Figure 1.
Antioxidative activity according to the DPPH method in Hypericum perforatum L. extracts. 1—Regenerated plants in MS medium in vitro; 2—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and NAA (2.5 mg L−1); 3—MS medium with 2,4-D (1.0 mg L−1), BAP (0.5 mg L−1), and NAA (0.1 mg L−1); 4—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic (50 µM); 5—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic acid (100 µM); 6—MS medium and BAP (0.5 mg L−1); 7—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 8—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM) and kinetin (0.11 µM); 9—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM), kinetin (0.11 µM), and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 10—Field growing plants of Hypericum perforatum L. The error bars show the mean ± SD from three experiments. Asterisks show statistically significant comparisons between callus cultures of Hypericum perforatum L. and field growing plant extract experiments, which were tested with unpaired two-tailed t-test, with a significance level set at p < 0.01.
Figure 1.
Antioxidative activity according to the DPPH method in Hypericum perforatum L. extracts. 1—Regenerated plants in MS medium in vitro; 2—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and NAA (2.5 mg L−1); 3—MS medium with 2,4-D (1.0 mg L−1), BAP (0.5 mg L−1), and NAA (0.1 mg L−1); 4—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic (50 µM); 5—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic acid (100 µM); 6—MS medium and BAP (0.5 mg L−1); 7—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 8—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM) and kinetin (0.11 µM); 9—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM), kinetin (0.11 µM), and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 10—Field growing plants of Hypericum perforatum L. The error bars show the mean ± SD from three experiments. Asterisks show statistically significant comparisons between callus cultures of Hypericum perforatum L. and field growing plant extract experiments, which were tested with unpaired two-tailed t-test, with a significance level set at p < 0.01.
![Agriculture 13 01543 g001]()
Scheme 1.
The probable mechanism for the DPPH radical scavenging activity of N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide.
Scheme 1.
The probable mechanism for the DPPH radical scavenging activity of N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide.
Figure 2.
Antioxidative activity according to FRAP in Hypericum perforatum L. extracts. 1—Regenerated plants in MS medium in vitro; 2—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and NAA (2.5 mg L−1); 3—MS medium with 2,4-D (1.0 mg L−1), BAP (0.5 mg L−1), and NAA (0.1 mg L−1); 4—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic (50 µM); 5—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic acid (100 µM); 6—MS medium and BAP (0.5 mg L−1); 7—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 8—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM) and kinetin (0.11 µM); 9—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM), kinetin (0.11 µM), and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 10—Field growing plants of Hypericum perforatum L. The error bars show the mean ± SD from three experiments. Asterisks show statistically significant comparisons between callus cultures of Hypericum perforatum L. and field growing plant extract experiments, which were tested with unpaired two-tailed t-test, with a significance level set at p < 0.01.
Figure 2.
Antioxidative activity according to FRAP in Hypericum perforatum L. extracts. 1—Regenerated plants in MS medium in vitro; 2—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and NAA (2.5 mg L−1); 3—MS medium with 2,4-D (1.0 mg L−1), BAP (0.5 mg L−1), and NAA (0.1 mg L−1); 4—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic (50 µM); 5—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic acid (100 µM); 6—MS medium and BAP (0.5 mg L−1); 7—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 8—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM) and kinetin (0.11 µM); 9—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM), kinetin (0.11 µM), and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 10—Field growing plants of Hypericum perforatum L. The error bars show the mean ± SD from three experiments. Asterisks show statistically significant comparisons between callus cultures of Hypericum perforatum L. and field growing plant extract experiments, which were tested with unpaired two-tailed t-test, with a significance level set at p < 0.01.
![Agriculture 13 01543 g002]()
Figure 3.
The concentration of total phenolics in the extracts of Hypericum perforatum L. 1—Regenerated plants in MS medium in vitro; 2—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and NAA (2.5 mg L−1); 3—MS medium with 2,4-D (1.0 mg L−1), BAP (0.5 mg L−1), and NAA (0.1 mg L−1); 4—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic (50 µM); 5—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic acid (100 µM); 6—MS medium and BAP (0.5 mg L−1); 7—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 8—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM) and kinetin (0.11 µM); 9—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM), kinetin (0.11 µM), and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 10—Field growing plants of Hypericum perforatum L. The error bars show the mean ± SD from three experiments. Asterisks show statistically significant comparisons between callus cultures of Hypericum perforatum L. and field growing plant extract experiments, which were tested with unpaired two-tailed t-test, with a significance level set at p < 0.01.
Figure 3.
The concentration of total phenolics in the extracts of Hypericum perforatum L. 1—Regenerated plants in MS medium in vitro; 2—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and NAA (2.5 mg L−1); 3—MS medium with 2,4-D (1.0 mg L−1), BAP (0.5 mg L−1), and NAA (0.1 mg L−1); 4—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic (50 µM); 5—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic acid (100 µM); 6—MS medium and BAP (0.5 mg L−1); 7—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 8—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM) and kinetin (0.11 µM); 9—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM), kinetin (0.11 µM), and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 10—Field growing plants of Hypericum perforatum L. The error bars show the mean ± SD from three experiments. Asterisks show statistically significant comparisons between callus cultures of Hypericum perforatum L. and field growing plant extract experiments, which were tested with unpaired two-tailed t-test, with a significance level set at p < 0.01.
![Agriculture 13 01543 g003]()
Figure 4.
Superoxide dismutase activity in Hypericum perforatum L. extracts. 1—Regenerated plants in MS medium in vitro; 2—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and NAA (2.5 mg L−1); 3—MS medium with 2,4-D (1.0 mg L−1), BAP (0.5 mg L−1), and NAA (0.1 mg L−1); 4—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic (50 µM); 5—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic acid (100 µM); 6—MS medium and BAP (0.5 mg L−1); 7—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 8—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM) and kinetin (0.11 µM); 9—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM), kinetin (0.11 µM), and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 10—Field growing plants of Hypericum perforatum L. The error bars show the mean ± SD from three experiments. Asterisks show statistically significant comparisons between callus cultures of Hypericum perforatum L. and field growing plant extract experiments, which were tested with unpaired two-tailed t-test, with a significance level set at p < 0.01.
Figure 4.
Superoxide dismutase activity in Hypericum perforatum L. extracts. 1—Regenerated plants in MS medium in vitro; 2—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and NAA (2.5 mg L−1); 3—MS medium with 2,4-D (1.0 mg L−1), BAP (0.5 mg L−1), and NAA (0.1 mg L−1); 4—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic (50 µM); 5—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic acid (100 µM); 6—MS medium and BAP (0.5 mg L−1); 7—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 8—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM) and kinetin (0.11 µM); 9—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM), kinetin (0.11 µM), and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 10—Field growing plants of Hypericum perforatum L. The error bars show the mean ± SD from three experiments. Asterisks show statistically significant comparisons between callus cultures of Hypericum perforatum L. and field growing plant extract experiments, which were tested with unpaired two-tailed t-test, with a significance level set at p < 0.01.
![Agriculture 13 01543 g004]()
Figure 5.
Ascorbate peroxidase activity in Hypericum perforatum L. extracts. 1—Regenerated plants in MS medium in vitro; 2—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and NAA (2.5 mg L−1); 3—MS medium with 2,4-D (1.0 mg L−1), BAP (0.5 mg L−1), and NAA (0.1 mg L−1); 4—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic (50 µM); 5—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic acid (100 µM); 6—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1); 7—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 8—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM) and kinetin (0.11 µM); 9—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM), kinetin (0.11 µM), and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 10—Field growing plants of Hypericum perforatum L. The error bars show the mean ± SD from three experiments. Asterisks show statistically significant comparisons between callus cultures of Hypericum perforatum L. and field growing plant extract experiments, which were tested with unpaired two-tailed t-test, with a significance level set at p < 0.01.
Figure 5.
Ascorbate peroxidase activity in Hypericum perforatum L. extracts. 1—Regenerated plants in MS medium in vitro; 2—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and NAA (2.5 mg L−1); 3—MS medium with 2,4-D (1.0 mg L−1), BAP (0.5 mg L−1), and NAA (0.1 mg L−1); 4—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic (50 µM); 5—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic acid (100 µM); 6—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1); 7—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 8—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM) and kinetin (0.11 µM); 9—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM), kinetin (0.11 µM), and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 10—Field growing plants of Hypericum perforatum L. The error bars show the mean ± SD from three experiments. Asterisks show statistically significant comparisons between callus cultures of Hypericum perforatum L. and field growing plant extract experiments, which were tested with unpaired two-tailed t-test, with a significance level set at p < 0.01.
![Agriculture 13 01543 g005]()
Figure 6.
Catalase activity in Hypericum perforatum L. extracts. 1—Regenerated plants in MS medium in vitro; 2—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and NAA (2.5 mg L−1); 3—MS medium with 2,4-D (1.0 mg L−1), BAP (0.5 mg L−1), and NAA (0.1 mgL−1); 4—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic (50 µM); 5—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic acid (100 µM); 6—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1); 7—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 8—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM) and kinetin (0.11 µM); 9—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM), kinetin (0.11 µM), and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 10—Field growing plants of Hypericum perforatum L. The error bars show the mean ± SD from three experiments. Asterisks show statistically significant comparisons between callus cultures of Hypericum perforatum L. and field growing plant extract experiments, which were tested with unpaired two-tailed t-test, with a significance level set at p < 0.01.
Figure 6.
Catalase activity in Hypericum perforatum L. extracts. 1—Regenerated plants in MS medium in vitro; 2—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and NAA (2.5 mg L−1); 3—MS medium with 2,4-D (1.0 mg L−1), BAP (0.5 mg L−1), and NAA (0.1 mgL−1); 4—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic (50 µM); 5—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic acid (100 µM); 6—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1); 7—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 8—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM) and kinetin (0.11 µM); 9—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM), kinetin (0.11 µM), and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 10—Field growing plants of Hypericum perforatum L. The error bars show the mean ± SD from three experiments. Asterisks show statistically significant comparisons between callus cultures of Hypericum perforatum L. and field growing plant extract experiments, which were tested with unpaired two-tailed t-test, with a significance level set at p < 0.01.
![Agriculture 13 01543 g006]()
Figure 7.
Measurement of carotenoids concentration in Hypericum perforatum L. extracts. 1—Regenerated plants in MS medium in vitro; 2—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and NAA (2.5 mg L−1); 3—MS medium with 2,4-D (1.0 mg L−1), BAP (0.5 mg L−1), and NAA (0.1 mg L−1); 4—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic (50 µM); 5—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic acid (100 µM); 6—MS medium and BAP (0.5 mg L−1); 7—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 8—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM) and kinetin (0.11 µM); 9—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM), kinetin (0.11 µM), and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 10—Field growing plants of Hypericum perforatum L. The error bars show the mean ± SD from three experiments. Asterisks show statistically significant comparisons between callus cultures of Hypericum perforatum L. and field growing plant extract experiments, which were tested with unpaired two-tailed t-test, with a significance level set at p < 0.01.
Figure 7.
Measurement of carotenoids concentration in Hypericum perforatum L. extracts. 1—Regenerated plants in MS medium in vitro; 2—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and NAA (2.5 mg L−1); 3—MS medium with 2,4-D (1.0 mg L−1), BAP (0.5 mg L−1), and NAA (0.1 mg L−1); 4—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic (50 µM); 5—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic acid (100 µM); 6—MS medium and BAP (0.5 mg L−1); 7—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 8—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM) and kinetin (0.11 µM); 9—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM), kinetin (0.11 µM), and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 10—Field growing plants of Hypericum perforatum L. The error bars show the mean ± SD from three experiments. Asterisks show statistically significant comparisons between callus cultures of Hypericum perforatum L. and field growing plant extract experiments, which were tested with unpaired two-tailed t-test, with a significance level set at p < 0.01.
![Agriculture 13 01543 g007]()
Figure 8.
Determination of antibacterial activity in Hypericum perforatum L. extracts against E. coli. 1—Regenerated plants in MS medium in vitro; 2—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and NAA (2.5 mg L−1); 3—MS medium with 2,4-D (1.0 mg L−1), BAP (0.5 mg L−1), and NAA (0.1 mg L−1); 4—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic (50 µM); 5—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic acid (100 µM); 6—MS medium and BAP (0.5 mg L−1); 7—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 8—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM) and kinetin (0.11 µM); 9—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM), kinetin (0.11 µM), and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 10—Field growing plants of Hypericum perforatum L. The error bars show the mean ± SD from three experiments. Asterisks show statistically significant comparisons between callus cultures of Hypericum perforatum L. and field growing plant extract experiments, which were tested with unpaired two-tailed t-test, with a significance level set at p < 0.01.
Figure 8.
Determination of antibacterial activity in Hypericum perforatum L. extracts against E. coli. 1—Regenerated plants in MS medium in vitro; 2—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and NAA (2.5 mg L−1); 3—MS medium with 2,4-D (1.0 mg L−1), BAP (0.5 mg L−1), and NAA (0.1 mg L−1); 4—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic (50 µM); 5—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic acid (100 µM); 6—MS medium and BAP (0.5 mg L−1); 7—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 8—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM) and kinetin (0.11 µM); 9—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM), kinetin (0.11 µM), and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 10—Field growing plants of Hypericum perforatum L. The error bars show the mean ± SD from three experiments. Asterisks show statistically significant comparisons between callus cultures of Hypericum perforatum L. and field growing plant extract experiments, which were tested with unpaired two-tailed t-test, with a significance level set at p < 0.01.
![Agriculture 13 01543 g008]()
Figure 9.
Determination of antibacterial activity in Hypericum perforatum L. extracts against B. subtilis. 1—Regenerated plants in MS medium in vitro; 2—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and NAA (2.5 mg L−1); 3—MS medium with 2,4-D (1.0 mg L−1), BAP (0.5 mg L−1), and NAA (0.1 mg L−1); 4—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic (50 µM); 5—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic acid (100 µM); 6—MS medium and BAP (0.5 mg L−1); 7—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 8—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM) and kinetin (0.11 µM); 9—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM), kinetin (0.11 µM), and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 10—Field growing plants of Hypericum perforatum L. The error bars show the mean ± SD from three experiments. Asterisks show statistically significant comparisons between callus cultures of Hypericum perforatum L. and field growing plant extract experiments, which were tested with unpaired two-tailed t-test, with a significance level set at p < 0.01.
Figure 9.
Determination of antibacterial activity in Hypericum perforatum L. extracts against B. subtilis. 1—Regenerated plants in MS medium in vitro; 2—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and NAA (2.5 mg L−1); 3—MS medium with 2,4-D (1.0 mg L−1), BAP (0.5 mg L−1), and NAA (0.1 mg L−1); 4—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic (50 µM); 5—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1), NAA (2.5 mg L−1), and salicylic acid (100 µM); 6—MS medium and BAP (0.5 mg L−1); 7—MS medium with BAP (0.5 mg L−1) and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 8—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM) and kinetin (0.11 µM); 9—MS medium with 2,4-D (0.9 µM), kinetin (0.11 µM), and N-(1,3-dioxoisoindolin-2-yl)-3-((4-methoxyphenyl)amino)propanamide (0.5 mg L−1); 10—Field growing plants of Hypericum perforatum L. The error bars show the mean ± SD from three experiments. Asterisks show statistically significant comparisons between callus cultures of Hypericum perforatum L. and field growing plant extract experiments, which were tested with unpaired two-tailed t-test, with a significance level set at p < 0.01.
![Agriculture 13 01543 g009]()