Download Complete Issue - Academic Journals

More documents

Recommendations

Info

cultivars which was suggestive of greater capacity of Ak in controlling Na + . Tolerance of salt stress is greater in Ak cultivar than that in Ou and Ka cultivars and the difference might be due to different salt-tolerance mechanisms. Higher plant growth and photosynthetic pigments, lower Na and Cl content, greater accumulation of soluble sugars and K could explain the greater salttolerance of Ak compared to that of Ou and Ka. REFERENCES Abbaspour H (2010). Investigatin of the effects of vesicular arbuscular mycorrhiza on mineral nutrition and growth of Carthamus tinctorius under salt stress. Russian J. Plant Physiol., 57: 564-570. Arnon DI (1949). Copper enzymes in isolated chloroplasts. Polyphenoloxidase in Beta vulgaris. Plant Physiol., 24: 1-15. Ashraf M, Harris PJC (2004). Potential biochemical indicators of salinity tolerance in plants. Plant Sci., 166: 3–16. Banakar MH, Ranjbar GH (2010). Evaluation of salt tolerance of pistachio cultivars at seedling stage. Am-Eurasian J. Agric. Environ. Sci., 9: 115-120. Cheraghi SAM (2004). Institutional and scientific profiles of organizations working on saline agriculture in Iran. In: F.K. Taha, Sh. Hsmail and A. Jaradat, Prospects of saline agriculture in the Arabian Peninsula. Amherst Scientific Publishers. U.S.A, pp. 399-412. Cordovilla MP, Ocana A, Ligero F, Liuch C (1995). Salinity effects on growth analysis and nutrient composition in four grain legumesrhizobium symbiosis. J. Plant Nutr., 18: 1595-1609. Debez A, Saadaoui D, Ramani B, Ouerghi Z, Koyro HW, Huchzermeyer B, Abdelly C (2006). Leaf H + -ATPase activity and photosynthetic capacity of Cakile maritima under increasing salinity. Environ. Exp. Bot., 57: 285-229. Dubey RS (2005). Photosynthesis in plants under stressful conditions. In: Pessarakli M (ed) Hand book photosynthesis, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group, New York, pp. 717–737. Eryilmaz F (2007). The relationships between salt stress and anthocyanin content in higher plants. Biotechnol. Equip., 20: 47-52. Irigoyen JJ, Emerich DW, Sanchez-Diaz M (1992). Water stress induced changes in concentrations of proline and total soluble sugars in nodulated alfalfa (Medicago sativa) Plants. Physiol. Plant., 84: 67- 72. Jaleel CA, Gopi R, Manivannan P, Panneerselvam R (2007b). Responses of antioxidant defense system of Catharanthus roseus (L.) G. Don. to paclobutrazol treatment under salinity. Acta Physiol. Plant., 29: 205-209. Jaleel CA, Manivannan P, Lakshmanan GMA (2007). NaCl as a physiological modulator of proline metabolism and antioxidant potential in Phyllanthus amarus. C. R. Biol., 330: 806-813. Abbaspour et al. 2473 James RA, Munns R, Caemmerer S, Trejo C, Miller C, Condou T (2006). Photosynthetic capacity is related to the cellular and subcellular partitioning of Na + , K + and Cl – in salt-affected barley and durum wheat. Plant Cell Environ., 29: 2185-2197. Karmoker JL, Farhana S, Rashid P (2008). Effects of salinity on ion accumulation in maiz (Zea maiz L.). Bangladesh J. Bot., 37: 203-205. Khan H, Hassan ZU, Matlo A (2006). Yield and micronutrients content of bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under a multi-nutrient fertilizer. Int. J. Agric. Biol., 8: 366-370. Lewiss OAM (1986). The processing of inorganic nitrogen by the plant. In: Arnold E (eds), Plants and Nitrogen. Butterworth, London, England, pp. 21-41. Levitt J (1980). Responses of plant to environmental stresses. Water, radiation, Salt and other stresses,. Acad. Press, Vol. 2, New York. Moghaieb REA, Saneoka H, Fujita K (2004). Effect of salinity on osmotic adjustment, glycinebetaine accumulation and the betaine aldehyde dehydrogenase gene expression in two halophytic plants, Salicornia europaea and Suaeda maritima. Plant Sci., 166: 1345- 1349. Mudgal V, Madaan N, Mudgal A (2010). Biochemical mechanisms of salt tolerance in plants: A review. Int. J. Bot., 6: 136-143. Munns R, Tester M (2008). Mechanisms of salinity tolerance. Ann. Rev. Plant Biol., 59: 651-681. Munns R (2002). Comparative physiology of salt and water stress. Plant Cell Environ., 25: 239-250. Munns R (2005). Genes and salt tolerance: bringing them together. New Phytol., 167: 645-663. Parida AK, Das AB (2005). Salt tolerance and salinity effects on plants. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf., 60: 324-349. Rontein D, Basset G, Hanson AD (2002). Metabolic engineering of osmoprotectants accumulation in plants. Metab. Eng., 4: 49-56. Sheibani A (1994). Pistachio production in Iran. Acta Hort., 419: 14-15. Shi DC, Wang DL (2005). Effects of various salt-alkali mixed stresses on Aneurolepidium chinense (Trin.) Kitag. Plant Soil, 271: 15-26. Turan MA, Abdrlkarim H, Awad A, Taban N, Taban S(2010). Effect of salt stress on growth and ion distribution and accumulation in shoot and root of maiz plant. Afr. J. Agric. Res., 5(7): 584-588. Tester M, Davenport R (2003). Na + tolerance and Na + transport in higher plants. Ann. Bot., 91: 503–507. Wehrman I, Handel R (1984). Relationship between N and Cl nutrition and No3 content of vegetables. VI International Colloquium for the Optimization of Plant nutrition. Montpellier, France, 2: 679-685.. Yousif HY, Bingham FT, Yermason DM (1972). Growth, mineral composition, and seed oil of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) as affected by NaCl. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc., 36: 450-453. Zhu JK (2003). Regulation of ion homeostasis under salt stress. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol., 6: 441-445. Zhu JK (2002). Salt and drought stress signal transduction in plants. Ann. Rev. Plant Biol., 53: 247-273.
Journal of Medicinal Plants Research Vol. 6(12), pp. 2474-2477, 30 March, 2012 Available online at http://www.academicjournals.org/JMPR DOI: 10.5897/JMPR11.1735 ISSN 1996-0875 ©2012 <strong>Academic</strong> <strong>Journals</strong> Full Length Research Paper Study on salicin content correlation between taxilli herba and their willow host plants Dong Lu 1 , Benwei Su 1 , Yonghua Li 2 *, Kaixin Zhu 1 , Hehuan Pei 1 , Minghui Zhao 1 and Jing Li 1 1 Qinzhou Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Qinzhou 535000, China. 2 Guangxi Traditional Chinese Medicine University, Nanning, 530001, China. Accepted 20 February, 2012 This paper aims to study the correlation of salicin content between taxilli herba and its host plants, willows. The salicin content of the taxilli herba parasitizing in willows and mulberries was determined by the method of reversed-phase high performance liquid chromatography (RP-HPLC). The salicin sample was ultrasonically extracted in methanol solution in the chromatographic conditions of an Ultimate ® XB-C18 column (250 mm × 4.6 mm, 5 μm) at room temperature, with a mobile phase of methanol 0.1% potassium dihydrogen phosphate (32:68, V/V), a flow rate of 1.0 ml·min -1 , and a detection wavelength of 269 nm. The linear range of salicin was from 2.02 to 404.80 μg·L -1 (r = 1.0000), and the average recovery rate was 97.76%. The salicin content of willow host trees and of the taxilli herba parasitizing in them was in the range of 0.84 to 3.29 mg·g -1 and of 1.80 to 10.56 mg·g -1 , respectively, the latter reaching 355.17% (3.55 times) as high as the former, at the very most. However, no salicin could be determined in mulberry host trees and the taxilli herba parasitizing in them. Salicin characteristic components in willow host trees could be multiplied by their taxilli herba, and host trees could affect the medicinal quality of the taxilli herba parasitizing in them possibly by delivering their characteristic components. Key words: Taxilli herba, willow, salicin, reversed-phase high performance liquid chromatography, ultraviolet detection. INTRODUCTION Having antipyretic and analgesic effects, salicin can be used for the treatment of fever and diseases, like arthritis (Teruaki et al., 2002). As a natural product, it is widely found in the family salicaceae, especially in the willow branches and barks (Zhao et al., 2005). Taxilli herba is commonly used as a traditional Chinese herbal medicine. Being the most widely used taxilli herba parasitizes in mulberries from ancient times, taxilli herba parasitizing in other host plants like daimyo oaks, beeches, willows, bigcatkin willows, and maples are still being used (Li et al., 2009; Li et al., 2006). Even in the current Chinese Pharmacopoeia, the host plants of taxilli herba are not clearly defined (National Pharmacopoeia Committee, 2010). In this study, the method of RP-HPLC is adopted to determine the salicin content of the taxilli herba *Corresponding author. E-mail:liyonghua185@126.com. Tel: +867713137585. Fax: +867713140360. parasitizing in willows and its host plants, with the taxilli herba parasitizing in mulberries and its host plants as reference substances. By observing the salicin content of taxilli herba and its host plants, this study can provide some experimental evidence for the assessment of the impact of host plants on their taxilli herba’s medicinal quality. MATERIALS AND METHODS Materials and reagents The reference substance of salicin was purchased from Chengdu Mansite Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., with the batch number of A0130. Furthermore, ultrapure water was used, and all the other chemical reagents were analytically pure. The taxilli herba parasitizing in willows and in mulberries was collected from Qinzhou, Guangxi in the wild environment; and the standardized planting base of Qinzhou Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine respectively in March 2011. The taxilli herba was identified by researcher Huaxing Qiu from South China Institute of Botany, the Chinese Academy of
Page 1 and 2:
Journal of Medicinal Plants Researc
Page 3 and 4:
Editors Prof. Akah Peter Achunike E
Page 5 and 6:
Electronic submission of manuscript
Page 7 and 8:
Fees and Charges: Authors are requi
Page 9 and 10:
Table of Contents: Volume 6 Number
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Figure 1. Chuanxiong Rhizoma (http:
Page 17 and 18:
Table 1. Identification of main pea
Page 19 and 20:
Table 3. Pharmacokinetic parameters
Page 21 and 22:
active component study, many invest
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
and 1185 kg ha -1 in the first site
Page 27 and 28:
Table 1. Recommendation for use fer
Page 29 and 30:
Sadanandan AK, Hamza S (1996c). Stu
Page 31 and 32:
and it has been traced to South Ame
Page 33 and 34:
Table 3. Results of phytochemical a
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
(a) (b) (c) Figure 1. (a) Normal ce
Page 39 and 40:
emedies in the south of Brazil. J.
Page 41 and 42:
known fatty acids and terpenoids we
Page 43 and 44:
Table 1. Renal function tests of ra
Page 45 and 46:
Al-Radahe et al. 2271 Figure 3.nnnn
Page 47 and 48:
namely disruption of the vascular e
Page 49 and 50:
Zayachkivska OS, Konturek SJ, Drozd
Page 51 and 52:
β-carotene were purchased from Sig
Page 53 and 54:
Figure 1. Effect of ethanol concent
Page 55 and 56:
Table 3. Climatic and soil factors
Page 57 and 58:
content of polysaccharides. Phospha
Page 59 and 60:
Serge et al. 2285 Table 1. Relative
Page 61 and 62:
Percentage inhibition % of inhibiti
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Table 1. Result of phytochemical sc
Page 67 and 68:
Table 3. Result of thin layer chrom
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Table 2. MIC of a compound 1 from c
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Zirihi et al. 2301 Figure 2. Termin
Page 77 and 78:
Figure 5. T. catappa Linn. (Combret
Page 79 and 80:
Figure 8. A. fumigatus: Aspect of c
Page 81 and 82:
Figure 12. Sensitivity of A. fumiga
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Noormi et al. 2311 Table 1. Callus
Page 87 and 88:
Table 2. Contd. NoC=No callus. 4.0
Page 89 and 90:
Figure 2. Contd. at 2.0 mg/L yellow
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Table 1. Biochemical parameters in
Page 95 and 96:
Figure 3. Bcl-xL reactions in inter
Page 97 and 98:
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would l
Page 99 and 100:
Figure 1. The first page of the boo
Page 101 and 102:
Figure 3. The most widely included
Page 103 and 104:
Figure 4. Lithographic print “St.
Page 105 and 106:
Table 1. List of plants included in
Page 107 and 108:
Table 1. Contd. Nedelcheva 2333 Cin
Page 109 and 110:
Table 1. Contd. Nedelcheva 2335 Rhe
Page 111 and 112:
14 7 1 15 1 35 17 16 Imported plant
Page 113 and 114:
Academy of Science Publishing House
Page 115 and 116:
et al., 1996; van Wyk and Gericke,
Page 117 and 118:
DPPH inhibition (%) DPPH % inhibiti
Page 119 and 120:
% Mortality Concentration (µg/ml)
Page 121 and 122:
information on plants used for the
Page 123 and 124:
Table 1. Levels of independent vari
Page 125 and 126:
Arbutin (mg/g) Co-solvent Figure 1.
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Arbutin (mg/g) Extraction pressure
Page 131 and 132:
Table 3. Arbuitn content of Asian p
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Arbutin (mg/g) Extraction pressure
Page 137 and 138:
Arbutin (mg/g) Extraction temperatu
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Table 1. Chemical composition of es
Page 143 and 144:
Darjazi 2369 Table 2. Statistical a
Page 145 and 146:
Table 3. Correlation matrix (number
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Table 1. Precision test. extraction
Page 151 and 152:
Figure 2. Effect of different alcoh
Page 153 and 154:
Table 6. Results of ANOVA. Nie et a
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Table 2. Plant data and MIC values
Page 159 and 160:
exhibiting the polar extracts of P.
Page 161 and 162:
Table 3. Contd. AcOEt ++ ++ ++ - Me
Page 163 and 164:
Figure 1. Map of Ladakh region of I
Page 165 and 166:
Warghat et al. 2391 Table 3. Summar
Page 167 and 168:
Table 5. Inter-Population genetic i
Page 169 and 170:
Excoffier L, Smouse PE, Quattro JM
Page 171 and 172:
ice residue is an ideal raw materia
Page 173 and 174:
DPPH• scavenging ratio(%) OD valu
Page 175 and 176:
scavenging effect on free radical a
Page 177 and 178:
our new CL system. Fenton reaction
Page 179 and 180:
1 2 Time (s) Figure 2. Kinetic curv
Page 181 and 182:
Wong et al., 2006). It can be seen
Page 183 and 184:
Pan YM, Liang Y, Wang HS, Liang M (
Page 185 and 186: 2422 J. Med. Plants Res. close cano
Page 187 and 188: 2424 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 1. M
Page 189 and 190: 2426 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 1. C
Page 195 and 196: 2432 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 2. D
Page 197 and 198: 2434 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 6. T
Page 199 and 200: 2436 J. Med. Plants Res. budget dur
Page 201 and 202: Journal of Medicinal Plants Researc
Page 203 and 204: 2440 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 1. R
Page 205 and 206: 2442 J. Med. Plants Res. Stability
Page 207 and 208: 2444 J. Med. Plants Res. production
Page 209 and 210: 2446 J. Med. Plants Res. Figure 2.
Page 213 and 214: 2450 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 2. A
Page 215 and 216: 2452 J. Med. Plants Res. Ghasemi Pi
Page 217 and 218: 2454 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 1. I
Page 219 and 220: 2456 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 3. M
Page 223 and 224: 2460 J. Med. Plants Res. Department
Page 225 and 226: 2462 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 3. E
Page 229 and 230: 2466 J. Med. Plants Res. AOAC (2000
Page 233 and 234: 2470 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 1. F
Page 235: 2472 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 3. S
Page 243 and 244: 2480 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 1. W
Page 249 and 250: 2486 J. Med. Plants Res. components
Page 253 and 254: 2490 J. Med. Plants Res. Inhibition
Page 257 and 258: 2494 J. Med. Plants Res. can increa
Page 259 and 260: 2496 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 2. S
Page 263 and 264: 2500 J. Med. Plants Res. Flowering
Page 265 and 266: 2502 J. Med. Plants Res. harvest in
Page 275 and 276: 2512 J. Med. Plants Res. over-expre
Page 279 and 280: 2516 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 1. P
Page 287 and 288:
2524 J. Med. Plants Res. ACKNOWLEDG
Page 289 and 290:
UPCOMING CONFERENCES 15th European
Page 291:
show all

Download Complete Issue - Academic Journals

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?