Plant Physiol. email content delivery
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Plant Physiology 75:592-595 (1984)
© 1984 American Society of Plant Biologists

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Muhitch, M. J.
Right arrow Articles by Fletcher, J. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Muhitch, M. J.
Right arrow Articles by Fletcher, J. S.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Muhitch, M. J.
Right arrow Articles by Fletcher, J. S.
Articles

Isolation and Identification of the Phenols of Paul's Scarlet Rose Stems and Stem-Derived Suspension Cultures 1

Michael J. Muhitch2 and John S. Fletcher

Botany and Microbiology Department, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Okahoma 73019

The phenols of Paul's Scarlet rose stems and stem-derived cell cultures have been analyzed using C18-reversed-phase high performance liquid chromatography.

Rose stems were found to contain gallic acid, (+)catechin, (–)epicatechin, the dimers (–)epicatechin-(+)catechin and (+)catechin-(+)catechin, a polymeric procyanidin, ferulic acid, and several gallotannins. In contrast, a cell suspension of Paul's Scarlet rose which has been maintained in culture for over 25 years contained only low levels of gallic acid and (–)epicatechin-(+)catechin. The phenol content of a second rose cell line which was started from the same initial isolate in 1957, but which was maintained in a laboratory other than our own was quantitatively and qualitatively similar to the cell line kept in our laboratory for the last 20 years. A third cell line which we started 6 months ago contained a wide variety of phenols, most of which were in common with those of rose stems.

Selective subculturing of smaller cell clumps of our oldest cell line failed to enhance either the quantities or the diversity of phenols which accumulated in these cultured cells. Possible reasons for the failure of selective subculturing to enhance phenol levels in this long-established cell line are discussed.

2 Present address: American Cyanamid Co., Agricultural Research Division, P.O. Box 400, Princeton, NJ 08540.

1 Supported by National Institute of Health Grant 5 R01 AGJO1709-03.






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
ASPB Publications PLANT PHYSIOLOGY THE PLANT CELL
Copyright © 1984 by the American Society of Plant Biologists