Genetic diversity and antimicrobial activity of endophytic Myrothecium spp. isolated from Calophyllum apetalum and Garcinia morella
- 335 Downloads
Calophyllum apetalum and Garcinia morella, medicinal plants are endemic to Western Ghats, Karnataka, India. Sixteen Myrothecium isolates were obtained from the tissues of bark and twigs of these plants. The purpose of this study was to explore the antimicrobial activity and genetic variability of the endophytic Myrothecium isolates. The antimicrobial activity as well as the genetic diversity of endophytic Myrothecium species was investigated through RAPD, ISSR and ITS sequence analysis. Myrothecium isolates were genotypically compared by RAPD and ISSR techniques, 510 and 189 reproducible polymorphic bands were obtained using 20 RAPD and ten ISSR primers respectively. The isolates grouped into four main clades and subgroups using unweighted pair group method with arithmetic mean cluster analysis. rDNA ITS sequence analysis presented better resolution for characterising the isolates of Myrothecium spp. The clustering patterns of the isolates were almost similar when compared with RAPD and ISSR dendograms. The results signify that RAPD, ISSR and ITS analysis can be employed to distinguish the genetic diversity of the Myrothecium species. The endophytic and pathogenic strains were compared by maximum parsimony, maximum likelihood and neighbour joining methods. One isolate (JX862206) amongst the 16 Myrothecium isolates exhibited potent antibacterial and as well as anti-Candida activity.
KeywordsMyrothecium RAPD ISSR ITS Phylogenetic analysis Maximum parsimony
The authors acknowledge the support under Institution of Excellence Program of University of Mysore awarded by Ministry of Human Resource Development and UGC, Government of India.
Conflict of interest
There is no conflict of interest.
- 2.Hyde KD, Soytong K (2008) The fungal endophyte dilemma. Fungal Divers 33:163–173Google Scholar
- 12.Magnani RF, Rodrigues-Fo E, Daolio C, Ferreira AG, de Souzab AQL (2003) Three highly oxygenated caryophyllene sesquiterpenes from Pestalotiopsis sp., a fungus isolated from bark of Pinus taeda. Zeitschrift für Naturforschung 58c:319–324Google Scholar
- 14.Sun X, Guo L-D (2012) Endophytic fungal diversity: review of traditional and molecular techniques. Mycology 3(1):65–76Google Scholar
- 17.Tejesvi MV, Kini KR, Prakash HS, Subbiah V, Shetty HS (2007) Genetic diversity and antifungal activity of species of Pestalotiopsis isolated as endophytes from medicinal plants. Fungal Divers 24:37–54Google Scholar
- 22.Khare CP (2007) In: Khare CP (ed) Indian medicinal plant: an illustrated dictionary. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 24.Kang T-J, Yang M-S (2004) Rapid and reliable extraction of genomic DNA from various wild-type and transgenic plants. BMC Biotechnol 20:4–20Google Scholar
- 25.Joshi SD, Sanjay R, Baby UI, Mandal AKA (2009) Molecular characterization of Pestalotiopsis spp. associated with tea (Camellia sinensis) in southern India using RAPD and ISSR markers. Indian J Biotechnol 8:377–383Google Scholar
- 28.Miller M (1997) Tools for population genetic analysis (TFPGA) 1.3: a windows program for the analysis of allozyme and molecular population genetic data. Computer software distributed by authorGoogle Scholar
- 34.Bacon CW, White JF (2000) Microbial endophytes. Marcel Deker Inc., New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 36.Tejesvi MV, Tamhankar SA, Kini KR, Rao VS, Prakash HS (2009) Phylogenetic analysis of endophytic Pestalotiopsis species from ethnopharmaceutically important medicinal trees. Fungal Divers 38:167–183Google Scholar
- 39.Ratanacherdchai K, Wang HK, Lin FC, Soytong K (2009) ISSR for comparison of cross-inoculation potential of Colletotrichum capsici causing chilli anthracnose. Afr J Microbiol Res 4:76–83Google Scholar
- 44.Wei JG, Xu T, Guo LD, Liu AR, Zhang Y, Pan XH (2007) Endophytic Pestalotiopsis species associated with plants of Podocarpaceae, Theaceae and Taxaceae in southern China. Fungal Divers 24:55–74Google Scholar
- 46.Boyle C, Götz M, Dammann-Tugend U, Schulz B (2001) Endophyte–host interactions III. Local vs. systemic colonisation. Symbiosis 31:259–281Google Scholar