2013
DOI: 10.1007/s10725-013-9830-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Efficiency of direct and indirect shoot organogenesis, molecular profiling, secondary metabolite production and antioxidant activity of micropropagated Ceropegia santapaui

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

4
20
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 55 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
4
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…5d), while primer OPV-18 showed 4 additional bands in clone-6 and clone-7. A variation during micropropagation depends upon the source of explants and the mode of in vitro regeneration [30], [31]. In the present study, high levels of uniformity among donor and in vitro raised clones was observed.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 54%
“…5d), while primer OPV-18 showed 4 additional bands in clone-6 and clone-7. A variation during micropropagation depends upon the source of explants and the mode of in vitro regeneration [30], [31]. In the present study, high levels of uniformity among donor and in vitro raised clones was observed.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 54%
“…The results presented in Table 7 show that the average content of 20-HE in leaves and roots of IDSO-plants were found to be 3-and 1.5-times higher than those in leaves and roots of DSO-plants (7.4 mg g -1 DW and 3.04 mg g -1 DW vs. 2.5 and 2.1 mg g -1 DW, respectively). Chavan et al (2014) also note the presence of quantitative differences between Ceropegia santapaui plants regenerated through indirect and direct organogenesis, with the former exhibiting increased levels of total phenolics and flavonoids. So far, the biosynthetic differences have not been well clarified.…”
Section: Quantification Of Chlorogenic Acid and 20-hydroxyecdysonementioning
confidence: 77%
“…So far, the biosynthetic differences have not been well clarified. Chavan et al (2014) suggest that these might be due to the exogenous supply of the plant growth regulators during in vitro multiplication.…”
Section: Quantification Of Chlorogenic Acid and 20-hydroxyecdysonementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The possible reasons for polymorphism observed during analysis that occurred in in-vitro raised plantlets regenerated from mother plants using indirect organogenesis might be because of source of application of growth regulators during callus induction, shoot regeneration, duration of cell, and tissue multiplication, accumulating mutations during the process of indirect organogenesis, etc. (Goel et al 2009;Rizvi et al 2012;Chavan et al 2014;Kshirsagar et al 2015;Thorat et al 2017). Similarly, ISSR primers were competent to detect polymorphism in Camellia chinensis (Devarumath et al 2002), Stevia (Martin et al 2004), Gerbera jamesonii (Bhatia et al 2011), Tylophora indica (Sharma et al 2014), Dendrocalamus strictus (Goyal et al 2016), Morus alba (Saha et al 2016) and Saccharum offi cinarum (Thorat et al 2017).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%