| Literature DB >> 22864243 |
Lei Jin1, Yanlong Zhang, Linmao Yan, Yulong Guo, Lixin Niu.
Abstract
Lily (Lilium) is used as an important edible and medical plant species with a vague taxonomic classification and a long history in China. Bulbs of six Lilium species (L. regale, L. concolor, L. pumilum, L. leucanthum, L. davidii var. unicolor and L. lancifolium) native to China were investigated with a view to their exploitation as a potential source of natural antioxidants due to their phenolic composition and dietary antioxidant potential. The results showed that all bulb extracts exhibited strong antioxidant activities, which generally correlated positively with the total phenolic contents (r = 0.68 to 0.94), total flavonoid contents (r = 0.51 to 0.89) and total flavanol contents (r = 0.54 to 0.95). High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) analysis revealed that rutin and kaempferol were the major phenolic components in the extracts. Hierarchical cluster analysis showed that L. regale belonged to the group with high phenolic content and strong antioxidant power. L. concolor and L. pumilum were arranged in one group characterized by moderate phenolic content and antioxidant capacity, while L. leucanthum, L. davidii var. unicolor and L. lancifolium were clustered in the third group with low phenolic content and weak antioxidant activity. These strongly suggest that lily bulbs may serve as a potential source of natural antioxidant for food and pharmaceutical applications.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22864243 PMCID: PMC6269050 DOI: 10.3390/molecules17089361
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Contents of total phenolics, flavonoids and flavanols in bulb extracts from six Lilium species.
| Species | TPC | TFOC | TFAC |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3897.60 ± 42.54 c | 413.45 ± 2.03 c | 296.13 ± 18.17 b | |
| 2336.00 ± 29.28 e | 521.19 ± 17.77 b | 107.36 ± 8.40 d | |
| 2017.17 ± 140.20 f | 150.53 ± 3.66 f | 66.07 ± 9.07 e | |
| 10381.49 ± 49.12 a | 1428.21 ± 38.52 a | 407.25 ± 10.91 a | |
| 2827.25 ± 55.50 d | 227.24 ± 3.66 e | 112.12 ± 12.96 d | |
| 4177.39 ± 57.19 b | 339.13 ± 9.17 d | 193.92 ± 7.95 c |
GAE mg/100 g, RE mg/100 g and CE mg/100 g represent milligrams of gallic acid equivalents, milligrams of rutin equivalent and milligrams of (+)-catechin equivalent per 100 grams of dry lily bulbs, respectively. Values are means of three replicates ± SD. Different letters (a–f) within the same column indicate significant difference at p < 0.05 by Duncan’s test.
Antioxidant activity determined by the DPPH, ABTS, CUPRAC and HRSA assays of the bulb extracts from six Lilium species.
| Species | DPPH | ABTS | CUPRAC | HRSA (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 455.31 ± 7.21 d | 1143.67 ± 11.28 a | 1025.14 ± 45.68 b | 40.86 ± 0.52 b | |
| 507.64 ± 6.85 c | 889.38 ± 13.42 b | 799.34 ± 5.81 d | 36.64 ± 0.80 d | |
| 404.48 ± 14.59 e | 848.49 ± 9.17 b | 595.61 ± 7.24 e | 22.45 ± 0.60 f | |
| 600.33 ± 2.24 a | 1173.28 ± 11.41 a | 1438.01 ± 16.56 a | 53.22 ± 0.99 a | |
| 541.27 ± 3.43 b | 1075.51 ± 2.94 a | 842.04 ± 8.32 c | 26.85 ± 0.79 e | |
| 546.51 ± 9.77 b | 1091.96 ± 5.70 a | 1044.10 ± 11.30 b | 37.47 ± 0.82 c |
TE µmol/100 g represents micromoles of trolox equivalents per 100 grams of dry bulbs from six Lilium species for DPPH and ABTS free radical-scavenging capacity, and cupric-reducing antioxidant capacity (CUPRAC). Hydroxyl radical-scavenging activity (HRSA) was expressed as the percentage of free radical-scavenging activity (%). Values are expressed as means ± SD (n = 3). Means in the same column followed by different letters (a–f) are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Figure 1HPLC trace of individual polyphenolic constituents (1, gallic acid; 2, rutinoside; 3, (+)-catechin; 4, chlorogenic; 5, (−)-epicatechin; 6, myricetin; 7, rutin; 8, p-coumaric acid; 9, quercetin; 10, phloridzin; 11, kaempferol) of the standard mixture solution and L. regale Wilson.
Phenolic composition of the bulb extracts from six Lilium Species.
| Phenolic compounds | Retention time (min) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gallic acid | 13.57 | 0.94 ± 0.03 b | 0.90 ± 0.02 bc | 0.85 ± 0.06 c | 0.88 ± 0.06 bc | 1.26 ± 0.01 a | 0.85 ± 0.06 c |
| Rutinoside | 19.31 | 0.82 ± 0.05 c | 0.97 ± 0.03 b | 0.93 ± 0.02 b | 1.05 ± 0.07 a | ND | 1.09 ± 0.10 a |
| (+)-catechin | 23.73 | 1.06 ± 0.10 b | 0.92 ± .001 c | 0.82 ± 0.03 d | 1.26 ± 0.05 a | 1.06 ± 0.02 b | 0.98 ± 0.02 c |
| Chlorogenic acid | 24.48 | 2.96 ± 0.06 a | 2.57 ± 0.19 b | 1.14 ± 0.05 c | 0.95 ± 0.04 d | ND | ND |
| (−)-epicatechin | 26.84 | 3.71 ± 0.09 a | 1.07 ± 0.03 c | 0.82 ± 0.02 e | 0.99 ± 0.01 d | 1.48 ± 0.03 b | 0.86 ± 0.02 e |
| Myricetin | 28.70 | 0.82 ± 0.02 c | 1.02 ± 0.03 c | 2.31 ± 0.28 b | 6.42 ± 0.35 a | 0.81 ± 0.02 c | 1.04 ± 0.08 c |
| Rutin | 31.00 | 3.36 ± 0.30 c | 1.35 ± 0.33 e | 0.96 ± 0.03 e | 20.98 ± 1.00 a | 2.36 ± 0.17 d | 4.48 ± 0.20 b |
| 32.63 | 3.91 ± 0.20 b | 1.45 ± 0.06 c | 1.26 ± 0.20 c | 0.80 ± 0.07 a | 4.51 ± 0.31 a | 0.82 ± 0.02 d | |
| Quercetin | 34.61 | ND | 1.56 ± 0.20 c | 0.89 ± 0.02 d | 6.20 ± 0.20 a | 2.38 ± 0.19 b | 0.96 ± 0.03 d |
| Phloridzin | 48.88 | 1.03 ± 0.10 c | 1.02 ± 0.08 c | 0.88 ± 0.04 c | 4.45 ± 0.28 a | 1.92 ± 0.19 b | ND |
| Kaempferol | 49.44 | 3.20 ± 0.20 d | 1.45 ± 0.19 e | 1.30 ± 0.20 e | 6.86 ± 0.31 c | 8.03 ± 0.39 b | 12.48 ± 0.90 a |
Values, in mg/100 g dw, are expressed as means ± SD (n = 3). Means in the same line followed by different letters (a–e) are significantly different (p < 0.05). ND = Not detected.
Linear correlation coefficients between phenolic composition and antioxidant capacity (panel A), and among the different methods for quantifying antioxidant capacity (panel B).
| DPPH | ABTS | CUPRAC | HRSA | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TPC | 0.70 | 0.68 | 0.94 ** | 0.86 * |
| TFOC | 0.68 | 0.51 | 0.87 * | 0.89 ** |
| TFAC | 0.54 | 0.83 * | 0.95 ** | 0.92 ** |
| DPPH | 1.00 | |||
| ABTS | 0.63 | 1.00 | ||
| CUPRAC | 0.77 * | 0.85 * | 1.00 | |
| HRSA | 0.65 | 0.69 | 0.94 ** | 1.00 |
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level. ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level.
Figure 2Dendrogram plot visualizing the clustering of the bulb extracts from six Lilium Species in this study based on their phenolic composition and antioxidant properties.
Figure 3Collection sites of six Lilium species native to China.