| Literature DB >> 33081286 |
Abdelhakim Aouf1, Hatem Ali2,3, Abdel Rahman Al-Khalifa2, Khaled Fahmy Mahmoud3, Amr Farouk4.
Abstract
The nanoencapsulation of essential oils enhances their applicability in several areas, such as pharmaceuticals and food biopreservation. This study focuses on the encapsulation of Saccocalyx satureioides Coss. et Durieu essential oil into nanoemulsions by high-pressure homogenization (HPH) and its effect on the volatile constituents and the antioxidant and anticancer activities of the essential oil. The analysis of hydrodistilled (HD) S. satureioides essential oil using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry revealed a total of 28 constituents, representing 99.80%, while only 13 constituents were identified in nanoemulsions, representing 98.65% of the total volatile material. The use of HPH led to qualitative and quantitative differences between the volatile profiles of the HD and the nanoemulsion of S. satureioides essential oil. Whereas borneol, α-terpineol, and thymol were the predominant constituents in the HD oil, carvacrol, thymol, and γ-terpinene were the major constituents in the nanoemulsion. The antioxidant activity of the S. satureioides essential oil nanoemulsion displayed was lower as compared to that of HD oil using DPPH free radical-scavenging, CUPRAC, and ABTS assays. This is consistent with the differences in total flavonoid, total phenolic, and volatiles detected in both HD oil and its nanoemulsion. Meanwhile, the cytotoxicity on liver cancer cells (Hep-G2) was stronger using nanoemulsions (106 μg/mL) than using HD oil (274.8 μg/mL).Entities:
Keywords: MTT; Saccocalyx satureioides; antioxidant; essential oil; high-pressure homogenization; nanoemulsion
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33081286 PMCID: PMC7587522 DOI: 10.3390/molecules25204756
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Volatile constituents identified from the hydrodistilled (HD) and nanoemulsions of S. satureioides essential oil using GC-MS.
| S/N | Compound | KI a | % Area b | Identification Method c,d | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HD | Nanoemulsions | ||||
| 1 | Tricyclene | 921 | 0.46 ± 0.03 | n.d. | MS & KI |
| 2 | α-Thujene | 928 | 0.56 ± 0.05 | n.d. | MS & KI |
| 3 | α-Pinene | 932 | 5.68 ± 0.06 | n.d. | MS, KI& ST |
| 4 | Camphene | 971 | 10.26 ± 0.11 | n.d. | MS, KI& ST |
| 5 | β-Pinene | 978 | 0.65 ± 0.12 | 0.97 ± 0.09 | MS & KI |
| 6 | β-Myrcene | 991 | 0.12 ± 0.02 | 0.89 ± 0.06 | MS & KI |
| 7 | α-Terpinene | 1004 | 0.72 ± 0.08 | 1.37 ± 0.13 | MS, KI& ST |
| 8 | p-Cymene | 1008 | 5.61 ± 0.33 | 6.99 ± 0.21 | MS, KI& ST |
| 9 | Limonene | 1029 | 2.74 ± 0.13 | 0.69 ± 0.04 | MS, KI& ST |
| 10 | γ-Terpinene | 1088 | 3.89 ± 0.08 | 10.7 ± 0.15 | MS, KI& ST |
| 11 | Linalool | 1089 | 0.26 ± 0.05 | 1.78 ± 0.30 | MS, KI& ST |
| 12 | 1139 | 0.07 ± 0.01 | n.d. | MS & KI | |
| 13 | Camphor | 1141 | 0.38 ± 0.02 | n.d. | MS & KI |
| 14 | 1145 | 0.08 ± 0.01 | n.d. | MS & KI | |
| 15 | Borneol | 1148 | 25.71 ± 0.37 | 0.41 ± 0.02 | MS, KI& ST |
| 16 | Terpinen-4-ol | 1155 | 1.58 ± 0.09 | 1.42 ± 0.11 | MS, KI& ST |
| 17 | α-Terpineol | 1165 | 25.61 ± 0.27 | 1.60 ± 0.20 | MS, KI& ST |
| 18 | Isobornyl formate | 1225 | 0.53 ± 0.04 | n.d. | MS & KI |
| 19 | Bornyl acetate | 1263 | 0.53 ± 0.05 | n.d. | MS & KI |
| 20 | Thymol | 1267 | 12.8 ± 0.15 | 29.99 ± 0.33 | MS, KI& ST |
| 21 | Carvacrol | 1276 | 0.62 ± 0.05 | 41.27 ± 0.18 | MS, KI& ST |
| 22 | α-Gurjunene | 1392 | 0.11 ± 0.01 | n.d. | MS & KI |
| 23 | β-Caryophyllene | 1414 | 0.21 ± 0.02 | 0.58 ± 0.11 | MS & KI |
| 24 | Aromadendrene | 1435 | 0.08 ± 0.01 | n.d. | MS & KI |
| 25 | Alloaromadendrene | 1444 | 0.12 ± 0.03 | n.d. | MS & KI |
| 26 | γ-Cadinene | 1498 | 0.11 ± 0.07 | n.d. | MS & KI |
| 27 | δ-Cadinene | 1501 | 0.21 ± 0.08 | n.d. | MS & KI |
| 28 | Spathulenol | 1561 | 0.1 ± 0.06 | n.d. | MS & KI |
| Total | - | 99.80 | 98.65 | - | |
a Confirmed by comparison with Kovats index on a DB5 column [16]. b Values represent averages ±standard deviations for triplicate experiments.cConfirmed by comparison with the mass spectrum of the authentic compound. d Identification by comparison with data obtained from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) mass spectra library.n.d: not detected.
Figure 1Volatile chromatograms for (A) S. satureioides HD oil and (B) nanoemulsions of S. satureioides oil.
Figure 2Transmission electron microscope (TEM) image of S. satureioides oil nanoemulsions.
Activity of HD and nanoemulsions of S. satureioides essential oil in comparison to the antioxidant standards.
| Material | IC50 (µg/mL) | A0.5 (µg/mL) | IC50 (µg/mL) | Total Flavonoid Content * | Total Phenolic Content * |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| for 1 mg/mL | for 1 mg/mL | ||||
| 22.14a ± 0.12 | 37.72a ± 0.31 | 11.39a ± 0.05 | 0.401a ± 0.02 | 0.863a ± 0.02 | |
| Nanoemulsions of | 47.87b ± 0.21 | 754.67b ± 3.06 | 257.86b ± 3.71 | 0.302b ± 0.01 | 0.656b ± 0.03 |
| TROLOX ** | 5.12c ± 0.21 | 8.69c ± 0.14 | 3.21c ± 0.06 | - | - |
| Ascorbic acid ** | 4.39d ± 0.01 | 8.31d ± 0.15 | 3.04d ± 0.05 | - | - |
* Values represent averages ±standard deviations for triplicate experiments. Means with the same superscript letter within the same column are not significantly different (p > 0.05).** Antioxidant standards.
Figure 3Evaluation of cell viability percentage of liver cancer cell line (Hep G2) posttreatment: (A) S. satureioides HD oil and (B) nanoemulsions of S. satureioides oil compared with reference drug (C) 5-flurouracil using MTT(tetrazolium bromide solution) assay.
Figure 4Evaluation of cell viability percentage of Healthy human hepatic cells(THLE2) posttreatment: (A) S. satureioides HD oil and (B) nanoemulsions of S. satureioides oil compared with reference drug (C) 5-flurouracil using MTT assay.