wojciech Tomaszewicz1, Monika Cioć2, Katarzyna Dos Santos Szewczyk3, Małgorzata Grzyb1, Wioleta Pietrzak3, Bożena Pawłowska2, Anna Mikuła1.
Abstract
The tree ferns are an important component of tropical forests. In view of this, the enhancement of in vitro production of these plants is needed. Thus, the effect of different light-emitting diodes (LEDs) as well as control fluorescent lamps (Fl) and a 3-week-long period of darkness at the beginning of in vitro culture on micropropagation of the tree fern Cyathea delgadii Sternb. was analysed. Moreover, the photosynthetic pigment content and secondary metabolite profiles were estimated. The period of darkness contributed to a high production of somatic embryo-derived sporophytes and a low production of gametophytes. The formation of new sporophytes was stimulated by RBY (35% red, 15% blue, and 50% yellow) and B (100% blue) lights when the stipe explants or whole young sporophytes were used in the culture, respectively. The elongation of the roots and leaves was stimulated by RBfR light (35% red, 15% blue, and 50% far red), while root production increased under RBY light. The RB (70% red and 30% blue) and B lights stimulated the accumulation of chlorophyll better than Fl light. The most abundant metabolite found in the plant extracts was trans-5-O-caffeoylquinic acid (1.013 µg/mg of dry weight). The extract obtained from plants growing in a greenhouse had the best antioxidant activity.Entities:
Keywords: antioxidant activity; light-emitting diode; phenolic acids; photosynthetic pigments; somatic embryogenesis; tree fern
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35159295 PMCID: PMC8834616 DOI: 10.3390/cells11030486
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cells ISSN: 2073-4409 Impact factor: 6.600
The parameters used for evaluation of regenerative ability of stipes and whole sporophytes of Cyathea delgadii.
| Parameter | Method of Calculation |
|---|---|
| Experiment with Stipe Explants | |
| Ratio of explants with sporophytes | the number of explants with regenerated sporophytes divided by the total number of stipe explants used for culture initiation |
| Number of sporophytes | the total number of obtained sporophytes divided by the sum of cultured explants |
| Ratio of explants with gametophytes | the number of explants with regenerated gametophytes divided by the total number of explants used for culture initiation |
| Ratio of explants with mass-produced gametophytes | the number of explants that produced gametophytes with total surface equal or higher than 4 mm2, per total number of explants with gametophytes |
| Ratio of sporophytes with a developed leaf | the number of sporophytes with at least 1 leaf at crosier stadium or older per sum of all sporophytes (including these with only a leaf primordium) |
| Ratio of sporophytes with a developed leaf blade | the number of sporophytes with at least 1 leaf with the leaf blade older than crosier stadium per total number of sporophytes with a developed leaf |
| Length of the longest leaf | the sum of the length of the longest leaf from each sporophyte per the sum of obtained sporophytes |
| Number of roots | the sum of roots divided by the total number of sporophytes |
| Length of the roots | the sum of root length divided by the total number of sporophytes |
| Experiment with whole sporophytes | |
| Fresh weight | weight of total proliferated plants obtained from a single initial sporophyte |
| Number of sporophytes | the sum of newly-formed sporophytes per the total number of initial sporophytes |
| Ratio of sporophytes with a developed leaf | the sum of sporophytes with at least 1 leaf at crosier stadium or older per sum of all sporophytes (including these with only a leaf primordium) |
| Number of leaves | the sum of leaves produced by sporophytes divided by the total number of sporophytes |
| Length of the longest leaf | the length of the longest leaf of each sporophyte divided by the total number of sporophytes |
| Number of roots | the sum of roots divided by the total number of sporophytes |
| Length of the longest root | the sum of the length of the longest root of each sporophyte divided by the total number of sporophytes |
Figure 1The influence of light quality and photoperiod on the efficiency of sporophytogenesis and gametophytogenesis after 8 weeks of culture of the Cyathea delgadii stipe explants. (A) The ratio of explants with sporophytes and (B) the number of sporophytes. (C) The picture of juvenile sporophytes developed after 3D/5L treatment under RBY LED light. (D) Separation of significantly different mean values of described parameters for light quality and photoperiod used in the cultures. (E) Mass gametophyte production after culture under RB LED light (8L). (F) The ratio of explants with gametophytes and (G) mass-produced gametophytes. Fl—control light: fluorescence Philips TL-D 36W/54 lamps; B—100% blue LED light (430 nm); R—100% red LED light (670 nm); RB—combination of red (70%) and blue (30%) LED lights; RBfR—combination of red, blue, and far-red (730 nm) LED lights (35%/15%/50%); RBY—combination of red, blue, and yellow (600 nm) LED lights (35%/15%/50%); RBUV—combination of red, blue, and UV (400 nm) LED lights (35%/15%/50%); RBG—combination of red, blue, and green (528 nm) LED lights (35%/15%/50%); Wh—white LED (1:1:1 2700K:4500K:5700K); 8L—8-week-long culture under 16/8 h light/dark; 3D/5L—5-week-long culture under 16/8 h light/dark preceded by 3-week-long culture under 24 h dark; Mean ± standard deviations marked by different letters are significantly different (p ≤ 0.05) following Duncan’s multiple range test; Significant effect: ** p ≤ 0.05; *** p ≤ 0.01; G—gametophyte, S—sporophyte.
Figure 2The influence of light conditions on the sporophyte development of Cyathea delgadii after 8-week-long culture of stipe explants. (A) The ratio of sporophytes with a developed leaf and (B) developed leaf blade. (C) Picture of well-developed leaf blade obtained under RBfR LED light (8L). (D) Length of the longest leaf. (E) Root production. (F) Length of the roots. Fl—control light: fluorescence Philips TL-D 36W/54 lamps; B—100% blue LED light (430 nm); R—100% red LED light (670 nm); RB—combination of red (70%) and blue (30%) LED light; RBfR—combination of red, blue, and far-red (730 nm) LED lights (35%/15%/50%); RBY—combination of red, blue, and yellow (600 nm) LED lights (35%/15%/50%); RBUV—combination of red, blue and UV (400 nm) LED lights (35%/15%/50%); RBG—combination of red, blue, and green (528 nm) LED lights (35%/15%/50%); Wh—white LED (1:1:1 2700K:4500K:5700K); 8L—8-week-long culture under 16/8 h light/dark; 3D/5L—5-week-long culture under 16/8 h light/dark preceded by 3-week-long culture under 24 h dark; Mean ± standard deviations marked by different letters are significantly different (p ≤ 0.05) following Duncan’s multiple range test.
Figure 3The proliferation of new sporophytes via somatic embryogenesis on whole etiolated 5-month-old sporophytes of Cyathea delgadii during culture under 16/8 h photoperiod conditions under fluorescent light. (A) initial sporophyte with reduced leaf blades. (B) Sporophyte with well-developed leaf blades after 3 weeks of the culture. (C) Intensive proliferation at the base of the initial sporophyte, and embryo structures protruding above its surface (magnification of the picture (B) after 3 weeks of the culture. (D) Somatic embryos at the base of initial sporophyte after 4 weeks of the culture. (E) Somatic embryos formed at the base of sporophyte and on the internode between 1st and 2nd leaf after 5 weeks of the culture. (F) Long roots of initial sporophytes (R1) after 6 weeks of the culture. (G) Somatic embryo-derived sporophytes with differentiated roots (R2) after 7 weeks of the culture. (H) Well-developed somatic embryo-derived sporophytes after 8 weeks of the culture. 1—first leaf, 2—second leaf, 3—third leaf, 4—fourth leaf, B—base of sporophyte, Ip—intensive proliferation, In—internode, Is—initial sporophyte, Lb—leaf blade, Ls—leaf stipe, P—leaf primordium, R1—root of initial sporophyte, R2—root of somatic embryo-derived sporophyte, Se—somatic embryo, Ss—somatic embryo-derived sporophyte.
Figure 4Effect of different light quality on fresh weight and biometrical properties of growth of Cyathea delgadii sporophytes after in vitro propagation under: Fl—fluorescent light; B—100% blue LED light; R—100% red LED light; RB—combination of red (70%) and blue (30%) LED light. The effect on 5-month-old etiolated sporophytes was estimated after 6-month-long culture. (A) Fresh weight of proliferated plants and number of obtained sporophytes. (B) Ratio of sporophytes with a developed leaf. (C) Number of leaves and length of the longest leaf. (D) Number of roots and length of the longest root. Mean ± standard deviations marked by different letters are significantly different (p ≤ 0.05) following Dunn–Bonferroni test.
Figure 5Effect of different light quality on the content [μg g−1 fresh weight ± SD] of photosynthetic pigments of Cyathea delgadii after multiplication in vitro under: Fl—fluorescent light; B—100% blue LED light; R—100% red LED light; RB—combination of red (70%) and blue (30%) LED light; data are means. Shared letters within each pigment indicate no statistically significant difference following Duncan’s multiple range test at p ≤ 0.5.
Content of phenolic acids, flavonoid aglycones, and flavonoid glycosides in the extracts from Cyathea delgadii, growing under various light conditions.
| Compound | Retention Time | [M-H]- [ | Fragment Ions | Collision Energy [eV] | Light Conditions | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dark | Fl | B | R | RB | Greenhouse | |||||
| Compound Content [µg/mg of Dry Weight] | ||||||||||
| Phenolic acids | ||||||||||
| Protocatechuic acid | 8.46 | 152.9 | 80.9 | −26 | 0.0058 ± 0.0002 d | 0.0048 ± 0.0001 e | 0.0067 ± 0.0006 c | 0.0076 ± 0.0003 b | 0.0033 ± 0.0001 f | |
| 9.32 | 352.9 | 190.8 | −24 | 0.3698 ± 0.0075 e | 0.7004 ± 0.0064 c | 0.7420 ± 0.0562 b | 0.5733 ± 0.0143 d | 0.0028 ± 0.0003 f | ||
| 10.45 | 352.9 | 190.8 | −24 | 0.0940 ± 0.0065 d | 0.0413 ± 0.0014 e | 0.1268 ± 0.0043 b | 0.1073 ± 0.0049 c | 0.0006 ± 0.0001 f | ||
| Caffeic acid | 11.40 | 178.7 | 88.9 | −46 | 0.0019 ± 0.0002 b | nd | 0.0012 ± 0.0001 c | nd | nd | |
| Flavonoid aglycones | ||||||||||
| Prunetin | 21.98 | 282.8 | 267.7 | −20 | nd | nd | ||||
| Flavonoid glycosides | ||||||||||
| Quercetin 3- | 11.99 | 608.7 | 299.6 | −46 | BQL | 0.0346 ± 0.0028 c | 0.0081 ± 0.0001 d | 0.0571 ± 0.0004 b | nd | |
| Quercetin 3- | 13.00 | 462.7 | 299.7 | −30 | nd | 0.0327 ± 0.0022 c | BQL | 0.0483 ± 0.0009 b | nd | |
| Kaempferol 3- | 13.31 | 592.7 | 284.8 | −38 | 0.0005 ± 0.00003 e | 0.0476 ± 0.0011 c | 0.0273 ± 0.0017 d | 0.0686 ± 0.0021 b | nd | |
| Kaempferol 3- | 14.66 | 446.7 | 226.8 | −54 | nd | 0.0360 ± 0.0004 b | BQL | 0.0316 ± 0.0011 c | BQL | |
| Quercetin 3- | 14.83 | 446.7 | 299.7 | −30 | BQL | 0.0049 ± 0.0003 b | BQL | 0.0021 ± 0.0002 c | nd | |
| Naringenin-7- | 15.12 | 432.7 | 270.8 | −22 | 0.0007 ± 0.00004 d | 0.0144 ± 0.0005 b | 0.0136 ± 0.0005 c | 0.0143 ± 0.0006 b | nd | |
Mean ± standard deviations marked by different letters are significantly different (p ≤ 0.05) within each secondary metabolite following Duncan’s multiple range test at (p ≤ 0.5).; n = 6; nd—not detected; BQL—peak detected, concentration higher than the limit of detection but lower than the limit of quantification. The highest content of each secondary metabolite is bold. Fl—control light: fluorescence Philips TL-D 36W/54 lamps; B—100% blue LED light (430 nm); R—100% red LED light (670 nm); RB—combination of red (70%) and blue (30%) LED light. Cultures were maintained under a 16/8 h light/dark.
The antioxidant activity of the Cyathea delgadii extracts from plants growing under various light conditions.
| Antioxidant Activity | Light Conditions | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dark | Fl | B | R | RB | Greenhouse | |
| DPPH (EC50 mg/mL) | 0.72 ± 0.78 ab | 0.08 ± 0.07 a | 0.88 ± 0.14 b | 0.39 ± 0.20 ab | 0.36 ± 0.39 ab | 0.03 ± 0.01 a |
| ABTS (EC50 mg/mL) | 1.87 ± 0.13 cd | 0.59 ± 0.10 a | 2.24 ± 0.50 d | 1.43 ± 0.25 bc | 1.32 ± 0.17 b | 0.35 ± 0.15 a |
| CHEL (EC50 mg/mL) | 1.65 ± 0.15 b | 1.42 ± 0.12 b | 1.15 ± 0.11 a | 1.50 ± 0.10 b | 2.15 ± 0.20 c | 2.70 ± 0.18 d |
| β-Carotene/linoleic acid (EC50 μg/mL) | 52.10 ± 0.16 d | 31.70 ± 0.12 b | 72.45 ± 0.75 e | 32.17 ± 0.20 b | 34.85 ± 0.13 c | 22.68 ± 0.39 a |
Fl—control light: fluorescence Philips TL-D 36W/54 lamps; B—100% blue LED light (430 nm); R—100% red LED light (670 nm); RB—combination of red (70%) and blue (30%) LED light. Cultures were maintained under a 16/8 h light/dark; EC50 value is the concentration of extract or standard required to achieve 50% antioxidant activity. Each value is expressed as mean ± standard deviation (n = 3); DPPH (2,2-diphenyl-1-picryl-hydrazyl) assay for ascorbic acid (standard) EC50 = 0.05 ± 0.02 mg/mL; ABTS (2,2′-azinobis[3 -ethylbenzthiazoline]-6-sulfonic acid) assay for ascorbic acid (standard) EC50 = 0.12 ± 0.10 mg/mL; metal chelating activity (CHEL) for ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) (standard) EC50 = 0.63 ± 0.10 mg/mL; β-carotene bleaching assay for butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT) (standard) EC50 = 32.15 ± 0.20 μg/mL.; mean ± standard deviations marked by different letters are significantly different (p ≤ 0.05) following Duncan’s multiple range test.
Figure 6The best conditions for mass production of Cyathea delgadii sporophytes.