Fig 1.
(A) Cordyceps sinensis; (B) Cordyceps militaris; (C) Cordyceps hawkesii; (D) Metacordyceps taii.
Table 1.
Details of the purchased Cordyceps species.
Table 2.
Identification of Cordyceps species by DNA sequencing.
Fig 2.
Statistical comparison test for the significant differences in extracted protein content (% by mass) using different lysis buffer extraction protocols.
The Tukey’s test was carried out to compare the means of extracted protein in different protocols. The results are presented as the mean ± standard deviation. Error bars indicated standard deviation (n = 7). **p < 0.01 and ***p < 0.001 in comparison between the different protocols.
Fig 3.
2-DE gel profiles of Cordyceps sinensis using different extraction protocols.
(a) Protocol A, (b) Protocol B, (c) Protocol C, and (d) Protocol D.
Fig 4.
2-DE gel profiles of (A) Cordyceps sinensis, (B) Cordyceps militaris, (C) Cordyceps hawkesii and (D) Metacordyceps taii, with extraction using lysis buffer without any cleanup process. All gel images were analyzed by Melanie 2-D electrophoresis analysis software.
Table 3.
Comparison of protein content (% by mass) and total number of protein spots of 2-DE gel images between Cordyceps sinensis and other similar species.
Fig 5.
Comparison of Cordyceps sinensis 2-DE profiles of (A) original source and (B) independent source. All gel images were analyzed by Melanie 2-D electrophoresis analysis software. All candidate protein marker spots (AS1 –AS14) in characteristic regions (RA1—RA5) were found reproducible.