Next Article in Journal
Resistance to Snow Mold as a Target Trait for Rye Breeding
Next Article in Special Issue
Genome-Wide Identification and Expression Analysis of ESPs and NSPs Involved in Glucosinolate Hydrolysis and Insect Attack Defense in Chinese Cabbage (Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis)
Previous Article in Journal
Green Synthesis of Silver Nanoparticles from Diospyros villosa Extracts and Evaluation of Antioxidant, Antimicrobial and Anti-Quorum Sensing Potential
Previous Article in Special Issue
Variation in the Main Health-Promoting Compounds and Antioxidant Activity of Different Edible Parts of Purple Flowering Stalks (Brassica campestris var. purpuraria) and Green Flowering Stalks (Brassica campestris var. campestris)
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Plants
Volume 11
Issue 19
10.3390/plants11192515
plants-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Effect of the Number of Dark Days and Planting Density on the Health-Promoting Phytochemicals and Antioxidant Capacity of Mustard (Brassica juncea) Sprouts

by
Zhiqing Li
1,†,
Hongmei Di
1,†,
Wenjuan Cheng
2,†,
Guanru Ren
3,
Yi Zhang
1,
Jie Ma
4,
Wei Ma
4,
Jiao Yang
4,
Huashan Lian
5,
Xiaomei Li
6,7,
Zhi Huang
1,
Yi Tang
1,
Yangxia Zheng
1,
Huanxiu Li
1,
Fen Zhang
1,* and
Bo Sun
1,*
1
College of Horticulture, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China
2
Institute of Agricultural Resources and Environment, Tianjin Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Tianjin 300384, China
3
College of Forestry, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China
4
Bijie Institute of Agricultural Science, Bijie 551700, China
5
School of Agriculture and Horticulture, Chengdu Agricultural College, Chengdu 611130, China
6
Rice and Sorghum Research Institue, Sichuan Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Deyang 618000, China
7
Vegetable Germplasm Innovation and Variety Improvement Key Laboratory of Sichuan, Chengdu 610300, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Plants 2022, 11(19), 2515; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11192515
Submission received: 24 August 2022 / Revised: 3 September 2022 / Accepted: 21 September 2022 / Published: 26 September 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Molecular and Physiological Regulation of Secondary Metabolism in Vegetables)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Mustard is an edible vegetable in the genus Brassica with tender and clean sprouts and short growth cycles that has become a rich source of nutrients required by humans. Here, the effects of dark exposure duration and planting density on the health-promoting phytochemicals and the antioxidant capacity of mustard sprouts were evaluated. The content of soluble sugar, soluble protein, chlorophyll, and carotenoids and the antioxidant capacity of mustard were higher in the two-day dark treatment; the content of indolic glucosinolates was also more affected in the dark day experiment than in the planting density experiment. The soluble sugar, soluble protein, and aliphatic and total glucosinolate levels were higher when sprouts were grown at high densities (6–7 g per tray); however, no significant variation was observed in the content of chlorophyll and carotenoids and the antioxidant capacity. The results of this study show that the optimum cultivation regime for maximizing the concentrations of nutrients of mustard plants is a planting density of 6 g of seeds per tray and a two-day dark treatment.

1. Introduction

Mustard (Brassica juncea) is a widely consumed, nutritious vegetable in the genus Brassica [1]. It is mostly cultivated for use as a fresh vegetable because of its high concentrations of bioactive components, such as chlorophyll, carotenoids, ascorbic acid, phenolic compounds, and glucosinolates, and many studies of these biochemical compounds in mustard have been conducted in recent years [2,3,4]. The consumption of sprouts is increasing, and this increase has been largely driven by a growing trend in healthy eating habits among consumers [5,6]. Sprouts have been shown in many studies to be more nutrient-dense than ungerminated seeds or even mature vegetables [5]. The levels of these health-promoting nutrients in sprouts are greatly affected by the growth environment and culture conditions [7,8]. For example, a previous study has shown that UV-B illumination treatment might increase the content of carotenoids and glucosinolates during the germination of white mustard sprouts [6]. Low temperature (8 °C) has been shown to significantly decrease the content of carotenoids and flavonoids of kale sprouts and increase the content of total glucosinolates [9]. However, very little research has examined the effects of dark treatment and planting density on the concentrations of health-promoting phytochemicals and the antioxidant capacity of sprouts.
There are two essential pathways in plant development: photomorphogenesis, which is triggered by light, and skotomorphogenesis, which is triggered by darkness [10]. Several previous studies have examined the effects of light factors on plants, especially light intensity, photoperiod, and light quality, because of their major consequences on plant growth and development [6,11,12]. However, the normal growth and development of plants can be disrupted if the darkness cues for inducing skotomorphogenesis are not appropriate [11,13]. The percentage of shading has a major effect on the germination and hormone content of Palmer amaranth seeds [14]. The accumulation of glucosinolates is enhanced in Pale Green and Purple Kohlrabi sprouts when dark conditions are appropriate [15]. Continuous irradiation, in which plants are exclusively exposed to light, causes the photosynthetic efficiency and nutrient quality of adult lettuce to decrease sharply [11]. These findings indicate the importance of exposure to darkness. This is especially the case for sprouts. Endogenous gibberellins (GAs) have been shown to play a key role in controlling the hypocotyl elongation of sprouts in skotomorphogenesis [16]. Given that the amount of GAs that accumulate in sprouts varies with the number of days that plants are exposed to darkness, studies are needed to determine the optimal number of days that sprouts should be exposed to darkness.
Planting density is also a key variable affecting the growth and development of plants [17]. Numerous studies have shown that cultivation at appropriate planting densities can enhance the yield of several crops, such as Brussels sprouts [17], spinach [18], and beetroot [19]. However, increases in planting density are not directly proportional to increases in nutritional quality, as the relationship between planting density and nutrients can be complex [18,20,21]. For example, low planting density increases the content of soluble sugar, protein, chlorophyll, carotenoids, total phenols, and flavonoids in cucumber [21]. The level of ascorbic acid and the antioxidant activity of red cabbage are highest under a medium planting density (125,000 plants ha−1) compared with low (100,000 plants ha−1) and high (166,700 plants ha−1) planting densities [20]. The lowest marketable quality of spinach, which is determined by the content of β-carotene, vitamin C, and nitrate, was observed when it was cultivated at the lowest planting density (800,000 seeds ha−1) [18]. In sprouts, a low seedling density can result in the sparse growth of sprouts and low yield. By contrast, high seedling density can result in uneven growth and decreases in biomass and nutritional quality due to limitations in matrix nutrients and space [17,22].
Given that the number of dark days and planting density both have substantial effects on the growth and quality of sprouts, studies are needed to identify the optimal cultivation conditions for the growth of sprouts. Here, the effects of the number of dark days and planting density on the health-promoting phytochemicals and antioxidant capacity of mustard sprouts were examined.

2. Results

2.1. Soluble Sugar and Soluble Protein

The soluble sugar content was highest in D2 (158.36 mg g−1); the soluble protein content was similar in D3 (109.68 mg g−1) and D2 (109.14 mg g−1) (Table 1). D2 was thus optimal for the production and accumulation of soluble sugar and protein.
Meanwhile, the soluble sugar and soluble protein content was highest in P4 (152.65 mg g−1) and P3 (113.35 mg g−1), respectively (Table 2), which indicated that high planting density enhanced the soluble sugar and protein content.

2.2. Chlorophyll and Carotenoids

The chlorophyll content was highest in D2 (7.29 mg g−1), and it was 5.72%, 13.17%, and 27.83% higher in D2 than in D1 (6.89 mg g−1), D3 (6.44 mg g−1), and D4 (5.70 mg g−1), respectively. The carotenoid content was highest in D1 (0.64 mg g−1), and there was no significant difference in the carotenoid content between D2 (0.63 mg g−1) and D1 (Table 1). D2 had a positive effect on the accumulation of photosynthetic pigments. However, there was no significant effect of planting density on the level of chlorophyll and carotenoids (Table 2).

2.3. Ascorbic Acid

The ascorbic acid content was highest in D4 (1.41 mg g−1), followed by D2 (1.31 mg g−1), and there was no significant difference in the ascorbic acid content between D4 and D2 (Table 3).
The ascorbic acid content was higher in P3 (2.52 mg g−1) and P4 (2.61 mg g−1) than in P1 (2.24 mg g−1) and P2 (2.07 mg g−1) (Table 4), which indicated that the ascorbic acid content was higher at high planting densities.

2.4. Proanthocyanidins, Flavonoids, and Total Phenolics

The content of proanthocyanidins (5.95 mg g−1), flavonoids (14.92 mg g−1), and total phenolics (16.05 mg g−1) was highest in D2 (Table 3), demonstrating that D2 was optimal for maximizing the content of the above three antioxidants.
The content of proanthocyanidins was highest in P3 (6.39 mg g−1), and no differences were observed in the content of flavonoids and total phenolics among the four planting density treatments (Table 4).

2.5. Antioxidant Activity

High levels of ABTS (47.97 mg g−1) and FRAP (0.15 mmol g−1) were observed in D4, and no significant differences were observed in ABTS and FRAP among the three remaining treatments (Table 3). Planting density barely made any difference to the antioxidant activity (Table 4).

2.6. Glucosinolates

Three aliphatic and four indolic glucosinolates were identified in mustard sprouts in our study. The content of total and individual glucosinolates varied among the dark day and planting density treatments (Figure 1 and Figure 2).
There was little variation in the content of total glucosinolates among the dark day treatments, especially aliphatic glucosinolates (Figure 1). No significant differences were observed in the content of sinigrin, which accounted for the greatest proportion of total glucosinolates; the same was the case for gluconapin and total aliphatic glucosinolates. The content of progoitrin was slightly higher in D2 (0.68 μmol g−1) compared with the other treatments. However, the highest levels of the indolic glucosinolates 4-hydroxy glucobrassicin (0.12 μmol g−1), glucobrassicin (0.76 μmol g−1), and neoglucobrassicin (2.46 μmol g−1) were all observed in D2; the only exception was the content of 4-methoxyglucobrassicin, which was highest in D4 (0.53 μmol g−1). The content of total indolic glucosinolates was 27.42%, 7.34%, and 9.39% higher in D2 (3.88 μmol g−1) than in D1 (3.05 μmol g−1), D3 (3.61 μmol g−1), and D4 (3.55 μmol g−1), respectively.
The content of aliphatic glucosinolates varied significantly among the planting density treatments (Figure 2). The highest level of sinigrin was observed in P4 (336.42 μmol g−1), followed by P3 (307.58 μmol g−1); the content of sinigrin in P4 and P3 was 45.41% and 32.94% higher than that in P1 and 28.93% and 17.88% higher than that in P2, respectively. The highest levels of gluconapin and progoitrin were observed in P4 (2.64 μmol g−1) and P3 (0.65 μmol g−1), respectively. The content of total aliphatic glucosinolates was higher in P4 (339.70 μmol g−1) and P3 (310.62 μmol g−1) than in P1 (233.87 μmol g−1) and P2 (263.62 μmol g−1); the same was the case for total glucosinolates. The variation in indolic glucosinolates was low among the planting density treatments. No significant differences were observed in the content of 4-hydroxy glucobrassicin and neoglucobrassicin among the planting density treatments, and the highest content of glucobrassicin (0.62 μmol g−1), 4-methoxyglucobrassicin (0.77 μmol g−1), and total indolic glucosinolate (3.52 μmol g−1) was observed in P4.

2.7. PCA

To evaluate the effect of treatment more comprehensively and systematically, PCA was performed to characterize differences in the content of the main health-promoting phytochemicals and antioxidant capacity among dark day and planting density treatments.
The first principal component (PC1) and second principal component (PC2) explained 38.6% and 23.8% of the variance, respectively, for the dark day PCA. D2 and D4 were separated along PC1, and D4 was separated from D1 and D2 along PC2 (Figure 3A). PLS-DA was also performed. PLS-DA1 and PLS-DA2 accounted for 30.8% and 27.9% of the variance, respectively, and their distributions were similar to PC1 and PC2 (Figure 3B). According to the loading and VIP plots of the PLS-DA, the major contributors to D2 were soluble sugar, flavonoids, total indolic glucosinolates, glucobrassicin, total chlorophyll, and proanthocyanidins, and the major contributors to D4 were ABTS and 4-methoxyglucobrassicin (Figure 3C).
PC1 and PC2 explained 42.9% and 13.2% of the variance, respectively, in the planting density PCA. P4 and P2 were separated along PC1, and P4 was separated from P3 along PC2 (Figure 4A). PLS-DA was also performed. PLS-DA1 and PLS-DA2 accounted for 42.4% and 12.6% of the variance, respectively. P4 and P3 could be discriminated from P1 and P2 along PLS-DA1, and P4 could be discriminated from P3 along PLS-DA2 (Figure 4B). According to the loading and VIP plots of the PLS-DA, ascorbic acid, progoitrin, gluconapin, 4-methoxyglucobrassicin, sinigrin, total glucosinolates, and total aliphatic glucosinolates were the major contributors to P4, soluble protein was the main contributor to P3, and proanthocyanidins were the main contributor to P1 (Figure 4C).

2.8. Correlation Analysis

To investigate the correlations between the health-promoting phytochemicals and antioxidant activity, Pearson correlation coefficients were determined, and the correlation threshold R2 > 0.65 was used. Three groups with significant positive correlations among variables were detected. The first group included correlations among sinigrin, progoitrin, gluconapin, total aliphatic glucosinolates, and total glucosinolates; the second group included correlations among total phenolics, ascorbic acid, proanthocyanidins, FRAP, and 4-methoxyglucobrassicin; the last group included correlations among total indolic glucosinolates and glucobrassicin. No correlations were observed among the above three groups.
In the first group, total glucosinolates were positively correlated with total aliphatic glucosinolates, sinigrin, progoitrin, and gluconapin, and this group had the highest number of correlations (four edges). In the second group, FRAP and total phenolics were significantly correlated with each other and with ascorbic acid and proanthocyanidins (three edges), whereas the latter two were irrelevant. In addition, 4-methoxyglucobrassicin was correlated with ascorbic acid. In the third group, total indolic glucosinolates and glucobrassicin were positively correlated with each other (Figure 5).

3. Discussion

The health-promoting phytochemicals and antioxidant activity of mustard sprouts were greatly affected by the number of days they were exposed to darkness and planting density.
Dark conditions promote the skotomorphogenesis of sprouts. During this process, the hypocotyl rapidly elongates, the cotyledon slowly expands, and undifferentiated chloroplast precursors are produced [23]. This process is modulated by phytochrome-interacting factors (PIFs) to a large extent, suggesting that the length of exposure to dark treatment affects levels of photosynthetic pigments, such as chlorophyll and carotenoids [24]. Cotyledons are considered the main assimilatory organ in the early stage of sprouts, and their size, regulated by the length of dark exposure, is closely related to the accumulation of plant nutrients, such as soluble sugar and protein [23,25]. In the dark day experiment, D2 was optimal for maximizing the concentrations of chlorophyll, carotenoids, soluble sugar, and soluble protein in mustard sprouts. The content of chlorophyll and carotenoids did not vary significantly among planting density treatments; this might stem from the shading of tender leaves by neighboring plants in the early sprouting stage, which prevents light from being detected by the phytochrome photoreceptors [24,26]. Research has shown that planting density affects the content of soluble sugar and protein [27]. However, no linear relationship between planting density and the content of soluble sugar and protein in mustard sprouts was observed in our study.
The content of ascorbic acid and phenolic compounds (including total phenolics, flavonoids, and proanthocyanidins) and antioxidant activities were measured to characterize variation in antioxidant capacity among treatments [28]. In previous studies, radish sprouts grown under dark conditions were shown to have fewer total phenolic and flavonoid compounds than those grown under light conditions [29]. Phenolic compounds and antioxidant activities in broccoli and kale sprouts are lowest under constant darkness and increase with the duration of artificial light exposure [30]. The expression of the genes involved in polyphenol biosynthesis is highly upregulated by light stimulation when reactive oxygen species (ROS) accumulate under light stress [30,31]. This effect has also been observed in flavonoid compounds and other antioxidants [32]. However, in our study, the antioxidant capacity did not continuously decrease with the number of dark days. The content of ascorbic acid (1.41 mg g−1), ABTS+ (47.97%), and FRAP (0.15 mg g−1) was highest in D4; however, D2 was the best overall treatment compared with D1. Therefore, we speculated that appropriate levels of dark exposure are needed to optimize antioxidant capacity, and this requires further study [31]. Planting density has been shown to affect the antioxidant capacity, including the content of ascorbic acid and total phenolics, in previous studies [20,33]. The same has been observed for glucosinolates; abiotic stress caused by planting density is the main factor affecting the antioxidant capacity of plants [17,22,33]. Competition for nutrients and space increases with planting density, and this is thought to increase the antioxidant capacity [33,34]. However, in the planting density experiment, ascorbic acid and proanthocyanidins were the only compounds that were most abundant at high planting densities: P3 (6.39 mg g−1) and P4 (2.61 mg g−1), respectively. No significant variation in the other compounds was observed among planting density treatments, and this might suggest that the effect of planting density is negligible in the early sprouting stage of mustard.
Glucosinolates are important secondary metabolites in cruciferous plants that have received much interest in recent years for their strong biological activity and anti-cancer function [1,35]. Seven glucosinolates of two classes, aliphatic and indolic, were detected in mustard sprouts in this study, with sinigrin being predominant. The abundance of these glucosinolates might contribute to the high nutritional value of mustard sprouts [2,3]. However, the content of glucosinolates is heavily affected by environmental conditions and cultivation methods; it thus responded strongly to these two factors examined in our study [35].
There has been much debate regarding whether glucosinolate biosynthesis is stimulated by light or dark treatment [7]. Sprouts grown in the dark have a higher content of indolic glucosinolates, whereas those grown under light have a higher content of aliphatic glucosinolates [36,37]. Dark treatment had the strongest positive effect on total indolic glucosinolates compared with aliphatic glucosinolates. Glucobrassicin, an important indolic glucosinolate, is most abundant in 7-day-old mustard sprouts under complete darkness [36]. Rapeseed sprouts have higher concentrations of 4-hydroxyglucobrassicin, neoglucobrassicin, and total indolic glucosinolates when they are grown in the dark than when they are grown under light [36,38]. However, light treatment enhanced the concentrations of glucosinolates (expressed as mg of sinigrin per 100 g) by 33% in broccoli sprouts over 7 days of development [39]. The extent to which glucosinalbin (the specific and decisive aliphatic glucosinolate in white mustard) was reduced during germination was mitigated by treatment with 24 h of darkness [7]. The close correlation of glucosinolates with dark/light treatment might be related to the R2R3-MYB gene subfamily, a complex group of transcription factors in Brassica plants. The expression of MYB34, MYB51, and MYB122, which have a major effect on indolic glucosinolate biosynthesis, is upregulated by dark conditions, whereas the expression of MYB28 and MYB29, which affect aliphatic glucosinolate biosynthesis, is upregulated under light exposure [37,40,41]. The expression levels of these transcription factors are also affected by the degree of light and dark regulation, depending on the intensity and length of darkness or light exposure [32,37,42]. Thus, for mustard sprouts, exposure to darkness for 2 d may maximize the upregulation of the expression levels of the transcription factors involved in glucosinolate regulation, especially indolic glucosinolates.
In the planting density experiment, the content of aliphatic and total glucosinolates increased with planting density. The concentrations of total aliphatic glucosinolates in P3 and P4 were 45.25% and 32.82% higher than that in P1 and 28.86% and 17.83% higher than that in P2, respectively; total glucosinolates were also significantly higher at high planting densities. The degradation of glucosinolate by myrosinase hydrolysis has been shown to be related to the response of plants to stress, and aliphatic glucosinolates are the most strongly affected by stress [43,44,45]. In the sprouts of polyploid Brassica juncea, the abundance of aliphatic glucosinolates is highest under biotic stress, such as glucose stress, and this is not the case with indolic glucosinolates [44]. An increase in glucosinolates, which is mainly determined by sinigrin, has been observed in broccoli in response to salt stress [45]. Additionally, as stress factors, nutrient and space deficiencies associated with high planting density are closely related to the content of glucosinolates. In six canola varieties, increases in plant densities result in a higher glucosinolate content [34]. Watercress grown under 20 cm spacing (72 plants per bed) is superior to 31 cm (36 plants per bed) spacing for maximizing the glucosinolate content [46]. Myrosinase-mediated glucosinolate degradation products can be rearranged to form different glucosinolate activation products, and this process is affected by planting density [43,47]. As planting densities increase, either direct elicitors from neighboring plants or indirect elicitors by competing nutrients and space lead to variation in the structural outcome of glucosinolate activation [43]. Thus, owing to nutrient and space stress, higher planting density (seeds at a density of 6–7 g) enhances yield as well as the nutritional value of mustard sprouts, and these changes are mostly associated with variations in glucosinolate concentrations [3,18].

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Plant Material

The leaf mustard variant Brassica juncea var. rugosa, which is mostly cultivated for use as a fresh vegetable, was used as experimental material.
In the dark day experiment, 5 g of mustard seeds was evenly propagated in a seedling tray (32.6 cm × 22.4 cm × 4.1 cm) and covered with moist germinating paper. The mustard sprouts were exposed to darkness for 1 d (D1), 2 d (D2), 3 d (D3), and 4 d (D4) at a temperature of 25 °C and relative humidity (RH) of 70%. There were four replicates for each treatment, and one tray corresponded to one replicate. In the planting density experiment, 4 g (P1), 5 g (P2), 6 g (P3), and 7 g (P4) of mustard seeds were sown in each tray, and the plants were exposed to darkness for 2 d; all other conditions were the same among the treatments. After 7 d of growth, which corresponded to when the mustard sprouts reached the size at which they are typically harvested, the aerial parts were harvested, lyophilized, and stored at −20 °C for further analysis.

4.2. Soluble Protein Content

Fifty milligrams of freeze-dried powdered material was soaked in distilled water, and the solution was stirred for 30 s, settled for 30 min, and centrifuged for 5 min at 4000× g, and then 1 mL was transferred to a polypropylene tube. Coomassie brilliant blue G-250 was combined with 1 mL supernatant, and the absorbance was measured at 595 nm within 20 min after the reaction [4].

4.3. Soluble Sugar Content

Fifty milligrams of powder was extracted in 10 mL of distilled water for 20 min at 90 °C, and the homogenates were centrifuged at 4000× g for 5 min. A combination of 1 mL of sample extract, 0.5 mL of anthrone-ethyl acetate reagent, and 5 mL of concentrated sulfuric acid was homogenized and boiled for 5 min. The absorbance of the reaction mixtures was measured at 630 nm [4].

4.4. Chlorophyll and Carotenoids Content

An appropriate amount of sample was weighed, ground, and extracted with 10 mL of ethanol. The supernatant was collected and analyzed by the spectrophotometer, absorbance was detected at 665 nm, 649 nm, and 451 nm to measure the content of total chlorophyll and carotenoids, respectively [4].

4.5. Ascorbic Acid Content

Fifty mg of sample powder was extracted with 5 mL of 1.0% (w/v) oxalic acid and then centrifuged for 5 min at 4000× g. Each sample was filtered through a 0.45 μm cellulose acetate filter and analyzed by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). The amount of ascorbic acid was calculated from absorbance values at 243 nm [4].

4.6. Proanthocyanidin Content

The powder of each sample was weighed, ground, and transferred to 4 mL of the extracting reagent. The solution was vortexed for 5 min, shaken for 1 h, and centrifuged at 4000× g for 5 min. The p-dimethylaminocinnamaldehyde reagent was added to 700 μL of supernatant. The absorbance of the mixture was spectrophotometrically detected at 640 nm after 20 min [48].

4.7. Flavonoid Content

Forty milligrams of sample powder was extracted in 50% ethanol and incubated at room temperature for 24 h in the dark. A 1.2 mL aliquot of the supernatant was mixed with 60 μL of 2% aluminum trichloride, 60 μL of 1 mol L−1 potassium acetate, and 1.68 mL of distilled water after being centrifuged. The absorption was read at 415 nm after 40 min [4].

4.8. Total Phenolic Content

Total phenolics were extracted with 50% ethanol, and the supernatant (300 μL) was mixed with 1.5 mL of 0.2 mol L−1 Folin–Ciocalteu reagent, and after 3 min, 1.2 mL of saturated sodium carbonate was added. The mixtures were allowed to stand for 20 min at room temperature, and the absorbance was measured at 760 nm with the spectrophotometer [4].

4.9. ABTS Assay

An aliquot of 300 μL of each extracted sample was added to 3 mL of ABTS+ solution. The absorbance was measured spectrophotometrically at 734 nm after exactly 2 h, and then the value was calculated [4].

4.10. Ferric Reducing Antioxidant Power (FRAP)

The extracted samples (300 μL) were added to 2.7 mL of the FRAP working solution, incubated at 37 °C, and vortexed. The absorbance was then recorded at 593 nm after 10 min, and the result was expressed as mmol kg−1 of dry weight [4].

4.11. Glucosinolate Composition and Content

Powdered samples (100 mg) were boiled in 5 mL of water for 10 min, and the supernatant was collected and applied to a DEAE-Sephadex A-25 column. The glucosinolates were converted into their desulpho analogues by treatment with aryl sulphatase, and the desulphoglucosinolates were eluted. HPLC analysis of desulphoglucosinolates was carried out using an Agilent 1260 HPLC instrument equipped with a variable wavelength detector (VWD) detector. The samples were separated at 30 °C on a Waters Spherisorb C18 column (250 × 4.6 mm) using acetonitrile and water at a flow rate of 1.0 m Lmin−1. The absorbance was detected at 226 nm [4].

4.12. Statistical Analyses

All assays were performed in four replicates and all results were shown as mean ± standard deviation. Statistical analysis used SPSS version 20 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). The data obtained were subjected to analysis of one-way ANOVAs. The histogram graphs were conducted using Origin 8.5.0 (OriginLab Corporation, Northampton, MA, USA). A principal components analysis (PCA) and partial least-squares discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) were performed using SIMCA 14.1 Demo software (Umetrics, Malmö, Sweden) with unit variance scaling to determine the relationships among the samples. The correlation analyses were also performed and were visualized using Cytoscape v. 3.5.1 (The Cytoscape Consortium, New York, NY, USA) [49,50].

5. Conclusions

Dark treatment and planting density had marked effects on the health-promoting phytochemicals and antioxidant capacity of mustard sprouts in our study. D2 increased the content of soluble sugar and protein, chlorophyll, carotenoids, and indolic glucosinolates. High planting densities (i.e., seeds sown at a density of 6–7 g per tray (P3 and P4) significantly enhanced the content of soluble sugar, protein, and aliphatic and total glucosinolates, and no marked increases were observed in the content of chlorophyll and carotenoids and antioxidant capacity. Overall, a sowing density of 6 g of seeds per tray and dark treatment for two days are optimal for maximizing the nutritional quality of mustard sprouts and minimizing costs. In addition, the regulatory mechanisms of darkness and planting density on indolic and aliphatic glucosinolates, respectively, in mustard sprouts, should be studied further. It is also of great significance to establish a quantifiable formula to more systematically evaluate the treatment effect in the future.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/plants11192515/s1, Table S1: Correlation of the health-promoting phytochemicals and antioxidant capacity in mustard sprouts.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, F.Z. and B.S.; investigation, Z.L., W.C., G.R., Y.Z. (Yi Zhang), Z.H., and Y.T.; resources, H.L. (Huashan Lian) and X.L.; data curation, H.D., J.M., W.M., J.Y., and Y.Z. (Yangxia Zheng); writing—original draft preparation, Z.L., H.D., and W.C.; writing—review and editing, H.L. (Huanxiu Li), F.Z., and B.S.; funding acquisition, J.M., Y.Z. (Yangxia Zheng), H.L. (Huanxiu Li), F.Z., and B.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (32072586, 31500247), the Natural Science Foundation of Sichuan Province (2022NSFSC1689), the Project of New Varieties Breeding of Sichuan Vegetable Innovation Team (sccxtd-2022-05), the High-level Talent Innovation Project of Guizhou Province (BKRC202102), the Talent Project of Guizhou Province (RCJD2020-7), and the Central Guidance on Local Science and Technology Development Fund of Shaanxi Province (2022ZY1-CGZY-07).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available in the manuscript and Supplementary Materials.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Sun, B.; Tian, Y.X.; Chen, Q.; Zhang, Y.; Luo, Y.; Wang, Y.; Li, M.Y.; Gong, R.G.; Wang, X.R.; Zhang, F.; et al. Variations in the glucosinolates of the individual edible parts of three stem mustards (Brassica juncea). R. Soc. Open Sci. 2019, 6, 182054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Oh, S.K.; Kim, K.W.; Choi, M.R. Antioxidant activity of different parts of Dolsan Leaf Mustard. Food Sci. Biotechnol. 2016, 25, 1463–1467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Pant, U.; Bhajan, R.; Singh, A.; Kulshesthra, K.; Singh, A.K.; Punetha, H. Green leafy mustard: A healthy alternative. Electron. J. Plant Breed. 2020, 11, 267–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Sun, B.; Tian, Y.X.; Jiang, M.; Yuan, Q.; Chen, Q.; Zhang, Y.; Luo, Y.; Zhang, F.; Tang, H.R. Variation in the main health-promoting compounds and antioxidant activity of whole and individual edible parts of baby mustard (Brassica juncea var. gemmifera). RSC Adv. 2018, 8, 33845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Ebert, A.W. Sprouts and Microgreens—Novel food sources for healthy diets. Plants 2022, 11, 571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Artés-Hernández, F.; Castillejo, N.; Martínez-Zamora, L.; Martínez-Hernández, G.B. Phytochemical fortification in fruit and vegetable beverages with green technologies. Foods 2021, 10, 2534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Francisco, A.H.; Daniel, M.M.F.; Venzke, K.T.; Benito, M.H.G. Enrichment of glucosinolate and carotenoid contents of mustard sprouts by using green elicitors during germination. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2022, 110, 104546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Tian, Y.; Deng, F.M. Phytochemistry and biological activity of mustard Brassica juncea: A review. CYTA J. Food 2020, 18, 704–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Dunja, Š.; Valentina, L.; Radojčić, R.I.; Stjepana, F.; Branka, S. Low temperatures affect the physiological status and phytochemical content of flat leaf kale (Brassica oleracea var. acephala) sprouts. Foods 2022, 11, 264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Chen, M.; Chory, J.; Fankhauser, C. Light Signal transduction in higher plants. Annu. Rev. Genet. 2004, 38, 87–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  11. Chen, X.L.; Li, Y.L.; Wang, L.C.; Yang, Q.C.; Guo, W.Z. Responses of butter leaf lettuce to mixed red and blue light with extended light/dark cycle period. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 6924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Paradiso, R.; De Pascale, S. Effects of plant size, temperature, and light intensity on flowering of phalaenopsis hybrids in mediterranean greenhouses. Sci. World J. 2014, 2014, 420807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Cheon, C.; Saito, T. An approach to the characterization of effects of photoperiod on vernalization in radish plants using “flower formation index”. Environ. Control Bio. 2010, 42, 75–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Jha, P.; Norsworthy, J.K.; Riley, M.B.; Bridges, W. Shade and plant location effects on germination and hormone content of palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) seed. Weed Sci. 2010, 58, 16–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Ramaraj, S.; Cheol, K.M.; Ji, Y.H.; Van, N.B.; In, S.S.; Un, P.S.; Joonyup, K. Accumulation of phenolic compounds and glucosinolates in sprouts of pale green and purple kohlrabi (Brassica oleracea var. gongylodes) under light and dark conditions. Agronomy 2021, 11, 1939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Achard, P.; Liao, L.L.; Jiang, C.F.; Desnos, T.; Bartlett, J.; Fu, X.D.; Harberd, N.P. DELLAs contribute to plant photomorphogenesis. Plant Physiol. 2007, 143, 1163–1172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Turbin, V.A.; Sokolov, A.S.; Kosterna, E.; Rosa, R. Effect of Plant Density on the growth, development and yield of brussels sprouts (Brassica oleracea L. var. gemmifera L.). Acta Agrobot. 2014, 67, 51–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Giordano, M.; El-Nakhel, C.; Colonna, E.; Pannico, A.; Maiello, R.; De Pascale, S.; Rouphael, Y. Effects of genotypes, plant density and nitrogen rates on yield and quality of spinach. Acta Hortic. 2021, 1326, 223–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Sinta, Z.; Garo, G. Influence of plant density and nitrogen fertilizer rates on yield and yield components of beetroot (Beta vulgaris L.). Int. J. Agron. 2021, 2021, 6670243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Phahlane, C.J.T.; Maboko, M.M.; Soundy, P.; Sivakumar, D. Development, yield, and antioxidant content in red cabbage as affected by plant density and nitrogen rate. Int. J. Veg. Sci. 2018, 24, 160–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Ding, X.T.; Nie, W.F.; Qian, T.T.; He, L.Z.; Zhang, H.M.; Jin, H.J.; Cui, J.W.; Wang, H.; Zhou, Q.; Yu, J.Z. Low plant density improves fruit quality without affecting yield of cucumber in different cultivation periods in greenhouse. Agronomy 2022, 12, 1441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Reda, T.; Thavarajah, P.; Polomski, R.; Bridges, W.; Shipe, E.; Thavarajah, D. Reaching the highest shelf: A review of organic production, nutritional quality, and shelf life of kale (Brassica oleracea var. acephala). Plants People Planet 2021, 3, 308–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Seluzicki, A.; Burko, Y.; Chory, J. Dancing in the dark: Darkness as a signal in plants. Plant Cell Environ. 2017, 40, 2487–2501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Martin, G.; Leivar, P.; Ludevid, D.; Tepperman, J.M.; Quail, P.H.; Monte, E. Phytochrome and retrograde signalling pathways converge to antagonistically regulate a light-induced transcriptional network. Nat. Commun. 2016, 7, 11431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Brown, A.V.; Hudson, K.A. Developmental profiling of gene expression in soybean trifoliate leaves and cotyledons. BMC Plant Biol. 2015, 15, 169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Roig-Villanova, I.; Martínez-García, J.F. Plant responses to vegetation proximity: A whole life avoiding shade. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Ishikawa, H.; Batieno, B.J.; Fatokun, C.; Boukar, O. A high plant density and the split application of chemical fertilizer increased the grain and protein content of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) in Burkina Faso, West Africa. Agriculture 2022, 12, 199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Frazie, M.D.; Kim, M.J.; Ku, K.M. Health-promoting phytochemicals from 11 mustard cultivars at baby leaf and mature stages. Molecules 2017, 22, 1749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Choi, H.; Ji, J.S.; Ji, P.H.; Beom, Y.Y.; In, K.Y. Regeneration, nutritional values, and antioxidants in excised adventitious shoot of radish affected by dark treatment. J. Food Nutr. Res. 2015, 3, 365–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Zhang, X.Y.; Bian, Z.H.; Yuan, X.X.; Chen, X.; Lu, C.G. A review on the effects of light-emitting diode (LED) light on the nutrients of sprouts and microgreens. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 99, 203–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Poór, P.; Takács, Z.; Bela, K.; Czékus, Z.; Szalai, G.; Tari, I. Prolonged dark period modulates the oxidative burst and enzymatic antioxidant systems in the leaves of salicylic acid-treated tomato. J. Plant Physiol. 2017, 213, 216–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Li, Y.M.; Gao, M.F.; He, R.; Zhang, Y.T.; Song, S.W.; Su, W.; Liu, H.C. Far-red light suppresses glucosinolate profiles of chinese kale through inhibiting genes related to glucosinolate biosynthesis. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2021, 188, 104507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Machado, R.M.A.; Alves-Pereira, I.; Ferreira, R.M.A. Plant growth, phytochemical accumulation and antioxidant activity of substrate-grown spinach. Heliyon 2018, 4, e00751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Nasiri, A.; Samdaliri, M.; Rad, A.S.; Shahsavari, N.; Mirkale, A.M.; Jabbari, H. Effect of plant density on yield and physiological characteristics of six canola cultivars. J. Sci. Agric. 2017, 1, 249–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Park, J.; Kim, J.; Purevdorj, E.; Son, Y.; Nho, C.W.; Yoo, G. Effects of long light exposure and drought stress on plant growth and glucosinolate production in pak choi (Brassica rapa subsp. chinensis). Food Chem. 2021, 340, 128167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Ciska, E.; Honke, J.; Kozłowska, H. Effect of light conditions on the contents of glucosinolates in germinating seeds of white mustard, red radish, white radish, and rapeseed. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2008, 56, 9087–9093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kim, Y.B.; Chun, J.; Kim, H.R.; Kim, S.; Lim, Y.P.; Park, S.U. Variation of glucosinolate accumulation and gene expression of transcription factors at different stages of chinese cabbage seedlings under light and dark conditions. Nat. Prod. Commun. 2014, 9, 533–537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. McGregor, D.I. Glucosinolate content of developing rapeseed (Brassica napus L. “Midas”) seedlings. Can. J. Plant Sci. 1988, 68, 367–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Pérez-Balibrea, S.; Moreno, A.D.; Garcia-Viguera, C. Influence of light on health-promoting phytochemicals of broccoli sprouts. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2008, 88, 904–910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Gigolashvili, T.; Engqvist, M.; Yatusevich, R.; Müller, C.; Flügge, U. HAG2/MYB76 and HAG3/MYB29 exert a specific and coordinated control on the regulation of aliphatic glucosinolate biosynthesis in Arabidopsis thaliana. New Phytol. 2008, 177, 627–642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Maruyama-Nakashita, A.; Nakamura, Y.; Tohge, T.; Saito, K.; Takahashi, H. Arabidopsis SLIM1 is a central transcriptional regulator of plant sulfur response and metabolism. Plant Cell 2006, 18, 3235–3251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Kumari, S.; Jo, J.S.; Choi, H.S.; Lee, J.G.; Lee, S.I.; Jeong, M.; Kim, J.A. Molecular characterization and expression analysis of MYB transcription factors involved in the glucosinolate pathway in chinese cabbage (Brassica rapa ssp. pekinensis). Agronomy 2019, 9, 807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Wentzell, A.M.; Kliebenstein, D.J. Genotype, age, tissue, and environment regulate the structural outcome of glucosinolate activation. Plant Physiol. 2008, 147, 415–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Augustine, R.; Bisht, N.C. Biotic elicitors and mechanical damage modulate glucosinolate accumulation by co-ordinated interplay of glucosinolate biosynthesis regulators in polyploid Brassica juncea. Phytochemistry 2015, 117, 43–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. López-Berenguer, C.; Martínez-Ballesta, M.C.; García-Viguera, C.; Carvajal, M. Leaf water balance mediated by aquaporins under salt stress and associated glucosinolate synthesis in broccoli. Plant Sci. 2007, 174, 321–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Schuchardt, J.P.; Hahn, A.; Greupner, T.; Wasserfurth, P.; Rosales-López, M.; Hornbacher, J.; Papenbrock, J. Watercress–cultivation methods and health effects. J. Appl. Bot. Food Qual. 2019, 92, 232–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Nastruzzi, C.; Cortesi, R.; Esposito, E.; Menegatti, E.; Leoni, O.; Iori, R.; Palmieri, S. In vitro cytotoxic activity of some glucosinolate-derived products generated by myrosinase hydrolysis. J. Agric. Food Chem. 1996, 44, 1014–1021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Prior, R.L.; Fan, E.; Ji, H.P.; Howell, A.; Nio, C.; Payne, M.J.; Reed, J. Multi-laboratory validation of a standard method for quantifying proanthocyanidins in cranberry powders. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2010, 90, 1473–1478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Sun, B.; Di, H.M.; Zhang, J.Q.; Xia, P.X.; Huang, W.L.; Jian, Y.; Zhang, C.L.; Zhang, F. Effect of light on sensory quality, health-promoting phytochemicals and antioxidant capacity in post-harvest baby mustard. Food Chem. 2021, 339, 128057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Zhang, C.L.; Di, H.M.; Lin, P.X.; Wang, Y.T.; Li, Z.Q.; Lai, Y.S.; Li, H.X.; Sun, B.; Zhang, F. Genotypic variation of glucosinolates and their breakdown products in mustard Brassica juncea seeds. Sci. Hortic. 2022, 294, 110765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Plants 11 02515 g001 550
Figure 1. Glucosinolate content under different days of dark treatment in mustard sprouts. Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation. The same letter in the same figure means no significant differences among values (p < 0.05) according to the LSD’s test. (A) sinigrin; (B) gluconapin; (C) progoitrin; (D) neoglucobrassicin; (E) 4-methoxyglucobrassicin; (F) glucobrassicin; (G) 4-hydroxyglucobrassicin; (H) total aliphatic glucosinolates; (I) total indolic glucosinolates; (J) total glucosinolates. D1: dark treatment for one day; D2: dark treatment for two days; D3: dark treatment for three days; D4: dark treatment for four days.
Figure 1. Glucosinolate content under different days of dark treatment in mustard sprouts. Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation. The same letter in the same figure means no significant differences among values (p < 0.05) according to the LSD’s test. (A) sinigrin; (B) gluconapin; (C) progoitrin; (D) neoglucobrassicin; (E) 4-methoxyglucobrassicin; (F) glucobrassicin; (G) 4-hydroxyglucobrassicin; (H) total aliphatic glucosinolates; (I) total indolic glucosinolates; (J) total glucosinolates. D1: dark treatment for one day; D2: dark treatment for two days; D3: dark treatment for three days; D4: dark treatment for four days.
Plants 11 02515 g001
Plants 11 02515 g002 550
Figure 2. Glucosinolate content under different planting densities in mustard sprouts. Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation. Same letter in the same figure means no significant differences among values (p < 0.05) according to the LSD’s test. (A) sinigrin; (B) gluconapin; (C) progoitrin; (D) neoglucobrassicin; (E) 4-methoxyglucobrassicin; (F) glucobrassicin; (G) 4-hydroxyglucobrassicin; (H) total aliphatic glucosinolates; (I) total indolic glucosinolates; (J) total glucosinolates. P1: a sowing density of 4 g of seeds per tray; P2: a sowing density of 5 g of seeds per tray; P3: a sowing density of 6 g of seeds per tray; P4: a sowing density of 7 g of seeds per tray.
Figure 2. Glucosinolate content under different planting densities in mustard sprouts. Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation. Same letter in the same figure means no significant differences among values (p < 0.05) according to the LSD’s test. (A) sinigrin; (B) gluconapin; (C) progoitrin; (D) neoglucobrassicin; (E) 4-methoxyglucobrassicin; (F) glucobrassicin; (G) 4-hydroxyglucobrassicin; (H) total aliphatic glucosinolates; (I) total indolic glucosinolates; (J) total glucosinolates. P1: a sowing density of 4 g of seeds per tray; P2: a sowing density of 5 g of seeds per tray; P3: a sowing density of 6 g of seeds per tray; P4: a sowing density of 7 g of seeds per tray.
Plants 11 02515 g002
Plants 11 02515 g003 550
Figure 3. PCA analysis of different dark treatments on mustard sprouts. (A) PCA score plot; (B) PLS-DA score plot; (C) loading plot. SIN: sinigrin; GNA: gluconapin; PRO: progoitrin; NGBS: neoglucobrassicin; GBS: glucobrassicin; 4-MGBS: 4-methoxyglucobrassicin; 4-HGBS: 4-hydroxyglucobrassicin; AGS: total aliphatic glucosinolates; IGS: total indolic glucosinolates; GS: total glucosinolates. D1: dark treatment for one day; D2: dark treatment for two days; D3: dark treatment for three days; D4: dark treatment for four days.
Figure 3. PCA analysis of different dark treatments on mustard sprouts. (A) PCA score plot; (B) PLS-DA score plot; (C) loading plot. SIN: sinigrin; GNA: gluconapin; PRO: progoitrin; NGBS: neoglucobrassicin; GBS: glucobrassicin; 4-MGBS: 4-methoxyglucobrassicin; 4-HGBS: 4-hydroxyglucobrassicin; AGS: total aliphatic glucosinolates; IGS: total indolic glucosinolates; GS: total glucosinolates. D1: dark treatment for one day; D2: dark treatment for two days; D3: dark treatment for three days; D4: dark treatment for four days.
Plants 11 02515 g003
Plants 11 02515 g004 550
Figure 4. PCA analysis of different planting densities on mustard sprouts. (A) PCA score plot; (B) PLS-DA score plot; (C) loading plot. SIN: sinigrin; GNA: gluconapin; PRO: progoitrin; NGBS: neoglucobrassicin; GBS: glucobrassicin; 4-MGBS: 4-methoxyglucobrassicin; 4-HGBS: 4-hydroxyglucobrassicin; AGS: total aliphatic glucosinolates; IGS: total indolic glucosinolates; GS: total glucosinolates. P1: a sowing density of 4 g of seeds per tray; P2: a sowing density of 5 g of seeds per tray; P3: a sowing density of 6 g of seeds per tray; P4: a sowing density of 7 g of seeds per tray.
Figure 4. PCA analysis of different planting densities on mustard sprouts. (A) PCA score plot; (B) PLS-DA score plot; (C) loading plot. SIN: sinigrin; GNA: gluconapin; PRO: progoitrin; NGBS: neoglucobrassicin; GBS: glucobrassicin; 4-MGBS: 4-methoxyglucobrassicin; 4-HGBS: 4-hydroxyglucobrassicin; AGS: total aliphatic glucosinolates; IGS: total indolic glucosinolates; GS: total glucosinolates. P1: a sowing density of 4 g of seeds per tray; P2: a sowing density of 5 g of seeds per tray; P3: a sowing density of 6 g of seeds per tray; P4: a sowing density of 7 g of seeds per tray.
Plants 11 02515 g004
Plants 11 02515 g005 550
Figure 5. Correlation plot of the correlations between health-promoting phytochemicals and antioxidant capacity in mustard sprouts. All correlations in the figure reflect the absolute values of Pearson correlation coefficient above the threshold (R2 > 0.65). The numbers on the lines represent the specific value of the correlation coefficient. SIN: sinigrin; GNA: gluconapin; PRO: progoitrin; NGBS: neoglucobrassicin; GBS: glucobrassicin; 4-MGBS: 4-methoxyglucobrassicin; 4-HGBS: 4-hydroxyglucobrassicin; AGS: total aliphatic glucosinolates; IGS: total indolic glucosinolates; GS: total glucosinolates.
Figure 5. Correlation plot of the correlations between health-promoting phytochemicals and antioxidant capacity in mustard sprouts. All correlations in the figure reflect the absolute values of Pearson correlation coefficient above the threshold (R2 > 0.65). The numbers on the lines represent the specific value of the correlation coefficient. SIN: sinigrin; GNA: gluconapin; PRO: progoitrin; NGBS: neoglucobrassicin; GBS: glucobrassicin; 4-MGBS: 4-methoxyglucobrassicin; 4-HGBS: 4-hydroxyglucobrassicin; AGS: total aliphatic glucosinolates; IGS: total indolic glucosinolates; GS: total glucosinolates.
Plants 11 02515 g005
Table
Table 1. Soluble sugar, soluble protein, chlorophyll, and carotenoids content in different days of dark treatment of mustard sprouts (mg g−1).
Table 1. Soluble sugar, soluble protein, chlorophyll, and carotenoids content in different days of dark treatment of mustard sprouts (mg g−1).
Dark DaysSoluble SugarSoluble ProteinTotal ChlorophyllTotal Carotenoids
D1142.68 ± 5.06 c98.47 ± 1.69 c6.89 ± 0.13 b0.64 ± 0.02 a
D2158.36 ± 2.13 a109.14 ± 3.98 ab7.29 ± 0.06 a0.63 ± 0.01 ab
D3149.60 ± 6.29 b109.68 ± 5.64 a6.44 ± 0.24 c0.61 ± 0.04 ab
D4136.87 ± 2.28 c103.86 ± 0.76 bc5.70 ± 0.14 d0.60 ± 0.03 b
Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation. Same letter in the same column means no significant differences among values (p < 0.05) according to the LSD’s test. D1: dark treatment for one day; D2: dark treatment for two days; D3: dark treatment for three days; D4: dark treatment for four days.
Table
Table 2. Soluble sugar, soluble protein, chlorophyll, and carotenoids content in different planting densities of mustard sprouts (mg g−1).
Table 2. Soluble sugar, soluble protein, chlorophyll, and carotenoids content in different planting densities of mustard sprouts (mg g−1).
Planting DensitySoluble SugarSoluble ProteinTotal ChlorophyllTotal Carotenoids
P1138.74 ± 5.23 bc108.48 ± 4.15 ab6.38 ± 0.13 a0.63 ± 0.02 a
P2149.49 ± 8.74 ab107.35 ± 1.08 b6.30 ± 0.20 a0.67 ± 0.09 a
P3131.53 ± 9.44 c113.35 ± 4.44 a6.48 ± 0.08 a0.67 ± 0.04 a
P4152.65 ± 6.73 a108.09 ± 2.66 b6.40 ± 0.08 a0.68 ± 0.06 a
Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation. Same letter in the same column means no significant differences among values (p < 0.05) according to the LSD’s test. P1: a sowing density of 4 g of seeds per tray; P2: a sowing density of 5 g of seeds per tray; P3: a sowing density of 6 g of seeds per tray; P4: a sowing density of 7 g of seeds per tray.
Table
Table 3. Ascorbic acid, proanthocyanidins, flavonoids, total phenolics, and antioxidant activity content in different days of dark treatment of mustard sprouts.
Table 3. Ascorbic acid, proanthocyanidins, flavonoids, total phenolics, and antioxidant activity content in different days of dark treatment of mustard sprouts.
Dark DaysAscorbic Acid (mg g−1)Proanthocyanidins (mg g−1)Flavonoids (mg g−1)Total Phenolics (mg g−1)ABTS+ (%)FRAP (mmol g−1)
D11.02 ± 0.14 b5.71 ± 0.12 b13.73 ± 0.48 ab16.00 ± 0.58 a41.26 ± 3.05 ab0.14 ± 0.00 ab
D21.31 ± 0.26 a5.95 ± 0.14 a14.92 ± 0.80 a16.05 ± 0.35 a39.86 ± 4.20 b0.14 ± 0.01 ab
D31.24 ± 0.20 ab5.59 ± 0.04 b13.75 ± 1.43 ab14.96 ± 0.30 b38.55 ± 1.97 b0.14 ± 0.00 b
D41.41 ± 0.14 a4.92 ± 0.12 c13.38 ± 0.44 b15.98 ± 0.83 a47.97 ± 7.51 a0.15 ± 0.01 a
Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation. Same letter in the same column means no significant differences among values (p < 0.05) according to the LSD’s test. D1: dark treatment for one day; D2: dark treatment for two days; D3: dark treatment for three days; D4: dark treatment for four days.
Table
Table 4. Ascorbic acid, proanthocyanidins, flavonoids, total phenolics, and antioxidant activity content in different planting densities of mustard sprouts.
Table 4. Ascorbic acid, proanthocyanidins, flavonoids, total phenolics, and antioxidant activity content in different planting densities of mustard sprouts.
Planting DensityAscorbic Acid (mg g−1)Proanthocyanidins (mg g−1)Flavonoids (mg g−1)Total Phenolics (mg g−1)ABTS+ (%)FRAP (mmol g−1)
P12.24 ± 0.21 ab6.32 ± 0.15 ab15.02 ± 0.47 a18.27 ± 0.47 a39.07 ± 3.44 a0.17 ± 0.00 a
P22.07 ± 0.24 b6.20 ± 0.09 bc15.57 ± 1.64 a18.96 ± 0.40 a41.30 ± 1.77 a0.17 ± 0.00 a
P32.52 ± 0.25 a6.39 ± 0.09 a14.60 ± 0.51 a18.90 ± 0.84 a42.21 ± 1.55 a0.17 ± 0.00 a
P42.61 ± 0.30 a6.04 ± 0.13 c14.32 ± 0.48 a19.13 ± 0.94 a40.30 ± 3.18 a0.17 ± 0.00 a
Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation. Same letter in the same column means no significant differences among values (p < 0.05) according to the LSD’s test. P1: a sowing density of 4 g of seeds per tray; P2: a sowing density of 5 g of seeds per tray; P3: a sowing density of 6 g of seeds per tray; P4: a sowing density of 7 g of seeds per tray.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Li, Z.; Di, H.; Cheng, W.; Ren, G.; Zhang, Y.; Ma, J.; Ma, W.; Yang, J.; Lian, H.; Li, X.; et al. Effect of the Number of Dark Days and Planting Density on the Health-Promoting Phytochemicals and Antioxidant Capacity of Mustard (Brassica juncea) Sprouts. Plants 2022, 11, 2515. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11192515

AMA Style

Li Z, Di H, Cheng W, Ren G, Zhang Y, Ma J, Ma W, Yang J, Lian H, Li X, et al. Effect of the Number of Dark Days and Planting Density on the Health-Promoting Phytochemicals and Antioxidant Capacity of Mustard (Brassica juncea) Sprouts. Plants. 2022; 11(19):2515. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11192515

Chicago/Turabian Style

Li, Zhiqing, Hongmei Di, Wenjuan Cheng, Guanru Ren, Yi Zhang, Jie Ma, Wei Ma, Jiao Yang, Huashan Lian, Xiaomei Li, and et al. 2022. "Effect of the Number of Dark Days and Planting Density on the Health-Promoting Phytochemicals and Antioxidant Capacity of Mustard (Brassica juncea) Sprouts" Plants 11, no. 19: 2515. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11192515

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop