skip to context

Discussion and Conclusions

Your Discussion and Conclusions sections should answer the question:

What do your results mean?

In other words, the majority of the Discussion and Conclusions sections should be an interpretation of your results. You should:

  • Discuss your conclusions in order of most to least important.
  • Compare your results with those from other studies: Are they consistent? If not, discuss possible reasons for the difference.
  • Mention any inconclusive results and explain them as best you can. You may suggest additional experiments needed to clarify your results.
  • Briefly describe the limitations of your study to show reviewers and readers that you have considered your experiment’s weaknesses.
  • Discuss what your results may mean for researchers in the same field as you, researchers in other fields, and the general public. How could your findings be applied?
  • State how your results extend the findings of previous studies.
  • If your findings are preliminary, suggest future studies that need to be carried out.
  • At the end of your Discussion and Conclusions sections, state your main conclusions once again.

Example:

Article title: Development of ITS sequence-based markers to distinguish Berberis aristata DC. from B. lycium Royle and B. asiatica Roxb.

Source: 3 Biotech, DOI: 10.1007/s13205-010-0001-5

Discussion

One of the impediments in the acceptance of herbal formulations is the lack of standardization and quality control profiles …

… Controversial reports on the berberine content of these three species have been reported in the past. A comparative high performance thin layer chromatography (HPTLC) analysis of B. asiatica with B. aristata showed identical profile with lesser berberine content in the former (Srivastava et al. 2004). While, Andola et al. (2010) have reported that B. asiatica has higher berberine content followed by B. lycium and B. asiatica. These inconsistent reports indicate the disadvantage of chemical marker and also insist on a robust technique for differentiating these three species.

… Many studies in recent years have employed ITS sequences as genetic markers for various species … capturing measurable variations between species (Dubouzet and Shinoda 1999). Universal PCR primers designed from highly conserved regions flanking the ITS region … enable easy amplification of the ITS region (Yan-Bo et al. 2007; Yip et al. 2007). These advantages have made ITS region and ribosomal RNA gene sequence as preferred choice for molecular typing. Novak et al. (2007) have reported ITS sequence-based authentication of Echinacea spp. in extracts. Balasubramani et al. (2010) have reported ITS sequence-based DNA markers to differentiate Tribulus spp. of the Zygophyllaceae family. Watthanachaiyingcharoen et al. (2010) have reported 18S rRNA gene-based PCR–RFLP to distinguish Coscinium fenestratum from other genus in the Menispermaceae family.

The main problem with DNA-based methods for identification is the presence of phenolic compounds, acidic polysaccharides and pigments that hinder the PCR amplification. This can be avoided by choosing the most suitable DNA extraction process that helps to eliminate the PCR inhibitors. DNA-based methods have been successfully used to even authenticate herbal constituents in commercial herbal preparations in which the components have been ground, boiled, concentrated, dried and blended (Yip et al. 2007). DNA information may not be directly correlated with the amounts of the active ingredients and this is one disadvantage.

In this study, we have described ITS sequence-based efficient and reliable DNA markers to identify and distinguish B. aristata, B. asiatica and B. lycium. These markers can be used as a molecular pharmacognostic tool for quality control of herbal raw drugs.

--- Commentary ---

Original URL: http://www.springer.com/authors/journal+authors/journal+authors+academy?SGWID=0-1726414-12-837810-0

View: EAST

Picture Remarks:

---