Phytochemistry 114 (2015) 5–6

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Phytochemistry journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/phytochem

Editorial

Editorial for the special issue on Ganoderma Ganoderma is one of the most iconic fungi. The basidiomas, or basidiocarps, grow commonly on trees and can be readily observed. Some species are plant pathogenic organisms, for example, Ganoderma philippii and Ganoderma boninense cause (a) a root rot of cacao, coffee, and teas, and (b) an important disease of oil palm, respectively. Even more interest is generated by the purported medicinal properties of the fungus, especially in light of the worrying development of antibiotic resistant bacterial pathogens of humans. Medicinal mushrooms have been used for centuries to treat diseases especially in Asia (Paterson and Lima, 2014) and Ganoderma is probably the most important. Hence, in this Phytochemistry Special Issue (SI), the medicinal properties of Ganoderma are discussed extensively in expertly-reviewed papers. The impetus for producing the SI was the review (by Paterson, 2006) on Ganoderma as a fungal biofactory which has been cited 313 times (Scopus). In addition, the paper was at the number 1 position for cited papers for a period in Phytochemistry. We trust the papers published here will attract a similar amount of interest. The taxonomy of the Ganoderma complex is in a state of confusion that is often without resolution. Hence, we were delighted to receive an extremely well-researched paper on the diversity of the Ganoderma lucidum complex, based on morphology and phylogeny from four genetic loci (Zhou et al., 2015). The nomenclature of Ganoderma is subject to considerable controversy, and there has been debate on the correct name of the species used as a medicinal mushroom. One prominent group of authors has called the fungus Ganoderma sichuanense as discussed in Richter et al. (2015), while Zhou et al. (2015) advocated Ganoderma lingzhi. The situation was assessed by Professor David Hawksworth in a personal communication to us in 2014 as follows: It has been clear from molecular studies carried out in the 1990s that the Ganoderma most generally exploited for medicinal purposes in Asia was not correctly named as G. lucidum, a species described from London (UK) in 1781. In order to solve this problem, the medicinally important Ganoderma was described as a new species, G. lingzhi in 2012 (Cao et al., 2012) and this name was quickly taken up by Chinese researchers in particular, with attention being drawn to it in editorials in several mycological journals. In October 2103, however, another group of Chinese mycologists argued that one of the candidate species names investigated by the authors of G. lingzhi had been misinterpreted (Yao et al., 2013). This was the species named as G. sichuanense in 2009 and they designated a new sequenced type (an ‘‘epitype’’) for that name which was conspecific with G. lingzhi. It is not in dispute that the material studied by the original authors of G. sichuanense comprised more than one species, but it does seem remarkable that Chinese specialists on the genus would not have http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.phytochem.2015.04.008 0031-9422/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

realized that they were describing the exploited cultivated species. Sequences were obtained from the original type material of G. sichuanense, but the authors of the 2013 paper stated they had not been able to recover DNA. It is unclear precisely what happened in this case, and whether specimens or DNA extracts were perhaps switched at some point. In this current SI, the proposed epitypification is rejected on the grounds that the original type was adequate for identification and DNA data were recovered from it (Zhou et al., 2015). The truth of the situation may never emerge, but what is indisputable is that the name G. lingzhi refers to the exploited fungus, which is being increasingly used and a decision needs to be made. It is also self-evident that the user community will be content with the name G. lingzhi and prefer it to G. sichuanense. We have therefore decided to recommend adoption of the name G. lingzhi in this SI, and trust that a formal proposal to protect that name over G. sichuanense will be made and approved by the appropriate nomenclatural bodies in due course. In addition, Paterson and Lima (2015, in this SI), discuss methodological problems with the work undertaken by the group that advocated the name G. sichuanense, in terms of their inability to amplify type and typical specimens of Ganoderma, casting further doubt on that name being correct. The DNA of the topotypes might have been different from the type and typical specimens, and so the epitypification undertaken (by Yao et al., 2013) was premature because more work on the DNA of the type and typical specimen was required. G. lingzhi is not accepted by Richter et al. (2015) who prefer to use G. sichuanense, apparently to avoid instability in fungal nomenclature, although G. lingzhi had already been accepted by many Chinese workers in particular (see Hawksworth’s personal communication above). As guest editors of the Ganoderma SI, we did not feel it was appropriate to change every mention of G. lucidum in the SI to G. lingzhi, but we recommend that this should be done in future publications if the nomenclature committee for fungi agree with our conclusions. We were unclear though whether the original fungus mentioned in the papers in the SI would be considered G. lingzhi in all cases, and it would have taken considerable detective work to determine the exact provenance of each specimen. During the review process for the SI, it became apparent that not all papers received were of a sufficiently high quality, especially those reporting previously discovered compounds or activities. Also, often only crude extracts were tested for activity. There was a high attrition rate in the high number of submitted papers, although a small percentage was finally accepted. This is consistent with the current state of research on the medicinal properties of Ganoderma and other medicinal fungi (Paterson and Lima, 2014), in that only a small percentage of papers are of significant merit. However, we have managed to produce a SI where the

6

Editorial / Phytochemistry 114 (2015) 5–6

reader can be assured papers are of a high quality. We were gratified that numerous papers from native researchers in Asia and particularly China were received, although the reader will find that we have had truly international contributions. The other accepted papers are described briefly below. Grienke et al. (2015) provided a ground-breaking paper on the virtual profiling of secondary metabolites from Ganoderma to assess biological actions, which we were especially pleased to publish. The in silico screening allowed combining the biological (pharmacological target) and chemical (compound structure) which might give access to the biological activity of Ganoderma compounds. Ferreira et al. (2015) reviewed the biological activities of polysaccharides from Ganoderma and described some potential structure–function relationships for these compounds. Hasnat et al. (2015) described potent anti-inflammatory activity and suppressed colitis in mice from G. lucidum. Unusually for Phytochemistry, we decided the work was of sufficient importance to publish despite the fact that isolated and purified compounds were not used in the work – we considered that the paper pointed the way for future research on these interesting activities. Peng et al. (2015) provided interesting data on 14 novel lanostane triterpenoids from Ganoderma hainanense, a rare species of Ganoderma of relevance to the taxonomically-related papers published herein. Interesting cytotoxicity activities against (a) leukemia, and (b) liver, lung, breast, and colon cancer cells were found. Bishop et al. (2015) produced an excellent review of Ganoderma over the centuries, until the present use as a nutraceutical, leading to a $ 2.5 billion(US) industry, while suggesting that ‘‘a nutraceutical a day keeps the doctor away’’. Baby et al. (2015) provided a compendium of all the secondary metabolites from Ganoderma with some very useful structural information being provided. Lindequist et al. (2015) discusses Ganoderma pfeifferi as a European relative of G. lucidum. This species contained unique sesquiterpenoids and other small molecular weight compounds, some of which exhibit remarkable antimicrobial activities in vitro and in vivo against multi-resistant bacteria such as methicillinresistant Staphylococcus aureus. The study of anti-diabetic preparations is quite rarely covered for Ganoderma and so it is interesting that Ma et al. (2015) discusses the issue for G. lucidum. Da et al. (2015) provided information about a reproducible analytical system for Ganoderma triterpenes in a methods paper: Standardization is a much needed aspect of many of the analyses of this medicinal mushroom. Yan (2015) discuss novel meroterpenoids with interesting stimulating activities for neural stem cell proliferation, and potential for curing neurodegenerative diseases, and is of very high relevance. In terms of DNA sequencing, Kües et al. (2015) detail the analysis of Ganoderma genomes and discuss recent progress in studies of the genetic constitution of Ganoderma species while shedding light on the production of metabolites, which will enhance the study of their pharmacological activities. We decided to accept a few papers submitted to the SI that did not deal with Ganoderma per se if they were of sufficient interest. Hence, Mitsuhashi et al. (2015) described a novel autophagy inducer from Gymnopus. It was intended that quality papers on Ganoderma disease of oil palm subject would be published to broaden the theme from medicinal mushrooms. Papers on this theme are seldom published in high quality journals such as Phytochemistry. Hence, Ho and Tan (2015) provided novel information on the molecular response of oil palm to basal stem rot of oil palm roots. Finally, the guest editors would like to conclude by thanking Norman G. Lewis, an Editor in Chief of Phytochemistry, for his constant support and keeping us on the correct lines upon occasion. Also, the publishers deserve great credit for their professionalism during the collection and production of the papers.

References Baby, S., Johnson, A.J., Govindan, B., 2015. Secondary metabolites from Ganoderma. Phytochemistry 114, 66–101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.phytochem.2015. 03.010. Bishop, K.S., Kao, C.H.J., Xu, Y., Glucina, M.P., Paterson, R.R.M., Ferguson, L.R., 2015. From 2000 years of Ganoderma lucidum to recent developments in nutraceuticals. Phytochemistry 114, 56–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.phytochem.2015.02.015. Cao, Y., Wu, S.H., Dai, Y.C., 2012. Species clarification of the prize medicinal Ganoderma mushroom Lingzhi. Fungal Divers. 56, 49–62. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1007/s13225-012-0178-5. Da, J., Cheng, C.-R., Yao, S., Long, H.-L., Wang, Y.-H., Khan, I.A., Li, Y.-F., Wang, Q.-R., Cai, L.-Y., Jiang, B.-H., Liu, X., Wu, W.-Y., Guo, D.-A., 2015. A reproducible analytical system based on the multi-component analysis of triterpene acids in Ganoderma lucidum. Phytochemistry 114, 146–154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.phytochem.2014.08.007. Ferreira, I.C.F.R., Heleno, S.A., Reis, F.S., Stojkovic, D., Queiroz, M.J.R.P., Vasconcelos, M.H., Sokovic, M., 2015. Chemical features of Ganoderma polysaccharides with antioxidant, antitumor and antimicrobial activities. Phytochemistry 114, 38–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.phytochem.2014.10.011. Grienke, U., Kaserer, T., Pfluger, F., Mair, C.E., Langer, T., Schuster, D., Rollinger, J.M., 2015. Accessing biological actions of Ganoderma secondary metabolites by in silico profiling. Phytochemistry 114, 114–124. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.phytochem.2014.10.010. Hasnat, M.A., Pervin, M., Cha, K.M., Kim, S.K., Lim, B.O., 2015. Anti inflammatory activity on mice of extract of Ganoderma lucidum grown on rice via modulation of MAPK and NF-jB pathways. Phytochemistry 114, 125–136. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.phytochem.2014.10.019. Ho, C.-L., Tan, Y.-C., 2015. Molecular defense response of oil palm to Ganoderma infection. Phytochemistry 114, 160–169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.phytochem.2014.10.016. Kües, U., Nelson, D.R., Liu, C., Yu, G.-J., Zhang, J., Li, J., Wang, X.-C., Sun, H., 2015. Genome analysis of medicinal Ganoderma spp. with plant-pathogenic and saprotrophic life-styles. Phytochemistry 114, 18–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.phytochem.2014.11.019. Lindequist, U., Jülich, W.-D., Witt, S., 2015. Ganoderma pfeifferi – A European relative of Ganoderma lucidum. Phytochemistry 114, 102–108. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.phytochem.2015.12.018. Ma, H.-T., Hsieh, J.-F., Chen, S.-T., 2015. Anti-diabetic effects of Ganoderma lucidum. Phytochemistry 114, 109–113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.phytochem.2015.02.017. Mitsuhashi, S., Shindo, C., Shigetomi, K., Miyamoto, T., Ubukata, M., 2015. (+)Epogymnolactam, a novel autophagy inducer from mycelial culture of Gymnopus sp. Phytochemistry 114, 155–159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.phytochem.2014.08.012. Paterson, R.R.M., 2006. Ganoderma – a therapeutic fungal biofactory. Phytochemistry 67, 1985–2001. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.phytochem.2006. 07.004. Paterson, R.R.M., Lima, N., 2014. Biomedical effects of mushrooms with emphasis on pure compounds. Biomed. J. 37, 357–368. Paterson, R.R.M., Lima, N., 2015. Failed PCR of Ganoderma type specimens affects nomenclature. Phytochemistry 114, 16–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.phytochem.2014.11.014. Peng, X., Liu, J., Xia, J., Wang, C., Li, X., Deng, Y., Bao, N., Zhang, Z., Qiu, M., 2015. Lanostane triterpenoids from Ganoderma hainanense J.D. Zhao. Phytochemistry 114, 137–145. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.phytochem.2014.10.009. Richter, C., Wittstein, K., Kirk, P.M., Stadler, M., 2015. An assessment of the taxonomy and chemotaxonomy of Ganoderma. Fungal Divers. 71, 1–15. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13225-014-0313-6. Yan, 2015. Stem cells Ganoderma. Phytochemistry. Yao, Y.J., Wang, X.C., Wang, B., 2013. Epitypification of Ganoderma sichuanense J.D. Zhao & X.Q. Zhang (Ganodermataceae). Taxon 62, 1025–1031. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.12705/625.10. Zhou, L.-W., Cao, Y., Wu, S.-H., Vlasák, J., Li, D.-W., Li, M.-J., Dai, Y.-C., 2015. Global diversity of the Ganoderma lucidum complex (Ganodermataceae, Polyporales) inferred from morphology and multilocus phylogeny. Phytochemistry 114, 7– 15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.phytochem.2014.09.023.

R. Russell M. Paterson Nelson Lima Centre of Biological Engineering, University of Minho, Braga 4710-057, Portugal Tel.: +351 253 601 968. E-mail address: [email protected] (R.R.M. Paterson) Available online 12 May 2015

Editorial for the special issue on Ganoderma.

Editorial for the special issue on Ganoderma. - PDF Download Free
220KB Sizes 6 Downloads 25 Views