4.5 Article

In vitro propagation, genetic and phytochemical assessment of Habenaria edgeworthii: an important Astavarga plant

期刊

ACTA PHYSIOLOGIAE PLANTARUM
卷 34, 期 3, 页码 869-875

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11738-011-0884-8

关键词

Orchidaceae; Protocorm-like bodies (PLBs); Inter-simple sequence repeats (ISSR); Tuber induction; Genetic stability; Total phenolic content

资金

  1. Biodiversity Conservation and Management Thematic group
  2. National Academy of Sciences, India
  3. Hamdard University, New Delhi
  4. National Medicinal Plants Board [Z.18017/187/Pr.GO/UA-01/2006-07]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An efficient in vitro propagation protocol for Habenaria edgeworthii Hook. f. ex. Collett using seed-derived callus was established. The maximum seed germination was observed in Murashige and Skoog (MS) medium supplemented with 1.0 mu M alpha-naphthalene acetic acid (NAA). Induction of callus was achieved on full and A1/2-strength MS medium supplemented with 1.0 mu M NAA. The highest number of shoot (11.9 shoots/explant) was achieved in MS medium supplemented with 0.1 mu M 6-benzyladenine (BA) and 0.01 mu M NAA. Further, elongated shoots when transferred to A1/2-strength MS rooting medium with different auxin concentrations induced roots (41.6-83.3%) and tubers (0-20.8%); however, a maximum of 87.5% rooting was achieved in a plant growth regulator (PGR)-free MS medium. Rooted shoots (plantlets) when transferred to a mixture of soil:sand:perlite (1:1:1 ratio) resulted in 68% survival. Inter-simple sequence repeats (ISSR) markers confirmed the genetic stability among regenerated plants. The phytochemical analysis of tissue culture-raised tubers showed higher phenolic content than wild tuber. The regeneration protocol developed in this study provides a basis for germplasm conservation and harnessing the total phenol and phenolic compounds of H. edgeworthii. Further, the methods can open avenues for application in other Orchidaceous plants of the Indian Himalayan region.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据