DNA barcoding of the Mexican sedative and anxiolytic plant Galphimia glauca

Abstract

Ethnopharmacology relevance Galphimiaglauca (Malpighiaceae) is a Mexican plant popularly used as a tranquilizer in the treatment of nervous system disorders, although it is also used to treat other common illnesses. Aim of the study The aim of this investigation is to find out if populations of Galphimiaglauca collected in different regions and ecosystems in Mexico actually belong to the same species by using the contemporary technique of DNA barcodes. Our previous metabolic profiling study demonstrates that different collections of this plant obtained from various geographical areas exhibited diverse chemical profiles in terms of the active compounds named Galphimines. We expected the DNA barcodes apart from indicating the different species of Galphimia would indicate the active populations. Materials and methods We employed matK, rpoC1 and rbcL DNA barcodes to indicate the different species. Furthermore to investigate the possible impact of the several different ecosystems where the seven populations were collected, thin layer chromatography was employed to create a partial chemical profile, which was then compared with the metabolic profiles obtained by 1H-NMR and multivariate data analysis. Results and conclusions This study showed that the seven populations here analyzed contain at least three different species of the genus Galphimia, although each individual population is homogeneous. Interestingly our TLC analysis clearly showed that the active populations displayed a distinctively unique chemical profile. This work also showed that the use of DNA barcodes combined with chemical profile analysis is an excellent approach to solve the problems of quality control in the development of Galphimia-based medicines, as well as for any breeding programs for this species.

Molecular Markers Associated With Chemical Analysis: A Powerful Tool for Quality Control Assessment of Copalchi Medicinal Plant Complex

“…For example, to set doses for the cure of ailments using these species, quantitative analyses of the active ingredients for comparison between selected batches must be developed, as reported in previous studies (Cristians et al, 2014 ; Pérez-Vásquez et al, 2014 ). The overall results agreed with the findings of Sharma et al ( 2012 ), one of the few reports that combine molecular analysis based on phylogeny and chemical studies using TLC for the quality control of a Mexican medicinal plant, Galphimia glauca .…”

Multidisciplinary Investigations on Galphimia glauca: A Mexican Medicinal Plant with Pharmacological Potential

“…A second study utilizing DNA barcoding as a molecular marker confirmed the clear differences among the plant populations used in the former study [ 78 ]. The results found in this study indicated that the plants from all seven populations analyzed do not belong to the one Galphimia glauca species as labeled in the respective herbarium, on the contrary, there could be at least three different species of the genus Galphimia .…”

<b>DNA barcode regions for differentiating <i>Cattleya walkeriana</i> and <i>C. loddigesii</i>

“…On the specimens used in this study, the assessed DNA barcode regions were successfully amplified using primers designed to evaluate plants (Tokuoka & Tobe, 2006;Chen et al, 2010;Sharma et al, 2012). Most samples were successfully amplified through direct sequencing of the PCR products using the same primer pairs, which generated high-quality bidirectional sequences.…”

“…Unfortunately, several species were represented by only one specimen, where it was not possible to evaluate the intraspecific species variation and also not able to concatenate the regions in order to test species discrimination. Sequences of the universal primers for evaluating DNA barcodes, including those for ITS1, ITS2 (ITS1+ITS2, herein named as ITS region) and rpoC1, and general PCR reaction conditions, were obtained from previous studies (Tokuoka & Tobe, 2006;Chen et al, 2010;Sharma, Folch, Cardoso-Taketa, Lorence, & Villarreal, 2012). All PCRs were performed in 25 μL reaction volumes with 12.5 μL of PCR Master Mix (Promega Corp., Madison, Wisconsin), 1.25 μL each of 10 μM primers (upstream and downstream), and 10 μL of diluted (10-to 100-fold) DNA template.…”