Back to all available

Optimization of triterpenoid production and analysis of antioxidant capacity in a coculture of Sanghuangporus sanghuang and Inonotus obliquus

microbiology
mycology

Abstract

Fungal triterpenoids exhibit diverse biological activities and significant potential for pharmaceutical development because of their anticancer, immunomodulatory, and anti-inflammatory properties. Coculture technology enhances bioactive component accumulation and supports the discovery of undetectable metabolites in monoculture systems. Here, seven Inonotus obliquus ( I. obliquus ) strains and one Sanghuangporus sanghuang ( S. sanghuang ) strain were evaluated using intracellular triterpenoid content as a screening indicator for liquid coculture. By optimizing seed culture and preculture times and performing single-factor analysis, PB design, and RSM, multidimensional optimization of coculture conditions was achieved, followed by antioxidant activity assessment. The coculture of S. sanghuang and I. obliquus (HLJ01) yielded the most effective outcomes, with optimal preculture times of 3 days for S. sanghuang and 2 days for HLJ01. The triterpenoid content was significantly higher in the coculture system than in pure cultures of either strains. Under optimal conditions, triterpenoid content reached 32.8702 mg/g, a 39.62% increase from the preoptimization level (23.5425 mg/g). Compared with pure culture, triterpenoids from the coculture exhibited higher DPPH, ABTS, and hydroxyl radical–scavenging activities and enhanced Fe 3+ reducing power. Therefore, the S. sanghuang –HLJ01 liquid coculture system effectively increases intracellular triterpenoid content and antioxidant activity, providing a viable strategy for producing high-yield fungal triterpenoids.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].