| Literature DB >> 23085666 |
Pedro Barbosa1, Jorge M S Faria, Marta D Mendes, Luís Silva Dias, Maria Teresa Tinoco, José G Barroso, Luis G Pedro, Ana Cristina Figueiredo, Manuel Mota.
Abstract
Acetone was investigated and found to be an appropriate alternative to Triton X-100 as a solvent of essential oils in bioassays aimed to investigate their effects on pinewood nematode (Bursaphelenchus xylophilus) mortality. Therefore it was used as dilution agent to screen the effectiveness of fifty two essential oils against this pest. Thirteen essential oils were highly effective, resulting in more than 90% pinewood nematode mortality at 2 mg/mL, with six of them resulting in 100% mortality. LC₁₀₀ values ranged between 0.50 mg/mL and 0.83 mg/mL for the essential oils of Origanum vulgare and Satureja montana, respectively. Essential oils were submitted to gas chromatography and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis and their chemical composition established. Data from essential oils with 100% mortality at 2 mg/mL and other essential oils previously found to have LC₁₀₀ ≤ 2 mg/mL was combined, their chemical profiles investigated by correspondences analysis plus automatic classification.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23085666 PMCID: PMC6268321 DOI: 10.3390/molecules171012312
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Bursaphelenchus xylophilus mortality (mean ± SE, in percentage) when significant differences were found between the use of Triton X-100 and acetone as dilution agents of essential oils (p ≤ 0.006).
| Species | Dilution agent | 0.25 mg/mL | 0.5 mg/mL | 1 mg/mL |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Triton X-100 * | 14.98 ± 2.17 | 81.60 ± 1.72 | − |
| Acetone | 83.80 ± 1.08 | 89.39 ± 1.18 | − | |
|
| Triton X-100 * | 2.78 ± 0.68 | 3.72 ± 0.56 | 26.61 ± 3.83 |
| Acetone | 94.90 ± 1.06 | 98.81 ± 0.51 | 100.00 ± 0.00 | |
| Triton X-100 * | 7.13 ± 1.19 | − | − | |
| Acetone | 57.60 ± 2.44 | − | − |
* data from Barbosa et al. [8]; − no significant differences between Triton X-100 and acetone treatments (p > 0.01).
Estimated values (mean ± SE) of highest concentrations of essential oil at which the mortality is strictly zero (l), symmetry of mortality distribution (c), and concentrations necessary to result in 100% Bursaphelenchus xylophilus mortality (LC100).
| Species |
|
| LC100 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.100 ± 0.0017 a | 1.770 ± 0.095 a | 0.498 ± 0.028 a | ||
| 0.096 ± 0.0014 a | 1.799 ± 0.052 a | 0.571 ± 0.046 b | ||
| 0.095 ± 0.0008 a | 1.915 ± 0.135a | 0.663 ± 0.032 c | ||
| 0.099 ± 0.0003 a | 1.946 ± 0.008 a | 0.793 ± 0.002d | ||
| 0.089 ± 0.0024 b | 2.832 ± 0.056 b | 0.819 ± 0.007 d | ||
| 0.089 ± 0.0013 c | 2.798 ± 0.020 c | 0.828 ± 0.001d | ||
* Essential oils also tested in Barbosa et al. [8] using Triton X-100. Acetone used as solvent. All concentrations in mg/mL. In each column, means with the same letter do not differ for an experiment-wise error rate of 0.01.
Figure 1Ordination of essential oils (circles) and constituents (squares) in the first two factors of correspondences analysis.
Nematicidal activity of 52 essential oils against Bursaphelenchus xylophilus exposed for 24 h to a 2 mg/mL solution.
| Code | Family / Species | Collection place or source b | Date | Plant part c Status | I.P. d | Oil yield(%, v/w) | Mortality e (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Évora | 2005 | Leaves, Fresh | H | 0.40 | 1.54 ± 0.47 | |
|
| Flores (Az) | 2008 | AP (V), Fresh | H | 0.08 | 1.75 ± 0.47 | |
|
| Flores (Az) | 2008 | AP (V), Fresh | H | 0.25 | 1.20 ± 0.48 | |
| Graciosa (Az) | 2008 | AP (F), Fresh | H | 0.33 | 6.21 ± 0.71 * | ||
| HS | 2008 | Seeds, Dried | H | 5.61 | 8.60 ± 0.81 * | ||
| HS | 2008 | Seeds, Dried | H | 6.09 | 9.89 ± 1.71 * | ||
| HS | 2008 | Seeds, Dried | H | 5.88 | 6.29 ± 0.91 * | ||
| BPGV | 2008 | Seeds, Dried | H | 4.78 | 5.95 ± 0.79 * | ||
| HS | 2008 | Seeds, Dried | H | 1.07 | 7.13 ± 0.50 * | ||
|
| Flores (Az) | 2008 | Berries, Fresh | H | 0.41 | 0.79 ± 0.39 | |
| Flores (Az) | 2008 | Berries, Fresh | H | 0.06 | 0.84 ± 0.16 * | ||
| Flores (Az) | 2008 | AP (V), Fresh | H | 0.45 | 2.56 ± 0.66 | ||
| Lisboa | 2009 | AP (V), Fresh | H | 0.19 | 74.79 ± 2.56 * | ||
|
| HS | 2009 | AP (F), Fresh | H | 0.04 | 99.30 ± 0.54 * | |
|
| HS | 2009 | AP (F), Dried | H | 0.90 | 7.77 ± 0.83 * | |
| Beja | 2005 | AP (F), Fresh | H | 2.00 | 93.56 ± 1.07 * | ||
|
| HS | 2009 | AP (V), Dried | H | 2.12 | 92.57 ± 1.48 * | |
|
| Beja | 2009 | AP (V), Fresh | H | 0.25 | 47.36 ± 2.22 * | |
|
| HS | 2009 | AP (F), Fresh | H | 0.18 | 22.03 ± 2.66 * | |
|
| Évora | 2007 | AP (F), Fresh | H | 1.70 | 100.00 ± 0.00 * | |
| HS | 2009 | Leaves, Dried | H | 1.95 | 2.55 ± 0.84 | ||
| Lisboa | 2009 | AP (V), Fresh | H | 0.64 | 0.40 ± 0.41 | ||
| Lisboa | 2009 | AP (F), Fresh | H | 1.14 | 2.30 ± 0.52 | ||
| Lisboa | 2009 | AP (V), Fresh | H | 0.54 | 1.06 ± 0.40 | ||
| Lisboa | 2009 | AP (V), Fresh | H | 0.71 | 0.07 ± 0.43 | ||
| HS | 2008 | Leaves, Dried | H | 1.60 | 100.00 ± 0.00 * | ||
| HS | 2009 | AP (V), Dried | H | 0.55 | 100.00 ± 0.00 * | ||
| Beja | 2009 | AP (F), Fresh | D-E | − | 100.00 ± 0.00 * | ||
| Madeira | 2006 | AP (F), Fresh | D-E | − | 6.06 ± 0.62 * | ||
| S. Jorge (Az) | 2007 | AP (F), Fresh | D-E | − | 97.01 ± 0.98 * | ||
| Flores (Az) | 2008 | AP (F), Fresh | H | 0.06 | 94.63 ± 1.30 * | ||
| Corvo (Az) | 2008 | AP (F), Fresh | H | 0.22 | 99.44 ± 0.26 * | ||
| Gerês | 2008 | AP (F), Fresh | H | 0.35 | 51.61 ± 3.60 * | ||
| Graciosa (Az) | 2008 | AP (F), Fresh | H | 0.38 | 58.21 ± 2.19 * | ||
|
| Faro | 2008 | AP (F), Fresh | H | 0.21 | 3.30 ± 0.59 * | |
|
| Leiria | 2008 | AP (F), Fresh | H | 1.25 | 66.85 ± 3.44 * | |
|
| Leiria | 2008 | AP (F), Fresh | H | 0.23 | 24.25 ± 3.18 * | |
|
| Coimbra | 2009 | Branches without leaves, Dried | H | 0.55 | 1.56 ± 0.16 * | |
|
| Flores (Az) | 2008 | AP (V), Fresh | H | 0.25 | 2.17 ± 0.66 | |
| Porto da Cruz, Madeira | 2009 | Branches, Fresh | H | 0.42 | 2.22 ± 0.39 * | ||
| Porto da Cruz, Madeira | 2009 | Branches, Fresh | H | 0.48 | 2.80 ± 0.34 * | ||
| Ribeiro Frio, Madeira | 2009 | Branches, Fresh | H | 0.39 | 2.66 ± 0.75 | ||
| Ribeiro Frio, Madeira | 2009 | Branches, Fresh | H | 0.64 | 2.91 ± 0.44 * | ||
| S. Vicente, Madeira | 2000 | Leaves, Fresh | H | 0.30 | 4.46 ± 0.54 * | ||
|
| Lisbon | 2009 | AP (F), Fresh | H | 2.15 | 4.14 ± 0.85 * | |
| Graciosa (Az) | 2008 | Berries, Fresh | H | 0.21 | 1.22 ± 0.34 | ||
| Graciosa (Az) | 2008 | Leaves, Fresh | H | 0.08 | 1.46 ± 0.44 | ||
|
| Faro | 2008 | Leaves, Fresh | H | 0.80 | 98.86 ± 0.32 * | |
|
| Évora | 2009 | Leaves, Fresh | H | 0.31 | 26.59 ± 1.47 * | |
| Évora | 2009 | AP (V), Fresh | H | 2.60 | 100.00 ± 0.00 * | ||
| HS | 2009 | AP (F), Dried | H | 0.90 | 100.00 ± 0.00 * | ||
|
| HS | 2009 | AP (V), Dried | H | 0.19 | 54.63 ± 3.53 * |
Acetone always used as solvent. a Essential oils also tested in Barbosa et al. [8] using Triton X-100; b Az = Açores; HS = Herbal shop; BPGV = Banco Português de Germoplasma Vegetal; c AP = aerial part; (V) = in vegetative phase; (F) = in flowering phase; d I.P. = isolation procedure; isolation was either by hydrodistillation (H) or distillation-extraction (D–E); e Mortality values with * have 99% confidence intervals not including zero; f Nowadays included in Cupressaceae, previously Taxodiaceae.
Chemical composition of essential oils and volatiles of Portuguese plants resulting in 100% mortality of Bursaphelenchus xylophilus at 2 mg/mL.
| Lamiaceae | Rutaceae | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Compounds | RI a | ||||
| 2-Methyloctane | 887 | − | − | t b | t |
| Tricyclene | 921 | t | t | − | − |
| α-Thujene | 924 | 0.3 | 2.4 | − | − |
| α-Pinene | 930 | 1.6 | 2.3 | − | − |
| Camphene | 938 | 1.6 | 0.1 | − | − |
| 1-Octen-3-ol | 961 | t | t | − | − |
| β-Pinene | 963 | 0.2 | 1.2 | − | − |
| 973 | − | − | t | t | |
| β-Myrcene | 975 | t | 2.7 | − | − |
| α-Phellandrene | 995 | t | 0.4 | − | − |
| δ-3-Carene | 1000 | t | 0.1 | − | − |
| α-Terpinene | 1002 | 0.3 | 4.1 | − | − |
| 1003 | 20.3 | 8.1 | − | − | |
| 1,8-Cineole | 1005 | t | t | − | − |
| β-Phellandrene | 1005 | t | 0.1 | − | − |
| Limonene | 1009 | 0.6 | 0.5 | − | − |
| 1017 | t | t | − | − | |
| γ-Terpinene | 1035 | 4.3 | 41.1 | − | − |
| 1037 | t | t | − | − | |
| 2-Nonanone | 1058 | − | − | t | t |
| 2,5-Dimethyl styrene | 1059 | t | t | − | − |
| Terpinolene | 1064 | 0.4 | t | − | − |
| 1066 | t | t | − | − | |
| 1073 | − | − | t | t | |
| Linalool | 1074 | t | t | − | − |
| Geigerene isomer | 1116 | − | − | t | t |
| Geigerene | 1121 | − | − | 0.5 | 0.1 |
| Borneol | 1134 | 3.9 | 0.1 | − | − |
| Terpinen-4-ol | 1148 | 2.3 | 0.2 | − | − |
| α-Terpineol | 1159 | t | t | − | − |
| 2-Decanone | 1166 | − | − | t | t |
| Carvacrol methyl ether | 1224 | 3.7 | t | − | − |
| 2-Undecanone | 1275 | − | − | 94.4 | 92.8 |
| Thymol | 1275 | 15.2 | t | − | − |
| Carvacrol | 1286 | 40 | 35.3 | − | − |
| β-Bourbonene | 1379 | t | t | − | − |
| 2-Dodecanone c | 1389 | − | − | t | t |
| β-Caryophyllene | 1414 | 2.6 | 1.1 | − | − |
| β-Copaene | 1426 | t | t | − | − |
| Aromadendrene | 1428 | 0.3 | t | − | − |
| α-Humulene | 1447 | t | t | − | − |
| 2-Tridecanone | 1479 | − | − | t | t |
| β-Bisabolene | 1500 | 0.1 | t | − | − |
| 1505 | 0.1 | t | − | − | |
| δ-Cadinene | 1505 | 0.1 | 0.1 | − | − |
| β-Caryophyllene oxide | 1561 | 0.6 | t | − | − |
| UI | 1626 | − | − | 5.1 | 7.1 |
| % of identification | 98.6 | 99.9 | 94.9 | 92.9 | |
| Grouped components | |||||
| Monoterpene hydrocarbons | 29.6 | 63.1 | − | − | |
| Oxygen-containing monoterpenes | 65.2 | 35.6 | − | − | |
| Sesquiterpene hydrocarbons | 3.2 | 1.2 | − | − | |
| Oxygen-containing sesquiterpenes | 0.6 | − | − | − | |
| C13 compounds | − | − | 0.5 | 0.1 | |
| Others | − | − | 94.4 | 92.8 | |
Satureja montana 2 (Sm2), S. montana 3 (Sm3), Ruta graveolens 1 (Rg1), R. graveolens 2 (Rg2). a RI = Retention index relative to C8-C17 n-alkanes on the DB1 column; b t = trace (<0.05%); c identification based on mass spectra only; d unidentified compound in R. graveolens essential oil; m/z (rel. int.) 186 [M]+ (3), 105 (12), 104 (62), 92 (18), 91 (68), 82 (12), 71 (37), 65 (17), 58 (17), 43 (100).