| Literature DB >> 30979087 |
Urszula Złotek1, Urszula Szymanowska2, Łukasz Pecio3, Solomiia Kozachok4, Anna Jakubczyk5.
Abstract
The effect of elicitation with jasmonic acids (JA) and yeast extract (YE) on the production of phenolic compounds as well as the antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties of phenolic extracts of lovage was evaluated. The analysis of phenolic compounds carried out with the UPLC-MS technique indicated that rutin was the dominant flavonoid, while 5-caffeoylquinic acid was the main component in the phenolic acid fraction in the lovage leaves. The application of 10 µM JA increased the content of most of the identified phenolic compounds. The highest antioxidant activities estimated as free radical scavenging activity against ABTS (2,2'-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulphonic acid) and reducing power were determined for the sample elicited with 10 µM JA, while this value determined as iron chelating ability was the highest for the 0.1% YE-elicited lovage. The 0.1% and 1% YE elicitation also caused significant elevation of the lipoxygenase (LOX) inhibition ability, while all the concentrations of the tested elicitors significantly improved the ability to inhibit cyclooxygenase 2 (COX2) (best results were detected for the 10 µM JA and 0.1% YE2 sample). Thus, 0.1% yeast extract and 10 µM jasmonic acid proved to be most effective in elevation of the biological activity of lovage.Entities:
Keywords: anti-inflammatory properties; antioxidant activities; elicitation; lovage; phenolic compounds
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30979087 PMCID: PMC6480578 DOI: 10.3390/molecules24071441
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Qualitative and quantitative analysis of phenolics in the control and elicited lovage.
| No. | Compound | Sample | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C | JA1 | JA2 | JA3 | YE1 | YE2 | YE3 | ||
| 1 | 4-caffeoylquinic acid | 4.04 ± 0.46 a,b,c | 4.44 ± 0.12 b,c | 6.88 ± 0.67 d | 5.51 ± 0.47 c,d | 3.19 ± 0.15 a,b | 2.82 ± 0.59 a,b | 2.28 ± 0.52 a |
| 2 | 5-caffeoylquinic acid | 10.09 ± 2.92 a | 9.39 ± 0.16 a | 19.12 ± 4.11 b | 13.92 ± 1.12 a,b | 7.21 ± 0.30 a | 9.41 ± 2.33 a | 6.01 ± 1.59 a |
| 3 | Caffeoylquinic acid (unknown isomer) | 1.24 ± 0.32 a,b | 1.04 ± 0.01 a | 2.04 ± 0.41 b | 1.99 ± 0.20 b | 1.07 ± 0.03 a | 0.94 ± 0.17 a | 0.91 ± 0.17 a |
| 4 | Quercetin 3- | 0.88 ± 0.27 a | 0.66 ± 0.01 a | 1.05 ± 0.26 a | 0.86 ± 0.12 a | 0.76 ± 0.06 a | 0.94 ± 0.24 a | 0.51 ± 0.13 a |
| 5 | Apterin | 10.73 ± 0.20 a | 10.38 ± 0.21 a | 13.94 ± 2.67 a | 10.95 ± 0.86 a | 9.44 ± 0.60 a | 10.42 ± 2.46 a | 9.38 ± 2.21 a |
| 6 | Rutin | 13.80 ± 3.99 a | 12.01 ± 0.10 a | 18.60 ± 4.16 a | 14.37 ± 1.26 a | 12.16 ± 0.86 a | 13.53 ± 3.38 a | 9.85 ± 2.62 a |
| 7 | Kemferol 3- | 1.29 ± 0.33 a | 1.43 ± 0.04 a | 1.65 ± 0.34 a | 1.31 ± 0.11 a | 1.38 ± 0.11 a | 1.81 ± 0.43 a | 1.05 ± 0.28 a |
| 8 | Caffeic acid and apterin ester | 1.86 ± 0.06 a,b | 1.12 ± 0.04 a | 2.99 ± 0.58 c | 2.45 ± 0.18 b,c | 1.59 ± 0.06 a,b | 1.28 ± 0.20 a | 1.26 ± 0.24 a |
| 9 | Sinapic acid and apterin ester [ | 1.32 ± 0.28 a,b | 1.00 ± 0.01 a | 2.08 ± 0.12 c | 1.69 ± 0.12 b,c | 1.30 ± 0.06 a,b | 1.38 ± 0.24 a,b | 1.10 ± 0.18 a,b |
| 10 | p-coumaric acid and apterin ester | 0.59 ± 0.06 a,b | 0.44 ± 0.01 a | 0.75 ± 0.12 b | 0.63 ± 0.03 a,b | 0.56 ± 0.02 a,b | 0.61 ± 0.07 a,b | 0.50 ± 0.03 a |
| 11 | Ferulic acid and apterin ester | 0.84 ± 0.14 a,b | 0.62 ± 0.01 a | 1.03 ± 0.16 b | 0.93 ± 0.06 a,b | 0.86 ± 0.05 a,b | 0.86 ± 0.12 a,b | 0.76 ± 0.10 a,b |
| 12 | (E/Z)-Ligustilide [ | 0.93 ± 0.10 a | 1.54 ± 0.06 b | 2.73 ± 0.06 d | 2.03 ± 0.14 c | 1.59 ± 0.05 b | 1.63 ± 0.04 b,c | 1.49 ± 0.21 b |
| 13 | (E/Z)-Ligustlide | 0.89 ± 0.31 a | 1.57 ± 0.11 a,b | 2.38 ± 0.31 b | 1.97 ± 0.08 b | 1.71 ± 0.01 a,b | 2.40 ± 0.28 b | 1.85 ± 0.17 b |
| 14 | Caffeic acid [µg/g dw] | 5.28 ± 0.08 b | nd | 6.27 ± 0.24 c | 14.42 ± 0.11 d | nd | nd | 2.63 ± 0.78 a |
| Sum | 48.43 ± 4.02 a | 45.63 ± 0.77 a | 75.25 ± 8.68 b | 58.63 ± 4.74 a,b | 42.81 ± 2.36 a | 48.02 ± 9.99 a | 36.96 ± 8.45 a | |
Abbreviations: C–control plants, JA1–plants elicited with 1 µM jasmonic acid, JA2–plants elicited with 10 µM jasmonic acid, JA3–plants elicited with 100 µM jasmonic acid; YE1–plants elicited with 0.01% yeast extract, YE2–plants elicited with 0.1% yeast extract, YE3–plants elicited with 1% yeast extract. Means (± SD) in rows followed by different letters are statistically significantly different at p < 0.05. nd–not detected.
Figure 1Effect of elicitation on antioxidant activity of phenolic extracts from lovage: antiradical activity (A), reducing power (B), chelating power (C); C–control plants, JA1–plants elicited with 1 µM jasmonic acid, JA2–plants elicited with 10 µM jasmonic acid JA3–plants elicited with 100 µM jasmonic acid; YE1–plants elicited with 0.01% yeast extract, YE2–plants elicited with 0.1% yeast extract, YE3–plants elicited with 1% yeast extract. Results are means ± SD of three independent measurements. Different letters indicate significantly differences (p < 0.05).
Figure 2Lipoxygenase (A) and cyclooxygenase (B) inhibition by phenolics from lovage induced by elicitors; C–control plants, JA1–plants elicited with 1 µM jasmonic acid, JA2–plants elicited with 10 µM jasmonic acid JA3–plants elicited with 100 µM jasmonic acid; YE1–plants elicited with 0.01% yeast extract, YE2–plants elicited with 0.1% yeast extract, YE3–plants elicited with 1% yeast extract. Results are means ± SD of three independent measurements. Different letters indicate significantly differences (p < 0.05).