| Literature DB >> 19214156 |
Renato Bruni1, Gianni Sacchetti.
Abstract
The increasing diffusion of herbal products is posing new questions: why are products so often different in their composition and efficacy? Which approach is more suitable to increase the biochemical productivity of medicinal plants with large-scale, low-cost solutions? Can the phytochemical profile of a medicinal plant be modulated in order to increase the accumulation of its most valuable constituents? Will polyphenol-rich medicinal crops ever be traded as commodities? Providing a proactive answer to such questions is an extremely hard task, due to the large number of variables involved: intraspecific chemodiversity, plant breeding, ontogenetic stage, post-harvest handling, biotic and abiotic factors, to name but a few. An ideal path in this direction should include the definition of optimum pre-harvesting and post-harvesting conditions and the availability of specific Good Agricultural Practices centered on secondary metabolism enhancement. The first steps to be taken are undoubtedly the evaluation and the organization of scattered data regarding the diverse factors involved in the optimization of medicinal plant cultivation, in order to provide an interdisciplinary overview of main possibilities, weaknesses and drawbacks. This review is intended to be a synopsis of the knowledge on this regard focused on Hypericum perforatum L. (Hypericaceae/Guttiferae) secondary metabolites of phenolic origin, with the aim to provide a reference and suggest an evolution towards the maximization of St. John's Wort bioactive constituents. Factors considered emerged not only from in-field agronomic results, but also from physiological, genetical, biotic, abiotic and phytochemical data that could be scaled up to the application level. To increase quality for final beneficiaries, growers' profits and ultimately transform phenolic-rich medicinal crops into commodities, the emerging trend suggests an integrated and synergic approach. Agronomy and genetics will need to develop their breeding strategies taking account of the suggestions of phytochemistry, biochemistry, pharmacognosy and pharmacology, without losing sight of the economic balance of the production.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19214156 PMCID: PMC6253782 DOI: 10.3390/molecules14020682
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Localization and indicative amounts of most significant constituents of H. perforatum phytocomplex.
| Substance | Approximate amount (mg/g dry weight) |
|---|---|
|
| |
| Hypericin | 0.1-7a |
| Pseudohypericin | 0.1-12a |
|
| aDark glands in leaf and petal margin; stamens |
|
| |
| Hyperforin | 0.3-150b |
|
| bTranslucent glands in leaves, carpellar leaves and sepals |
|
| |
| Hyperoside | 1-25c |
| Rutin | 0-35c |
|
| cFloral dehiscent leaves: sepals, stamens, petals. Likely accumulation in vacuoles. |
|
| |
| Amentoflavone | 0-1.8d |
| Biapigenin | 0.3-10.2d |
|
| dFloral deiscent leaves: sepals, stamens, petals. Likely accumulation in vacuoles. |
a,b,c,d: same letters indicate sites of maximum accumulation; amounts referred to reproductive parts.
Amount of hyperforin (Hpf), hypericin (Hyp) and pseudohypericin (Pse) in vegetative and reproductive parts of wild and cultivated H.perforatum and related cultivars of different geographic origin.
| Origin/Cultivar | Amount1 | Method | Notes | Ref. | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hpf2 | Hyp3 | Pse4 | ||||
|
| ||||||
| Wild - Canada, BC | nm5 | 0.33-0.63 | nm | HPLC | Aerial parts at full flowering | [ |
| Wild - Canada, Nova Scotia | nm | 0.12-0.29 | nm | HPLC | Aerial parts at full flowering | [ |
| Wild - Canada, Ontario | nm | 0.13-0.27 | nm | HPLC | Aerial parts at full flowering | [ |
| Wild - Canada, Oregon | nm | 0.24-0.54 | nm | HPLC | Aerial parts at full flowering | [ |
| Wild - USA, California | nm | 0.11-0.44 | 2.78-4.27 | HPLC | Aerial parts Higher values in flowers | [ |
| Wild - USA, Montana | nm | 0.05-0.18 | 0.76-1.07 | HPLC | Aerial parts Higher values in flowers | [ |
| Wild - USA, Oregon | nm | 0.37-3.87* | nm | UV6 | Aerial parts * Flowers only | [ |
| Wild - USA, Oregon | nm | 0.60 mg/g | 2.86 mg/g | HPLC | Aerial parts Higher values in flowers | [ |
| Cultivated – USA | *27.37 | *1.46 | *2.51 | HPLC | *Flowers ** Leaves | [ |
|
| ||||||
| Cultivated – Brazil | nm | 3.83 | nm | HPLC | Leaves, stems, vegetative stage | [ |
| Cultivated - Chile | nm | 1.1-1.28 | nm | UV | Aerial parts at full flowering | [ |
| Cultivated - Chile | nm | 1.9-2.5 | nm | UV | Flowers | [ |
|
| ||||||
| Wild - Armenia | 150 | 0.23-0.05 | nm | HPLC | Low variability of samples collected from different sites. Unspecified aerial parts | [ |
| Wild - Armenia | nm | 0.06-0.64 | 0.2-1.6 | HPLC | FlowersFrom 10 different regions | [ |
| Wild - Bulgaria | nm | 1.25 | nm | UV | Unspecified aerial parts | [ |
| Wild - Croatiassp. perforatum | nm | 0.3 | nm | HPLC | Unspecified aerial parts. Richer in flavonoids | [ |
| Wild - Croatia,ssp. agustifolium | nm | 1 | nm | HPLC | Unspecified aerial parts. Devoid of rutin | [ |
| Wild - Greece (Crete Island) | nm | *1.1 | *1.3 | HPLC | *Flowers | [ |
| Wild - India | 1.66-4.62 | 1.19-2.68 | 13.74-41.64 | HPLC | Aerial parts | [ |
| Wild - Iran | 1.01 | nm | UV | Aerial parts af full flowering | [ | |
| Wild - Italy | *12.4-21.1 | *2.8-6.6 | *5.2-10.8 | HPLC | *Dried flowers only | [ |
| Wild - Italy | 8.3-31.81 | 8.34-14.79 | nm | HPLC | Aeria parts at full flowering ssp. | [ |
| Wild – Italy | *10.72-23.32 | *0.35-0.52 | nm | HPLC | * ssp. Perforatum | [ |
| Wild - Italy (Tuscany) | 0.84-4.82 | 0.02-0.11 | 0.03-0.33 | HPLC | Flowers only. Chemotype devoid of rutin | [ |
| Wild - Italy (Tuscany) | 82.5-52 | *0.03-0.2 | nm | HPLC | Flowering tops *Expressed as total naphtodianthrones | [ |
| Wild - Russia (Udmurtia) | nm | 12 fw | nm | UV | Flower buds | [ |
| Wild - Serbia | 3.55 | 0.17 | nm | HPLC | Aerial parts at full flowering | [ |
| Wild - Serbia | 1.52 | 0.2 | 0.5 | HPLC | Aerial parts at full flowering | [ |
| Wild - Solvenia | 13.59 | 5.20 | 5.22 | HPLC | Aerial parts at full flowering | [ |
| Wild - Turkey | nm | *0-**2.73 | nm | HPLC | * Stems ** Flowers | [ |
| Wild - Turkey | nm | 0.44-2.82 | nm | HPLC | Aerial parts at full flowering | [ |
| Wild - Turkey | nm | 2.15-2.46 | nm | UV | Aerial parts at full flowering | [ |
| Wild - Turkey | nm | 0.28-4.46 | nm | UV | Aerial parts at full flowering | [ |
| Cultivated - Denmark | 3 fw7 | nm | nm | HPLC | Leaves only | [ |
| Cultivated - Germany | 2 | 0.1-5.2 | 0.1-16 | HPLC | Flowering tops | [ |
| Cultivated - Germany cv. Hyperiflor | 12.3 | 0.8 | nm | HPLC | Aerial parts af full flowering | [ |
| Cultivated - Germany cv. Hyperimed | 26.51 | 0.87 | nm | HPLC | Aerial parts at full flowering | [ |
| Cultivated - Germany cv. Topaz | 12.81 | 1.11 | nm | HPLC | Aerial parts at full flowering | [ |
| Cultivated - Hungary | nm | 0.10-2.648 | nm | HPLC | Aerial parts at full flowering Selected breeding lines. | [ |
| Cultivated - Hungary cv Topas and selected breeding lines | nm | 0.64-3.88 | 3.18-11.88 | HPLC | Aerial parts at full flowering | [ |
| Cultivated - HungaryHybrids selection | nm | 1.52-11.9 fw7 | nm | UV | Reproductive parts. | [ |
| Cultivated - Italy cv. Zorzi | nm | 1.36 | nm | HPLC | Aerial parts at full flowering | [ |
| Cultivated - Lithuania | nm | 0.23-1.24 | nm | HPLC | Flowering tops Seeds from 21 wild accessions | [ |
| Cultivated - Poland | nm | 7-9 | nm | HPLC | Aerial parts at full flowering | [ |
| Cultivated - Slovakia | nm | 1.59 | nm | UV | Aerial parts at full flowering | [ |
| Cultivated - Slovakia | *91.6-107.5 | **1.1-5.8 | ***0.7-6.9 | HPLC | *Isolated unripe fruits | [ |
| Cultivated - Switzerland | *0.9-6.4 | **0.9-6.1 | nm | HPLC | *Maximum in flowers with open petals | [ |
| Cultivated - Switzerland | nm | 0.23-1.72 | 0.81-3.27 | HPLC | Aerial parts at full flowering Screening of 24 accessions | [ |
| Cultivated -Switzerland | nm | 0.34-1.08 | 1.25-2.36 | HPLC | Aerial parts at full flowering cv Topas, Hyperimed, Elixir | [ |
|
| ||||||
| Wild - Australia | nm | 0.12-0.8 | nm | HPLC | Aerial parts at full flowering | [ |
| Wild - Australia | nm | 1,02-4.84 | nm | UV | Leaves only | [ |
| Wild - Australia | nm | *1.2-2.35 | nm | UV | * Broadleaved ** Narrowleaved | [ |
|
| ||||||
| Controlled Environment | *3.13-7.39 fw | *0.03-0.09 fw **0.75-1.18 fw | *0.05-0.16 fw **0.98-1.47 fw | HPLC | *Shoots **Flower buds | [ |
| Controlled Environment | 30 | 1.3 | 2.8 | HPLC | Leaves | [ |
| Controlled Environment | nm | 18-38 | 42-115 | HPLC | Isolated flowers | [ |
| Greenhouse Cultivated | *0.65-3.17 | *0.57-3.93 | *1.07-4.10 | HPLC | * Flowering top ** Flowers. Seeds wild-collected in France and Switzerland. | [ |
| Greenhouse Cultivated cv. Anthos | 5.09 | 0.09 | 0.11 | HPLC | Unspecified aerial parts | [ |
| Greenhouse Cultivated cv. New Stem | 3.4 | 0.09 | 0.11 | HPLC | Unspecified aerial parts | [ |
| Greenhouse Cultivated cv Topaz | 2.92 | 0.06 | 0.11 | HPLC | Unspecified aerial parts | [ |
| Greenhouse Cultivated cv. Topaz | *1.89 | *0.82-2.10 | nm | HPLC | * Flowering top ** Flowers Seeds wild-collected in France and Switzerland. | [ |
| Greenhouse Cultivated cv. Topaz | nm | *0.23-0.39 | *0.44-0.89 | HPLC | *5 cm tops | [ |
1 All data are in mg/g dry weight, othervise differently stated; 2 Hpf – Hyperforin; 3 Hyp- Hypericin; 4 Pse – Pseudohypericin; 5 Not measured; 6 UV-Spectrophotometric determinations at 590 nm may suffer from interference from other pigments noticed by some authors. As a result such methodology may provide higher values than HPLC quantifications and no distinction between hypericin and pseudohypericins is possible; 7 Fresh weight; 8 dryness of the sample not specified.