Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Compares ginsenoside levels and biological activities in ginsenoside extracts, indicating differences in cultivation methods.
Field-cultivated roots of Panax quinquefolium represent the natural source of biologically active compounds, e.g., ginsenosides, while transformed roots provide a controlled alternative for their production. Ginsenoside levels from both the sources were determined with the use of the HPLC method. The extracts were tested for antimicrobial activity using the MIC and MBC/MFC methods, as well as for cytotoxic activity on the AGS (gastric cancer) cell line, Hs68 (human fibroblasts), and L929 (mouse fibroblasts) lines using the MTT assay. Additionally, the lack of pro-inflammatory activity of the plant materials was assessed using a monocyte activation test. The tested P. quinquefolium roots differed quantitatively and qualitatively in their ginsenoside profiles, and the highest amount was recorded in the transformed roots (204.62 ± 5.56 mg/g extract ± SE). The extracts exhibited the strongest antimicrobial activity against the Escherichia coli strain. Low activity of the tested extracts was observed against Candida species. In the tested cell lines (AGS, Hs68, L929), a dose-dependent decrease in cell viability was observed, with the field root extract exhibiting the highest cytotoxic activity in the concentration range of 2.5–10 mg/mL. All tested extracts proved to be safe and did not stimulate a pro-inflammatory response.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Szymańska et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: