| Literature DB >> 30556121 |
Iqra Ashraf1, Muhammad Zubair2, Komal Rizwan1,3, Nasir Rasool1, Muhammad Jamil1, Shakeel Ahmad Khan4, Rasool Bakhsh Tareen5, Viqar Uddin Ahmad6, Abid Mahmood7, Muhammad Riaz8, M Zia-Ul-Haq9, Hawa Ze Jaafar10.
Abstract
This research work was executed to determine chemical composition, anti-oxidant and anti-microbial potential of the essential oils extracted from the leaves and stem of Daphne mucronata Royle. From leaves and stem oils fifty-one different constituents were identified through GC/MS examination. The antioxidant potential evaluated through DPPH free radical scavenging activity and %-inhibition of peroxidation in linoleic acid system. The stem's essential oil showed the good antioxidant activity as compared to leaves essential oil. Results of Antimicrobial activity revealed that both stem and leaves oils showed strong activity against Candida albicans with large inhibition zone (22.2 ± 0.01, 18.9 ± 0.20 mm) and lowest MIC values (0.98 ± 0.005, 2.44 ± 0.002 mg/mL) respectively. Leaves essential was also active against Escherichia coli with inhibition zone of 8.88 ± 0.01 mm and MIC values of 11.2 ± 0.40 mg/mL. These results suggested that the plant's essential oils would be a potential cradle for the natural product based antimicrobial as well as antioxidant agents.Entities:
Keywords: Antioxidant; Camphor; D. mucronata; Essential oil; Leaves
Year: 2018 PMID: 30556121 PMCID: PMC6768045 DOI: 10.1186/s13065-018-0495-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chem Cent J ISSN: 1752-153X Impact factor: 4.215
% Yield and antioxidant analysis of D. mucronata Royle essential oils
| Samples, standard compound | % Yield g/100 g | % Inhibition of peroxidation in linoleic acid | DPPH radical scavenging IC50 (µg/mL) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Leaves essential oil | 5.6±0.005 | 37.57 ± 0.89 | 85.15 ± 0.31 |
| Stem essential oil | 9.5±0.008 | 64.16 ± 0.93 | 45.46 ± 0.04 |
| BHT | – | 89.1 ± 0.78 | 9.01 ± 0.10 |
Values are mean ± SD of three separate experiments (P < 0.05) BHT (butylated hydroxytoluene)
GC/MS analysis of D. mucronata essential oils
| Retention indices | Compound name | % Area | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Leaves | Stem | ||
| 716 | Cyclohexyl methane | – | 0.96 |
| 805 | 0.86 | – | |
| 820 | 2,2,3,4-Tetramethylpentane | 2.08 | 3.47 |
| 944 | 2,3,3-Trimethyl-octane | 1.24 | – |
| 970 | 5-(1-methylpropyl)-nonane | 3.13 | – |
| 1044 | Camphor | – | 1.27 |
| 1099 | 2,2-dimethyl octanol | 1.26 | – |
| 1114 | 3-Thujanone | – | 0.6 |
| 1138 | 0.84 | – | |
| 1175 | 1-Terpinen-4ol | – | 0.31 |
| 1264 | 2-Methyl-6-propyl dodecane | 5.11 | – |
| 1298 | 2,3,5,8-Tetramethyl decane | 5.81 | 0.37 |
| 1322 | 7,9-dimethyl hexadecane | 8.90 | – |
| 1399 | Tetradecane | 7.32 | – |
| 1445 | 2-Bromo dodecane | 1.20 | – |
| 1454 | 5-Methyl tetradecane | 5.10 | – |
| 1500 | Pentadecane | 12.75 | – |
| 1542 | 7-Methyl pentadecane | 1.63 | – |
| 1563 | Caryophyllene oxide | – | 5.94 |
| 1660 | 2,6,10,15-Tetramethyl heptadecane | 2.71 | – |
| 1664 | Ar-tumerone | – | 3.94 |
| 1666 | 2-Methyl hexadecane | 8.90 | – |
| 1686 | ( | 2.88 | – |
| 1719 | 8-Hexyl pentadecane | – | 0.86 |
| 1745 | 8-Methyl heptadecane | – | 0.34 |
| 1800 | 5-Propyl decane | 6.16 | – |
| 1848 | Hexahydrofarnesyl acetone | – | 2.35 |
| 1854 | 5-Methyl octadecane | 1.30 | – |
| 1878 | Methyl palmitate | – | 16.02 |
| 1897 | 7-Hexadecenoic acid, methyl ester, (Z)- | – | 0.31 |
| 1922 | Dibutyl phthalate | 0.86 | – |
| 1974 | Methyl isoheptadecanoate | – | 0.35 |
| 1984 | 1.74 | – | |
| 1999 | 2.89 | – | |
| 2000 | Eicosane | 2.66 | – |
| 2067 | (Z,Z)-9,12-octadecadienoic acid methyl ester | – | 13.99 |
| 2100 | Heneicosane | – | 1.50 |
| 2116 | 11,14,17-Eicosatrienoic acid, methyl ester | – | 18.57 |
| 2167 | Decane, 1,1′-oxybis- | 2.52 | – |
| 2190 | Octadecanoic acid, methyl ester | – | 2.36 |
| 2327 | Eicosanoic acid, methyl ester | – | 0.91 |
| 2400 | Tetracosane | – | 0.42 |
| 2413 | Octadecane,3-ethyl-5-(2-ethylbutyl)- | 1.83 | – |
| 2525 | 1,2- diisooctyl benzenedicarboxylic acid ester | 4.76 | 2.12 |
| 2527 | Behenic acid, methyl ester | – | 1.40 |
| 2714 | Tetracosanoic acid, methy ester | – | 1.44 |
| 2790 | – | 2.43 | |
| 2908 | Hexacosanoic acid, methyl ester | – | 0.95 |
| 3132 | Tocopheryl acetate | 0.81 | – |
| 3400 | Tetratriacontane | – | 6.65 |
| 3600 | Hexatriacontane | – | 1.16 |
Fig. 2GC/MS spectra of D. mucronata stem (a) and leaves (b) essential oils
Fig. 1Most abundant compounds identified in D. mucronata (stem and leaves) essential oils
Fig. 3Reducing potential of D. mucronata Royle essential oils
Antimicrobial activity of D. mucronata Royle essential oils
| Tested microbes | Leaves essential oil | Stem essential oil | Standard drugs | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zone of inhibition (mm) | MIC mg/mL | Zone of inhibition (mm) | MIC mg/mL | Zone of inhibition (mm) | MIC (mg/mL) | |
|
| – | – | – | – | 19.0 ± 0.60 | 0.86 ± 0.001 |
|
| – | – | – | – | 20.7 ± 0.55 | 0.48 ± 0.001 |
|
| – | – | – | – | 21.7 ± 0.49 | 0.97 ± 0.0003 |
|
| 18.9 ± 0.20 | 2.44 ± 0.002 | 22.2 ± 0.01 | 0.98 ± 0.005 | 23.8 ± 0.67 | 0.25 ± 0.0001 |
|
| 8.88 ± 0.01 | 11.2 ± 0.40 | – | – | 25.26 ± 0.3 | 0.46 ± 0.0002 |
|
| – | – | – | – | 22.9 ± 0.43 | 0.39 ± 0.0007 |
|
| – | – | – | – | 30.0 ± 0.32 | 0.25 ± 0.0001 |
|
| – | – | – | – | 23.4 ± 0.50 | 0.33 ± 0.0003 |
Values are mean ± S.D of three separate experiments (P < 0.05)
Rifampicin and fungone were used as standards for bacterial and fungal strains respectively